West Virginia | Horse Racing Free Tips

Mountaineer To Race Six Fewer Days in 2023

Mountaineer Park was granted approval on Monday by the West Virginia Racing Commission (WVRC) to race 124 dates in 2023, a six-program reduction from the 130 that the track is scheduled to race this year during its April-through-December meet.

Speaking about the loss of race dates, WVRC executive director Joe Moore said, “I'm told that is as a result of the Horse Racing Integrity Authority (HISA) and Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit (HIWU) assessments recently received by the commission and the racetracks for calendar year 2023.”

Mountaineer executives were offered the opportunity to elaborate on that reasoning and the dates cutback, but chose not to speak during the Nov. 14 meeting.

The HISA and HIWU assessments were separately discussed at length during a different portion of the meeting. TDN covered that topic here.

The awarding of race dates in West Virginia is a somewhat confusing two-step process bound by a state statute that requires Mountaineer to apply for 210 annual dates and Charles Town Races to apply for 220.

But in actuality, those quotas haven't been met “in a number of years” because of the logistical difficulties of filling that many cards, Moore said.

Moore explained that to comply with the law, tracks must first apply for the statutory minimum, then come back to the commission with a reduction request. After a 10-day public commentary period, if each track's horsemen's organization and tellers' union do not object, the WVRC can vote to reduce the dates.

So Mountaineer did both steps at Monday's meeting. Charles Town only applied for the 220 minimum, and will presumably be back before the board at a future meeting to ask for its traditional reduction.

Moore said Charles Town, which races year-round except for a brief break in December and January, had asked for 179 dates in 2022, but will likely end up racing only 175 by year's end because cancellations.

Charles Town executives were also offered an opportunity to outline the track's 2023 dates strategy, but declined to speak.

Chairman Ken Lowe Jr. and commissioner J.B. Akers voted in the affirmative on the two statutory requests and Mountaineer's reduction request. Commissioner Tony Figaretti voted “no” on all three counts.

“I'm not happy with it,” Figaretti said. “We're always deducting days, deducting days. It's too hard for me to accept that.”

The post Mountaineer To Race Six Fewer Days in 2023 appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Who Bears Compliance Responsibility if WV Can’t Hire HIWU Vets?

Facing a dire shortage of veterinarians at the state's two Thoroughbred tracks and under deadline pressure to decide whether to enter into a voluntary implementation agreement with the Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit (HIWU) prior to that entity's Jan. 1 start date, the West Virginia Racing Commission (WVRC) on Monday pressed a representative of HIWU for clarity on who, exactly, will bear responsibility if the minimum required number of equine drug testing employees can't be hired within the next six weeks.

It took some polite but persistent questioning by commissioner J.B. Akers to get an answer to that question. But Alex Waldrop, the recently retired National Thoroughbred Racing Association chief executive who now works as an advisor to HIWU, eventually conceded that “the burden right now is on HIWU.”

Akers had wanted assurance that West Virginia's racing wouldn't be subject to a shutdown if neither the commission nor the tracks could fill the federally required positions related to the coming of HIWU, an overarching national concern that has ramifications beyond just Mountaineer Park and Charles Town Races.

“I have a hard time believing that we're alone on this issue,” Akers said. “If it's only a few jurisdictions that's one thing. But if it's a substantial number of jurisdictions [that can't meet the staffing statute], I think that frames the issue a little differently.”

HIWU is the entity that will operate HISA's anti-doping program. HISA creates the rules HIWU will enforce.

In October, the WVRC, like racing commissions other states, was notified of the details of the combined agreements that HISA and HIWU want racing jurisdictions to either accept or decline prior to the Jan. 1 implementation date. Commissions and/or tracks have already been assessed costs for the 2023 operations of the two programs; if states opt-in to the agreements and pay some of the costs up front, their assessments will be reduced.

Joe Moore, the WVRC's executive director, said his state is already operating under a modified 2022 agreement with HISA on its racetrack safety program. He explained that he would like the proposed combined 2023 HISA and HIWU agreements split into two separate ones because the safety standards are a “much smoother agreement to extend [but] I believe the HIWU agreement is going to be a much heavier lift.”

At a time when the hiring marketplace is fierce nationwide and Mountaineer and Charles Town already find it difficult to obtain veterinary help, Moore stated it would be next to impossible for West Virginia to go out and hire at least 12 new people to work in drug testing oversight, which according to the incoming HIWU rules must consist of at least one veterinarian, a veterinary technician, a test barn supervisor, and five assistants at each track.

