The worst part of the New York takeout fiasco revealed last week is not the failure of so many agencies to catch an honest mistake, but that a short-term remedy to the situation may pre-empt a more serious and overdue discussion about takeout reduction.
A routine audit of the state breeding fund in early December turned up the colossal “oops” – that the New York Racing Association had been erroneously paying out 74 percent rather than 75 percent of its “super-exotic” (three or more horses) betting pools for the last 15 months. Every single racing and regulatory body in the state, not to mention those in the dozens of other states and foreign countries that bet into these NYRA pools, flat out forgot that the takeout rate on these bets was supposed to revert from 26 to 25 percent in September 2010. That was when a one-point takeout increase, hurriedly added to the 2008 NYRA franchise-renewal legislation as a sop to the state’s offtrack betting corporations, was supposed to expire.
You would think someone – anyone – would have had the expiration date circled on his calendar, but no one did. NYRA can be blamed for the oversight but no more so than the state Racing and Wagering Board, the Franchise Oversight Board, the state Department of Taxation and Finance, and anyone else charged with enforcing the racing laws of the state, or at least figuring out the current status of those laws. Takeout increases don’t usually have sunset provisions; this one did, but everyone forgot about it until the breeding-fund auditors stumbled on it.
At that point. FOB and SRWB officials angrily wagged their fingers at NYRA while neglecting to address why regulators had been equally negligent in overlooking the statute, and early reaction accused NYRA of knowingly keeping the extra money for itself. Then cooler heads pointed out that the primary beneficiary of the mistake was not NYRA, which only benefits from a higher takeout on the 15 percent of the handle bet directly through it ontrack or through its NYRA Rewards account-wagering system. For the 85 percent of the handle that is bet through OTB’s, simulcast outlets, and national-account wagering companies, NYRA gets the same negotiated percentage of handle regardless of the takeout rate. NYRA itself kept about $1 million more than the correct statutory rate, but over $7 million went straight into the profit margins of other bet-takers .
Few of those outlets have addressed whether they will try to track down and compensate the shortchanged bettors, whereas NYRA at least has agreed to make up the shortfall to NYRA Rewards customers, whose bets can be tracked. It also agreed to make up for the 15 months of overcharging with a remedial 15 months of undercharging – since the rate was applied at 26 rather than 25 percent, it will now be charged at 24 rather than 25 percent for at least an equal period of time.
This is a makeup, however, not the sort of forward-thinking takeout reform NYRA portrayed it as when it first addressed the issue with a press release misleadingly titled “NYRA Announces Takeout Reduction.” This was a little bit like someone being fined and sentenced to perform community service and then announcing that he has decided to take a more active role in community affairs.
NYRA also erred in saying it would not make up the overcharging on pick-six bets, citing an obscure statutory provision that actually allows takeout of as high as 36 percent in that pool. But no one had ever proposed or applied for such a rate, and it seems clear that the increase from 25 to 26 percent in the pick six was supposed to expire in September 2010 along with the increase on other super-exotics.
NYRA subsequently announced it will continue the new 24 percent rate past the 15-month makeup period, a positive gesture but still not enough. A 24 percent super-exotic rate is still higher than in most other major jurisdictions (including 19 percent in Kentucky). NYRA’s position has long been that it supports lower takeout, and it has opposed previous increases, including the 2008 one. After decades of losing that argument, however, NYRA is now positioned as never before to implement real and meaningful takeout reform.
The new Aqueduct racino is providing NYRA with as much as $100 million a year for purses and capital improvements, and some slice of that should be redirected to the public in the form of lower takeout. NYRA can finally afford it, and the crumbling of the state’s OTB system removes a major impediment to enacting it.
A short-term remedy to an error should not be mistaken for long-term reform.
Saturday, December 31, 2011
Verizon is jealous of NYRA &Charlie Heyward ?
The worst part of the New York takeout fiasco revealed last week is not the failure of so many agencies to catch an honest mistake, but that a short-term remedy to the situation may pre-empt a more serious and overdue discussion about takeout reduction.
