Here is a very good article on the above.
http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/217291.html
Bay Meadows/CHRB battle
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
-
CA Michael
- Grade II Winner
- Posts: 1258
- Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:32 pm
- Location: California
Walters calls it as it is. I'm going to the Senate committee meeting today to voice my support for the CHRB majority which instituted the synthetic track mandate. No doubt Bay Meadows and its developer types will be there to egg on Sen. Yee (that's 'Egg Fool Yee'). I planning on letting loose on this committee much along the lines that Dan Walters did in this article.
Hope to see you there!
Hope to see you there!
Convictions without Courage are worthless
-
CA Michael
- Grade II Winner
- Posts: 1258
- Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:32 pm
- Location: California
I can only guess. I have the horrible feeling that Jack Liebau has buffaloed enough CHRB board members into thinking that if they grant Bay Meadows a one year waiver, there will be no more racing after that.
However, after speaking with the San Mateo planning department, and the commercial division of Coldwell Banker in neighboring Burlingame today, I am convinced that the actual development on the site won't occur for 3-5 years, probably in 2011. In the meantime, dozens if not hundreds of horses will die on the Bay Meadows deathtrap racecourse.
I testified before the Senate GO committee and provided it with a selection of facts about the proposed development, and also asked them if THEY would build a huge commercial project like this when the local vacancy factor is 25%. No one bit.
However, after speaking with the San Mateo planning department, and the commercial division of Coldwell Banker in neighboring Burlingame today, I am convinced that the actual development on the site won't occur for 3-5 years, probably in 2011. In the meantime, dozens if not hundreds of horses will die on the Bay Meadows deathtrap racecourse.
I testified before the Senate GO committee and provided it with a selection of facts about the proposed development, and also asked them if THEY would build a huge commercial project like this when the local vacancy factor is 25%. No one bit.
Convictions without Courage are worthless
-
Playwithfire
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 226
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 8:55 pm
- Location: California
There may or may not be more than meets the eye to the delay of Golden Gate Fields and installation of its synthetic track. I believe the city of Albany has not granted environmental approval ( or something of that ilk) to GGF to begin installation of the Tapeta surface which was supposed to occur this week. Horses are still in the barns and they didn't even vote on the issue at the last meeting. I have a horse stabled at GGF, and I asked my trainer when he was going to have to vacate (to Vallejo). He didn't think they'd be putting it in at all in 2007.
So my question is, i wonder if the folks battling CHRB are behind Albany's reluctance to grant approval for GGF to install its surface, so they have more leverage to let Bay Meadows run next year, and maybe let Bay meadows get the dates it wants.
So my question is, i wonder if the folks battling CHRB are behind Albany's reluctance to grant approval for GGF to install its surface, so they have more leverage to let Bay Meadows run next year, and maybe let Bay meadows get the dates it wants.
-
CA Michael
- Grade II Winner
- Posts: 1258
- Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:32 pm
- Location: California
Playwithfire,
Robert Hartman of Golden Gate Fields told the State Senate GO committee on Tuesday that many of the obstacles had been resolved between the city and GGF, and that he expected the Tapeta track to be installed before the 2008 race meeting begins. It didn't sound to me like there is much hope of the work being done this summer, though.
It also appears, much to my disappointment, that the CHRB will reverse its March decision which denied Bay Meadows an extension. As you may know, 26 horses suffered fatal injuries on the Bay Meadows track in its Feb-April meet this year. I strongly believe BM Land Co. is pulling the wool over their eyes--I don't think it has any intention of building on that property for 3-4 years--when the economic conditions become favorable again. At present, there is a 25% vacancy factor in the San Mateo area. Would you add 800,000 square feet of additional office space now??
Robert Hartman of Golden Gate Fields told the State Senate GO committee on Tuesday that many of the obstacles had been resolved between the city and GGF, and that he expected the Tapeta track to be installed before the 2008 race meeting begins. It didn't sound to me like there is much hope of the work being done this summer, though.
It also appears, much to my disappointment, that the CHRB will reverse its March decision which denied Bay Meadows an extension. As you may know, 26 horses suffered fatal injuries on the Bay Meadows track in its Feb-April meet this year. I strongly believe BM Land Co. is pulling the wool over their eyes--I don't think it has any intention of building on that property for 3-4 years--when the economic conditions become favorable again. At present, there is a 25% vacancy factor in the San Mateo area. Would you add 800,000 square feet of additional office space now??