“I will tell you that neither of West Virginia's two test barns are anywhere close to this minimum,” Moore said.

“At Charles Town we have a vet supervisor who conducts our blood draw, two full-time assistants for urine collections, and a part-time assistant. Charles Town has one vet that does the pre-race and nightly card at the same time. We do not have a dedicated vet for the test barn, and we do not have a licensed vet tech,” Moore said.

“At Mountaineer Park, you have a licensed vet tech and three [per-diem] vet assistants for urine collection. Mountaineer Park has one vet for pre-race and nightly racing and no vet dedicated to the test barn,” Moore said.

Moore said one idea could be for the WVRC to staff the positions as best as it can, then ask HIWU to “fill in the gaps” while rebating the state for the positions West Virginia pays to cover.

“Or HIWU may take the stance of, 'You don't have enough [staff]. We're going to take over the whole operation,'” Moore postulated.

Another option, Moore said, would be to see if HIWU would be amenable to compromising on some of the required test barn positions by reducing or eliminating them.

Waldrop said that third option isn't likely to happen: “I don't think there is much, if any, leeway in [eliminating] the individual positions that need to be filled on a daily basis at West Virginia racetracks.”

But Waldrop did add that, “I do think that a cooperative effort between West Virginia and HIWU is the best way to go forward here. But I can't deliver that today. I can't promise that will be the case.”

Akers asked Moore if it would even be possible for the WVRC to post the jobs, interview candidates, perform background checks, and hire and train them prior to the Jan. 1, 2023, deadline.

Moore replied, “Commissioner, this couldn't be done by January of 2028. The racing commission does not have the funding to hire 12 additional personnel on a full-time basis.”

Willing and available veterinarians, Moore added, “don't exist out there right now.”

Waldrop explained that HISA and HIWU could assist with hiring by tapping into the resources of Drug Free Sport International, which has been hired to build HISA's independent Anti-Doping and Medication Control enforcement agency.

But while technicians and specimen collectors can be more easily trained to do their jobs, Waldrop admitted that, “The veterinary aspects are the most challenging. And I can tell you that HIWU is well aware of that, and they've been aware of that for some time. That's probably the biggest hurdle that they see in the near term. And they certainly intend to be prepared on Jan. 1.”

Waldrop continued: “Vets are hard to come by anywhere in the country right now, though, so I'm not going to sit here and say West Virginia is entirely unique. Equine vets [who are] familiar with the racetrack, that's a challenge. But it's one that HIWU has accepted, and they are confident that they can meet it.”

Akers then again prompted Waldrop to clarify who'd be held responsible if that didn't happen.

“Is it going to be HIWU's position, if, you know, that the state of West Virginia is out of compliance and it's our fault this didn't happen?” Akers asked. “Or is HIWU going to take responsibility and say that [the WVRC] made reasonable attempts and couldn't find the personnel to hire? Or is our racing jurisdiction going to be allegedly out of compliance with the statutory scheme, and therefore threatened by you with regard to whether we're even allowed to race or not?”

Waldrop replied that, “At this point in time, 'Who's out of compliance?' is an issue we could debate. But I think from the industry standpoint, it's HIWU's intention to be up and running and prepared to go Jan. 1.”

Waldrop continued: “One of the challenges you have in West Virginia [is] that you don't have the budgetary resources to hire these individuals…and I respect [and] understand that. HIWU doesn't have that challenge. HIWU has the financial resources to hire these people. So it's one of those hurdles that can be overcome because HIWU has that ability…. HIWU is part of Drug Free Sport, which is an international organization which has massive resources, financial as well as personnel, that they can draw upon.”

Akers said that it was his understanding that HIWU, HISA and Drug Free Sport don't currently have any regulatory veterinarians on staff.

“You're correct,” Waldrop answered. “You're focusing on exactly the right point, which is the challenge here is reg vets. The other positions we will provide. The reg vets are the challenge.”

But Akers still hadn't received a direct answer to his compliance question, so he respectfully but emphatically asked a third time if West Virginia was at risk of having its racing shut down over not having the required HIWU hires in place.

