Sidebar

[Indulto]

Originally Posted by NYPlayer

Oh, come on now! Don't be so modest.

http://www.capitalplayny.com/pdf/Exe...ary_080707.pdf

NYP,
I read the pitch at the above link as well as their poll you referenced. I can’t find any third-party substantiation of their claims, and you are the only unpaid voice promoting them I’ve encountered anywhere in cyberspace.

Even if I could share your optimism that “privatization” would preserve the quality of the New York racing experience despite all indications that racing would become the VLT operator’s stepchild, what do you find so compelling about this bidder’s qualifications and motivation for implementing your vision?

I’d be interested in your opinion regarding the potential expansion of Indian gaming in California as well. I’m concerned it will make the state government there dependent upon gambling revenue. While I applaud the racing industry’s ability to benefit the residents of their host states by supplementing their education programs, I’m wary of funding critical functions such as law enforcement through such sources.

Political groups representing law enforcement personnel are among those supporting the upcoming ballot measures to implement that expansion while the owner of BM and HOL is helping to fund the opposition:

http://www.insidebayarea.com/sanmate...ews/ci_7920662
Bay Meadows owner fights Indian pacts
By Aaron Kinney

… The owner of Bay Meadows race track has positioned himself at the center of a fight to defeat gaming agreements with four Southern California Indian tribes — pacts that would expand their gambling operations and funnel millions into the state's general fund.

Terry Fancher, … , spent more than $4 million in 2007 on a campaign to sink the tribal compacts, which go before the voters Feb. 5.

Bay Meadows Land Co. hopes that overturning the deals, which allow the tribes to add a total of 17,000 new slot machines, would give the state's race tracks a chance to improve their financial fortunes.

The race tracks could alleviate what they see as a competitive disadvantage with Indian casinos and tracks in other states by obtaining permission to install a type of video gaming device known as Instant Racing at their facilities, or by receiving financial compensation from the tribes. There is little chance that a breakthrough would come in time to save Bay Meadows from being torn down and redeveloped, since construction is set to begin late this year. But Hollywood Park could stand to benefit from any such tilt in the competitive balance.

Bay Meadows is part of a coalition fighting the tribal compacts — Californians Against Unfair Deals: No on 94, 95, 96 and 97 — that includes hotel and casino workers and other tribes whose interests are threatened by the deals.

Fancher's coalition is badly outgunned by the four tribes: the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, the Morongo Band of Mission Indians, the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians and the Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation.

… Magna Entertainment, which owns Golden Gate Fields in Albany and Santa Anita Park in Arcadia, has not contributed to the campaign against the compacts, while the Thoroughbred Owners of California have come out in support of the deals.

But state Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco, whose district includes San Mateo, views Fancher's fight against the Southern California tribes as evidence of a commitment to save not just his tracks but California's horseracing industry as a whole.

Yee adamantly opposes the deals, arguing that they do not include enough protections for workers or mitigation for the effects that major gambling operations can have on communities.

"I think it's extremely important that Californians defeat these particular compacts," Yee said. "You can't balance this budget with money tainted with the blood of workers." …

I have to admit to an additional motive for supporting the opposition because it supposedly could save HOL from developers if gaming expansion were to support racing, either by allowing VLTs at racetracks, or legislating casino support for purses.

I would prefer the latter because I have watched HOL deteriorate since the construction of the card casino there, and I don’t see that trend reversed through increased non-racing gambling there. AQU will IMO follow HOL’s example, but BEL doesn’t have to. Something to consider before flying headlong into a future funded from (disposable?) income of less-than-high-income slotsplayers.