Convictions without Courage are worthless
-
Tairaterces
- Grade III Winner
- Posts: 1026
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 11:27 am
- Location: NorCal
CA Michael wrote:As you may know, 26 horses suffered fatal injuries on the Bay Meadows track in its Feb-April meet this year.
Hi Michael,
Yes, 26 horses suffered fatal injuries, I feel just as bad as you about the deaths, but that Spring meet at Bay Meadows was an aberation. That is certainly not the norm. Were these deaths from just the dirt track? How many were turf deaths? How many of these deaths were from suspect horses that had no business racing, but the trainers sent them out anyway hoping they would be claimed away and be someone else's problem?
Of the 2 NorCal tracks the dirt course of Golden Gate Fields is far more dangerous than Bay Meadows, especially on an off track. Why do you think they changed the racing dates so GGF would have less rainy season racing dates?
You know that I value your opinion . . . . . . . but please don't be so melodramatic. . . . . .specifically calling Bay Meadows "a death trap" in a previous post . . . . . . .
You want to blame someone for these breakdowns . . . .blame Governor
"I'll be back" . . . . . . . . had dumbazz Arnold given a good portion of the slots to the tracks Bay Meadows would have had the money, and most important an incentive to invest in a profitable business . . . . . . . BUT what does the dumbazz do . . . . . he gives the indian casinos exclusivity to all of the slots. Hmmmmmmmm!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know that you have agendas . . . . . I too have an agenda and that is to go to my beautiful little race track on the peninsula and enjoy many more days of horse racing . . . . . . . .
Best,
Tairaterces
"and Secretariat let no one down on the unforgettable afternoon of June 9, 1973, when he ran a hole in the wind"
~Bob Ehalt~
Avatar: Istabraq (Sadler's Wells x Betty's Secret by Secretariat) Champion Hurdler
~Bob Ehalt~
Avatar: Istabraq (Sadler's Wells x Betty's Secret by Secretariat) Champion Hurdler
-
Worksoplad
- Starters Handicap
- Posts: 541
- Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 4:09 pm
- Location: Manhattan Beach, California
" know that you have agendas . . . . . I too have an agenda and that is to go to my beautiful little race track on the peninsula and enjoy many more days of horse racing . . . . . . . . "
Days being the operative word if the owner/developers have their way.
Days being the operative word if the owner/developers have their way.
"Who kills a man kills a reasonable creature, but he who destroys a good book kills reason itself." John Milton.
-
Tairaterces
- Grade III Winner
- Posts: 1026
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 11:27 am
- Location: NorCal
Worksoplad wrote:" know that you have agendas . . . . . I too have an agenda and that is to go to my beautiful little race track on the peninsula and enjoy many more days of horse racing . . . . . . . . "
Days being the operative word if the owner/developers have their way.
I think Michael is right about 3 to 4 more years of racing . . . . . . . crikeys they still haven't rented out alot of the office space from where the barn area and training track used to be . . . . . . . . and that was built years ago.
"and Secretariat let no one down on the unforgettable afternoon of June 9, 1973, when he ran a hole in the wind"
~Bob Ehalt~
Avatar: Istabraq (Sadler's Wells x Betty's Secret by Secretariat) Champion Hurdler
~Bob Ehalt~
Avatar: Istabraq (Sadler's Wells x Betty's Secret by Secretariat) Champion Hurdler
In general, the Bay Meadows surface was considered a safer surface in wet conditions
The Bay Meadows track had basically nothing done to it during the last meet. No material added or subtracted. The track was unsafe, inconsistent and hurt alot of horses last winter/spring. In essence it became a lame duck racetrack.
If BM racing is ok'd for 2008 and because racing at the BM site appears on surface to be a year to year proposition, there should, at minimum a thorough, impartial oversight with regards to the BM racing surface.
The Bay Meadows track had basically nothing done to it during the last meet. No material added or subtracted. The track was unsafe, inconsistent and hurt alot of horses last winter/spring. In essence it became a lame duck racetrack.
If BM racing is ok'd for 2008 and because racing at the BM site appears on surface to be a year to year proposition, there should, at minimum a thorough, impartial oversight with regards to the BM racing surface.
I'd bet the house Michael is right about the further development timeline.
BM has played a brilliant game both politically and via smoke and mirrors by:
A. deflecting the CHRB's desire to make racing in California safer through a political carpet bombing of insinuations and half truths.
B. By playing the development card
BM has played a brilliant game both politically and via smoke and mirrors by:
A. deflecting the CHRB's desire to make racing in California safer through a political carpet bombing of insinuations and half truths.