“I don't think that last scenario is going to occur, sir,” Waldrop replied. “HIWU will work with HISA, and do their level best to keep racing going in West Virginia without interruption to provide the staff that's necessary…So I would say to you that the burden right now is on HIWU to be prepared on Jan. 1.”

Akers said he appreciated that answer, adding that while he understood that Waldrop isn't a HIWU executive, he did want the minutes of the meeting to reflect that the HIWU advisor had articulated that “the burden should be presently on HIWU to make sure that these requirements are implemented by Jan. 1 to the extent that those are their mandates.”

In light of a long list of questions that Akers said he still had about entering into a voluntary HIWU agreement for 2023, Waldrop offered to set up a conference meeting in about two weeks between HIWU's executive director and general counsel and any interested West Virginia racing stakeholders and commission members.

The commission ended up taking no action on Monday on either opting into or out of the HISA and HIWU agreements for 2023.

The post Who Bears Compliance Responsibility if WV Can’t Hire HIWU Vets? appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

In Advance of HISA Appeals, Court Date, Two Sides Hone Arguments

In advance of oral arguments scheduled Aug. 30 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the two sides involved in the injunction appeal brought by the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act Authority (HISA) have filed legal briefs that they hope will sway the court to their side of the case.

Both HISA and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) are defendants in an underlying lawsuit led by the states of Louisiana and West Virginia, plus the Jockeys' Guild, that alleges unconstitutionality and federal rulemaking procedure violations regarding HISA's initial framework of regulations that went into effect July 1.

At issue in the appeal is whether a lower court (U.S. District Court, Western District of Louisiana) erred in preliminarily enjoining HISA regulations that were purportedly harming the plaintiffs. The issuance of that preliminary injunction favored the plaintiffs, but HISA and the FTC appealed it to the higher court.

The Appeals Court then ordered Aug. 8 that with the exception of three specifically contested HISA rules, HISA's legal authority would once again be valid in the two plaintiff states until that court heard oral arguments on the appeal. What happens in the Appeals Court will affect other actions in the lower court related to the underlying lawsuit.

“The district court had jurisdiction over Plaintiffs' claims,” stated an Aug. 19 brief filed by the plaintiffs. “The district court correctly concluded that Plaintiffs have standing because enforcing HISA's rules will inflict direct economic harm on each category of Plaintiff. Beyond that, the Plaintiff States are entitled to special solicitude, and HISA's rules inflict injuries on the States' sovereign, quasi-sovereign, and pecuniary interests.”

The plaintiffs' brief continued: “On the merits, multiple independent and valid grounds support the preliminary injunction. The HISA rules unlawfully dispensed with the requisite notice-and-comment period. Defendants' failure to provide for adequate notice and comment was not harmless given the significant changes these rules bring about for Plaintiffs, their members, and their citizens who raised substantive concerns that the FTC failed to take into account when it rubberstamped HISA's proffered rules…

“Beyond that, the district court correctly identified substantive flaws with each challenged series of rules–ways that HISA's rules clearly exceed its statutory authority–further amplifying the harms that warrant injunctive relief.

“Finally, the equitable factors support the preliminary injunction because the States cannot recoup their economic losses through an ordinary damages action [and] the public interest lies in ensuring that a private corporation is not unlawfully wielding federal power to implement a regulatory framework unauthorized by federal law.”

Not so, claimed the defendants in their Aug. 23 reply brief.

“Plaintiffs' response falls woefully short of justifying the district court's blunderbuss remedy–a preliminary injunction halting enforcement of all regulations promulgated under HISA at the time Plaintiffs brought this suit,” the defendants stated.

The defendants continued: “For each and every issue, Plaintiffs fail to so much as address critical defects highlighted by Defendants–presumably because they have no meritorious response. Plaintiffs do not even try to meet their burden to show actual and imminent harm for every rule they seek to enjoin, including the three specific rules that both sets of Defendants explained do not present any controversy.

“On the merits, Plaintiffs gloss over the gaping holes in the district court's plainly erroneous notice-and-comment analysis [and] lob a litany of misleading assertions on the assessment methodology…. Plaintiffs offer no meaningful response to the serious countervailing harms the order inflicts on Defendants and the public interest.

“These fatal flaws, independently or taken together, compel reversal of the extraordinary preliminary injunction in its entirety,” the defendants' brief summed up.

The post In Advance of HISA Appeals, Court Date, Two Sides Hone Arguments appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Op/Ed: Robert M. Beck, Jr.

