Sidebar

[Indulto]

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/st...0,495587.story
Assemb. Sheldon Silver opposes VLTs for Belmont
BY JAMES T. MADORE AND BART JONES

… Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, in his strongest comments to date, yesterday voiced staunch opposition to installing slotlike machines at Belmont Park horse-racing track, saying it would "saturate" the metropolitan area with gambling and not generate the promised millions of dollars in revenue for the state.

… Without his support, legislation giving Belmont the lottery terminals is doomed despite strong backing from the Senate's Republican majority and Gov. Eliot Spitzer, a fellow Democrat.

… Silver has called for the issue to be set aside until budget negotiations begin in the spring.

… Gubernatorial spokesman Jeffrey Gordon declined to comment on Belmont specifically but said Spitzer was focused "on continuing to make progress" in the racing talks. …

http://leftatthegate.blogspot.com/2008/01/thursday-night-notes-jan-3.html

comments:

ljk said...

… Charlie was on Capital OTB during the Spa meet saying they had previously considered how to race winter long at Belmont. Seems to me he discussed utilizing the training track with a winterized or synthetic surface and smaller heated facility that could handle the "modest" winter attendance. I don't think that would be a disaster.

A month or two of no racing (a political impossibility) wouldn't be a disaster either

alan said...

… my comment is based on the thought of 10 1/2 months of one-turn dirt racing at Belmont. …
… it's the change from one-turn to two-turns and back again which I think provides a lot of angles and juice throughout the year.

… Belmont is aligned so that the sun would never shine on the front of the track during the winter …

… If Charlie has a plan to conduct two-turn races at an alternate oval at the Belmont site - one that people can actually go outdoors and observe without freezing to death - then I'd have an open mind about it.

When the state takes possession of the tracks, its intended mission is to use that land to conduct thoroughbred racing. VLTs at AQU fueling purses at BEL and SAR while AQU provides stabling/training facilities in support of live racing still fulfills that primary purpose.

Surely its function is NOT to provide politicians and wealthy entrepreneurs with an opportunity to enrich themselves further at the expense of New York residents, industry workers, and racing fans nationwide.

At best, installing slots at AQU is a compromise of conscience forced on the racing franchisee by lack of management foresight and political avarice. The community hosting the AQU racino will likely pay a quality-of-living price that many of its taxpaying residents aren’t willing to pay even if others are.

It seems to me that Silver is showing himself to be more a man of principle and friend of the racing fan than Spitzer and Bruno combined. He is right to defer any immediate consideration of BEL VLTs. If the optimism of slots advocates proves justified, VLTs can always be approved elsewhere; and not necessarily confined to racetracks.

The racetracks are supposed to become the property of the state, not the local communities in which they are located. IMO VLTs on that property should exist there primarily to maintain thoroughbred racing as a self-sustaining entertainment attraction for generations of racing fans. If additional revenue can be generated beyond the legitimate needs of the non-profit racing franchisee, then it should benefit STATE residents, collectively … not private stockholders, individually. Meaningful oversight in that area is indeed warranted.

I’m not sure to what extent non-wealthy slotsplayers and local residents will be negatively-impacted by VLTs, but it seems to me that the less-than-enthusiastic response to slots in other parts of the state justifies caution as well as a wait-and-see approach with regard to BEL.