B. By playing the development card
-
Playwithfire
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 226
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 8:55 pm
- Location: California
Regarding the "safeness" of Bay Meadows this spring, I think zinn nailed it. Its a lame duck track. Why spend the money on the maintenance when you're willing to make 2007 the last year of racing?
Tairaterces, while this spring may have been an aberration, was it just chance that lead to more breakdowns? Or more likely less maintenance to the track because its a "lame duck". Both the Turf and Dirt course suffered many more breakdowns then normal. To me that means both surfaces were less safe than normal, which to me points to less care being given to each track. I don't see a reason why there would be more horses that "shouldn't have been running" this spring vs. a similar period. Also if you look at the recent Golden Gate meet, which feature many of the same horses running at BM (except for the now dead/sidelined ones), I don't believe there were near as many injuries in the most recent meet.
If they let them run in 2008, they better make damn sure that both track surfaces are well maintained.
Tairaterces, while this spring may have been an aberration, was it just chance that lead to more breakdowns? Or more likely less maintenance to the track because its a "lame duck". Both the Turf and Dirt course suffered many more breakdowns then normal. To me that means both surfaces were less safe than normal, which to me points to less care being given to each track. I don't see a reason why there would be more horses that "shouldn't have been running" this spring vs. a similar period. Also if you look at the recent Golden Gate meet, which feature many of the same horses running at BM (except for the now dead/sidelined ones), I don't believe there were near as many injuries in the most recent meet.
If they let them run in 2008, they better make damn sure that both track surfaces are well maintained.
-
CA Michael
- Grade II Winner
- Posts: 1258
- Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:32 pm
- Location: California
Below is a copy of the CTBAboardwatch letter to members of the CHRB
June 18, 2007
California Horse Racing Board
Commissioners:
We support the board's March 22 decision to deny a waiver of the board mandate for synthetic tracks to the Bay Meadows Racing Association. We also oppose any reversal of that decision. Here's why:
1) At the recent February-April Bay Meadows meet, 25 horses died as a direct result of injuries sustained on its racing surface. Another horse died shortly after the meet closed due to a soft tissue injury incurred during the race meet. Using the numbers used by Dr. Arthur at the March 22 hearing, the value of these horses was $650,000 (26 x $25,000).
If Bay Meadows does not dramatically improve its track's safety, and if racing is permitted to continue there next year, we estimate that another 100 horses, worth approximately $2.5 million, will die in 2008. We find this result unacceptable. Bay Meadows has made no effort to improve the track condition, or its track maintenance, as a precursor to hosting additional race meets. We find it incredible and very disturbing that the CHRB may revote its well considered March 22 decision with no concession in return from Bay Meadows.
2) According to San Mateo city planner Darcy Forcell, the lead planner for the Bay Meadows Land Co. development, that company has invested only the cost of the E.I.R. and another $50,000 in impact fees to the City Arts Council. She believes the entitlement process will be completed by this time next year (unless the Friends of Bay Meadows lawsuit prevails); if so, BMLC has another four years--until 2011--to remove the racetrack facilities before any further substantial fees are due. If the project has not begun by 2011, the property owner must pay a $4.6 million 'transportation mitigation" fee to the city of San Mateo.
Our research into current market conditions in the San Mateo vicinity indicate that the current vacancy rate is approximately 25%. Both the San Mateo County Times and the commericial/retail division of the local Coldwell Banker Co. confirm these numbers. If you owned this property, would you invest the millions to begin development anytime soon?
We believe that the racetrack facility could likely not be demolished for two to four years. Ms. Forcell also told us that "BMLC will likely sell off all or part of the permitted project." Thus, BMLC would be in a position to ask the CHRB for additional 'one year waivers' until 2011. Is this the position the board wishes to find itself in, year after year, for four more years?
For the horses' benefit; for the owners' and trainers' benefit; for the sport's benefit; and for the CHRB's own credibility, we strongly urge the CHRB to uphold its March 22 denial of the Bay Meadows waiver request.
If the board finds it politically impossible to do so, we resignedly request that it attach tough Conditions of Waiver to its decision. Track resurfacing; independent monitoring of track maintenance; and written approval of the track surface by owners and trainers groups are just several of the methods by which the CHRB could marginally improve the Bay Meadows racing surface for the protection of horses and their connections.
Thank you for your consideration of our thoughts.
