More Negotiations on Suffolk Downs
Image:
Description:
By Lynne Snierson
The number of live racing days is still yet to be determined in the event that Suffolk Downs decides to host a 2015 meet without a signed agreement between track ownership and the New England Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association.
Chip Tuttle, the chief operating officer of the East Boston, Mass. track, told The Blood-Horse on Feb. 6 that another published report stating a potential meet would be for 25 days is erroneous. Tuttle added that even though no decision has been reached on the meet's length, it would only be a short one.
In 2014 the Massachusetts legislature passed a bill that lowered the mandatory number of live Thoroughbred racing days from 80 to 65 in order for the track to be able to simulcast. After Suffolk Downs ended live racing in early October as a consequence of gaming partner Mohegan Sun's failure to win the competition for the sole casino license in Greater Boston, the track planned to close for good at the end of the calendar year when its simulcasting rights were set to expire.
But in the waning hours of the legislative session, a bill was passed that allows Suffolk to continue to simulcast with no live racing through March 31. At that time, state legislators urged track officials and the NEHBPA to continue their protracted and sensitive negotiations on the horsemen's attempt to lease the track and conduct a live meet this year.
At issue currently is the monies that will flow into the newly created Race Horse Development Fund, which was established in the state's 2011 expanded gambling law and is to be funded by a percentage of the licensing fees and future revenues from the yet-to-open three casinos and one slots parlor.
The law stipulates that 80% of the funds be dedicated to purses, 16% to breeders, and 4% to backstretch welfare. The split of the total allotment is 75% to the state's Thoroughbred industry and 25% to the Standardbred horsemen.
The horsemen had requested that they be allowed to leverage part of their share to cover operating expenses in their lease agreement with Suffolk Downs, but the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, which also regulates racing, has yet to issue an official ruling.
The owners of Suffolk Downs, who said they have lost about $60 million in recent years on the live product and are done investing any more money, would also like to be able to access those funds dedicated to purses in order to resurrect live racing at the 80-year-old track.
Without the ability to tap into that fund, both sides have indicated that an economically viable agreement on a lease agreement between the track and the horsemen remains unlikely. Nonetheless, talks are continuing.