A routine audit of the state breeding fund in early December turned up the colossal “oops” – that the New York Racing Association had been erroneously paying out 74 percent rather than 75 percent of its “super-exotic” (three or more horses) betting pools for the last 15 months. Every single racing and regulatory body in the state, not to mention those in the dozens of other states and foreign countries that bet into these NYRA pools, flat out forgot that the takeout rate on these bets was supposed to revert from 26 to 25 percent in September 2010. That was when a one-point takeout increase, hurriedly added to the 2008 NYRA franchise-renewal legislation as a sop to the state’s offtrack betting corporations, was supposed to expire.
You would think someone – anyone – would have had the expiration date circled on his calendar, but no one did. NYRA can be blamed for the oversight but no more so than the state Racing and Wagering Board, the Franchise Oversight Board, the state Department of Taxation and Finance, and anyone else charged with enforcing the racing laws of the state, or at least figuring out the current status of those laws. Takeout increases don’t usually have sunset provisions; this one did, but everyone forgot about it until the breeding-fund auditors stumbled on it.
At that point. FOB and SRWB officials angrily wagged their fingers at NYRA while neglecting to address why regulators had been equally negligent in overlooking the statute, and early reaction accused NYRA of knowingly keeping the extra money for itself. Then cooler heads pointed out that the primary beneficiary of the mistake was not NYRA, which only benefits from a higher takeout on the 15 percent of the handle bet directly through it ontrack or through its NYRA Rewards account-wagering system. For the 85 percent of the handle that is bet through OTB’s, simulcast outlets, and national-account wagering companies, NYRA gets the same negotiated percentage of handle regardless of the takeout rate. NYRA itself kept about $1 million more than the correct statutory rate, but over $7 million went straight into the profit margins of other bet-takers .
Few of those outlets have addressed whether they will try to track down and compensate the shortchanged bettors, whereas NYRA at least has agreed to make up the shortfall to NYRA Rewards customers, whose bets can be tracked. It also agreed to make up for the 15 months of overcharging with a remedial 15 months of undercharging – since the rate was applied at 26 rather than 25 percent, it will now be charged at 24 rather than 25 percent for at least an equal period of time.
This is a makeup, however, not the sort of forward-thinking takeout reform NYRA portrayed it as when it first addressed the issue with a press release misleadingly titled “NYRA Announces Takeout Reduction.” This was a little bit like someone being fined and sentenced to perform community service and then announcing that he has decided to take a more active role in community affairs.
NYRA also erred in saying it would not make up the overcharging on pick-six bets, citing an obscure statutory provision that actually allows takeout of as high as 36 percent in that pool. But no one had ever proposed or applied for such a rate, and it seems clear that the increase from 25 to 26 percent in the pick six was supposed to expire in September 2010 along with the increase on other super-exotics.
NYRA subsequently announced it will continue the new 24 percent rate past the 15-month makeup period, a positive gesture but still not enough. A 24 percent super-exotic rate is still higher than in most other major jurisdictions (including 19 percent in Kentucky). NYRA’s position has long been that it supports lower takeout, and it has opposed previous increases, including the 2008 one. After decades of losing that argument, however, NYRA is now positioned as never before to implement real and meaningful takeout reform.
The new Aqueduct racino is providing NYRA with as much as $100 million a year for purses and capital improvements, and some slice of that should be redirected to the public in the form of lower takeout. NYRA can finally afford it, and the crumbling of the state’s OTB system removes a major impediment to enacting it.
A short-term remedy to an error should not be mistaken for long-term reform.
TECHNOLOGY
DECEMBER 31, 2011
Verizon Drops Plan for New $2 Fee
By GREG BENSINGER
Verizon Wireless abruptly backed off a plan to charge some customers extra to pay their bills online or over the phone, joining the ignominious parade of corporate retreats in 2011.
Verizon Wireless backed off a plan to charge some customers $2 to pay their bills after a barrage of customer complaints and the scrutiny of federal regulators. George Stahl has details on The News Hub.