During one of the most politically polarizing times in our country's history, Congress passed the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act of 2020 (HISA) with bipartisan support. What did this rare display of unity say about the health of the Thoroughbred racing industry? To say it kindly: the industry needed help. HISA handed over the reins for regulating Thoroughbred safety and anti-doping and medication control matters to a private, self-regulatory organization named the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority (Authority). Before HISA, Thoroughbred racing in the United States was regulated by a patchwork of individual state racing commissions with different, and often conflicting, rules. HISA represents a significant change for an industry used to parochial and inconsistent governance–and even more disorderly enforcement. Perhaps more important, HISA is the solution to stop horse racing from going the way of the circus and dog racing, as many commentators and animal rights activists have warned.

Sadly, some in the industry have chafed at Congress' mandate that Thoroughbred racing must be safe, clean, and fair. Since the passage of HISA, the Authority has been attacked on all sides through meritless lawsuits that willfully ignore more than 80 years of binding legal precedent. Nothing about HISA or the Authority's structure is unique, let alone legally questionable. HISA is modeled after a law called the Maloney Act of 1938, which designated what would later become the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) to oversee financial regulation under the oversight of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Like FINRA, the Authority is self-funded, independent, and overseen by a federal agency. In other words, the Maloney Act and HISA are constitutional for the same reasons: Congress is well within its power to delegate its regulatory authority to private entities so long as a government agency retains ultimate decision-making authority as to rules and enforcement; Private organizations such as the Authority and FINRA are not subject to constitutional restraints on appointments and removal of board members; and Private self-funding of such organizations does not unconstitutionally compel states to enforce federal law.

For those keeping score, the Authority is winning the battles against its detractors. Two Federal District Courts–one in Kentucky and another in Texas–have soundly rejected the constitutional challenges lodged against HISA and the Authority, and the reviewing appellate courts are expected to affirm these decisions. No court has found HISA unconstitutional. Having lost their challenges to the Authority's constitutionality, the Authority's opponents have resorted to nitpicking the Authority's implementation of its rules. Thus far, these attempts have also failed. In one case, filed in Louisiana Federal District Court, the plaintiffs argued that the Authority failed to satisfy certain technical requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act. Significantly, the Louisiana Federal District Court found zero constitutional violations, but it did initially agree with the plaintiffs that the Authority's definition of “covered horse” and its search and seizure rule expanded beyond the scope the statute ever so slightly. Practically speaking, this portion of the ruling has no impact, because the Authority has already revised one of the rules and the other rule is revised in the ADMC rules. The District Court also questioned the Authority's rule on funding and the length of the notice and comment period, though it recognized that any of the claimed deficiencies could be easily remedied by the Authority even if the Authority is ultimately unsuccessful on the merits. It was perhaps not surprising then that the Authority recently sought and received an emergency stay of enforcement of a Louisiana Federal District Court's order halting implementation of the Authority's rules in Louisiana and West Virginia. This stay makes clear that the Authority's safety rules will continue to be enforced nation-wide.

Unfortunately, during the interim, the Authority's enforcement of its rules in Louisiana and West Virginia was delayed. Racing in both states suffered. For example, one jockey in Louisiana whipped a horse 17 times in one race, 11 times more than the Authority's strike limit. Under the Authority's rules, such behavior is prohibited and would have been swiftly and uniformly punished. But horses are not the only ones suffering as a result of these meritless lawsuits. A fourth federal lawsuit challenging the Authority and HISA was filed in Texas at the end of July. It recycles many of the failed legal claims. Like the cases that came before it (and those that will come after it), the new lawsuit merely serves as a distraction and a waste of industry resources. Ironically, under HISA, horsemen and racetracks will be the ones who bear the brunt of these additional legal costs. It is clear that litigation against the Authority will continue to burden the industry and threaten the safety and integrity of our equine and human athletes. The Authority is doing this good work despite the distractions of the ongoing litigation, and it continues to win the courtroom battles. Sadly, the Authority's legal costs to defend these lawsuits will only increase the costs to all racing participants, horsemen included.

Beck is an equine lawyer and member of Stites & Harbison, PLLC in Lexington, Kentucky. He previously served 7 1/2 years as the Chairman of the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission.

The post Op/Ed: Robert M. Beck, Jr. appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post