June 18, 2007
California Horse Racing Board
Commissioners:
We support the board's March 22 decision to deny a waiver of the board mandate for synthetic tracks to the Bay Meadows Racing Association. We also oppose any reversal of that decision. Here's why:
1) At the recent February-April Bay Meadows meet, 25 horses died as a direct result of injuries sustained on its racing surface. Another horse died shortly after the meet closed due to a soft tissue injury incurred during the race meet. Using the numbers used by Dr. Arthur at the March 22 hearing, the value of these horses was $650,000 (26 x $25,000).
If Bay Meadows does not dramatically improve its track's safety, and if racing is permitted to continue there next year, we estimate that another 100 horses, worth approximately $2.5 million, will die in 2008. We find this result unacceptable. Bay Meadows has made no effort to improve the track condition, or its track maintenance, as a precursor to hosting additional race meets. We find it incredible and very disturbing that the CHRB may revote its well considered March 22 decision with no concession in return from Bay Meadows.
2) According to San Mateo city planner Darcy Forcell, the lead planner for the Bay Meadows Land Co. development, that company has invested only the cost of the E.I.R. and another $50,000 in impact fees to the City Arts Council. She believes the entitlement process will be completed by this time next year (unless the Friends of Bay Meadows lawsuit prevails); if so, BMLC has another four years--until 2011--to remove the racetrack facilities before any further substantial fees are due. If the project has not begun by 2011, the property owner must pay a $4.6 million 'transportation mitigation" fee to the city of San Mateo.
Our research into current market conditions in the San Mateo vicinity indicate that the current vacancy rate is approximately 25%. Both the San Mateo County Times and the commericial/retail division of the local Coldwell Banker Co. confirm these numbers. If you owned this property, would you invest the millions to begin development anytime soon?
We believe that the racetrack facility could likely not be demolished for two to four years. Ms. Forcell also told us that "BMLC will likely sell off all or part of the permitted project." Thus, BMLC would be in a position to ask the CHRB for additional 'one year waivers' until 2011. Is this the position the board wishes to find itself in, year after year, for four more years?
For the horses' benefit; for the owners' and trainers' benefit; for the sport's benefit; and for the CHRB's own credibility, we strongly urge the CHRB to uphold its March 22 denial of the Bay Meadows waiver request.
If the board finds it politically impossible to do so, we resignedly request that it attach tough Conditions of Waiver to its decision. Track resurfacing; independent monitoring of track maintenance; and written approval of the track surface by owners and trainers groups are just several of the methods by which the CHRB could marginally improve the Bay Meadows racing surface for the protection of horses and their connections.
Thank you for your consideration of our thoughts.
Convictions without Courage are worthless
-
Playwithfire
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 226
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 8:55 pm
- Location: California
Good letter Michael.
Personally, i hope they open in 2008, but ONLY if they make the track safe and put money into it, which remains to be seen. I think the other alternatives for racing in the Bay Area are less attractive (more fair dates, running a ton at GGF, etc) mainly because of the lack of turf racing and purse reductions. I can't see them running for 4-5 months straight at GGF and be able to use the turf course w/out it being destroyed...which of course would make it dangerous and cause more injuries.
Unfortunately it doesn't look like any other facility would be willing to install synthetic surface other than Golden Gate Fields, and even that is being delayed.
Personally, i hope they open in 2008, but ONLY if they make the track safe and put money into it, which remains to be seen. I think the other alternatives for racing in the Bay Area are less attractive (more fair dates, running a ton at GGF, etc) mainly because of the lack of turf racing and purse reductions. I can't see them running for 4-5 months straight at GGF and be able to use the turf course w/out it being destroyed...which of course would make it dangerous and cause more injuries.
Unfortunately it doesn't look like any other facility would be willing to install synthetic surface other than Golden Gate Fields, and even that is being delayed.
-
CA Michael
- Grade II Winner
- Posts: 1258
- Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:32 pm
- Location: California
The CHRB just adjourned its monthly meeting and, thanks to a legal technicality, did not take any action on Bay Meadows' suggested one year waiver of synthetic track installation.
The deputy Attorney General told the board as it was about to vote on the waiver that because the issue was not posted on the agenda as an action item it could not be voted on today. This ruling gives those of us who oppose such a waiver an additional month to make our case to the board and to the public.
Pass it on!!
The deputy Attorney General told the board as it was about to vote on the waiver that because the issue was not posted on the agenda as an action item it could not be voted on today. This ruling gives those of us who oppose such a waiver an additional month to make our case to the board and to the public.
Pass it on!!
Convictions without Courage are worthless