The reversal, just a day after the new $2 charge became public, followed a barrage of customer complaints and the scrutiny of federal regulators.
More
Earlier: Verizon Outages, Fees Irk Customers
It capped a tough month for the nation's largest cellphone carrier, which was beset by three nationwide service outages after boasting it had exceeded its own goals in rolling out a new high-speed wireless data network.
Verizon Wireless had planned to implement the fee Jan. 15 for customers making one-time payments via its website or over the phone. An online petition on change.org calling for Verizon to drop the fee quickly drew more than 100,000 signatures, and the Federal Communications Commission said Friday it was "concerned about Verizon's actions" and was looking into the matter.
"We take great care to listen to our customers," Verizon Wireless Chief Executive Dan Mead said in an emailed statement. "The best path forward is to encourage customers to take advantage of the best and most efficient options, eliminating the need to institute the fee at this time."
The retreat echoed flip-flops this year by Bank of America Corp. and Netflix Inc., which backed off controversial plans of their own in the wake of heavy public criticism.
Greg Bensinger joins the News Hub to discuss Verizon's planned $2 fee the company says it will impose on some customers in 2012. AP Photo/Alan Diaz
Facing a customer backlash and the ire of some regulators, Bank of America in November dropped plans to impose a $5 monthly fee on many customers using their debit cards to make everyday purchases. Other banks including J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. and Wells Fargo & Co. also killed regional debit card fee trials in the wake of the outcry.
Netflix, meanwhile, abandoned its plan to split its DVD-by-mail service into a separate business named Qwikster as part of a new pricing structure that upset some of its users. The movie-rental company didn't back off a price hike it implemented in July, however—an increase for which CEO Reed Hastings issued an apology for failing to explain it better.
"Companies need to make changes like this in a way that their customers understand and in a way that they can see the benefit," said Helio Fred Garcia, a New York University crisis-management professor. "Verizon recognized the reaction and backed off—unlike Netflix which dug in its heels and tried to explain the change in a way customers didn't understand."
Hewlett-Packard Co. was another company that found itself in retreat this year, deciding to keep its personal computer division after announcing that it would explore spinning off the unit into a standalone company.
Verizon Wireless's fee hike didn't rise to the same franchise-shaking level, but it nevertheless riled consumers.
Enlarge Image
verizon
verizon
Getty Images
Verizon had planned to charge a $2 fee on customers making one-time payments online or on the phone. Above, a Los Angeles store.
"How can it be they that they would charge their customers to pay their bill, except to extract just a little more money? Someone wasn't thinking when they tried to impose this fee," said Bill Eger, 76, a Verizon customer in Hilo, Hawaii. "I am delighted they took attention to the response; that was a pretty fast turnaround."
Verizon Wireless—co-owned by Verizon Communications Inc. and Vodafone Group PLC—had said the fee was necessary for "convenience," without providing additional details.
Users who paid through their bank's website or by automatic deduction from their credit cards, among other options, wouldn't have been subject to the extra charge. The company declined to comment beyond Mr. Mead's statement.
"Verizon thinks it can do anything to its customers, and that we're powerless to stop it," said one petition, begun by Molly Katchpole, who helped quash Bank of America's debit-card fee plan by gathering 300,000 signatures on an online protest.
Ms. Katchpole's letter calling on Verizon to drop the fee had secured more than 100,000 digital signatures by Friday evening. Other petitions against Verizon's plan popped up on sites including gopetition.com and petitiononline.com.
A Year of Flip-Flops
Several companies dropped pricing or strategic changes amid public push back
Netflix: Abandoned plans in October to separate its DVD-by-mail business from its Internet-streaming service, but stuck with price increases.
Bank of America: In November dropped plans to impose a $5 monthly fee on debit-card users that was announced five weeks earlier.
H-P: After saying it would explore a spinoff for its PC division, H-P ousted its CEO and later decided not to separate the business
Critics of Verizon's fee plan took a victory lap after the reversed decision. "The era of corporations walking roughshod over consumers without consequence is officially over," said Ben Rattray, chief executive of change.org.
The misstep comes as Verizon looks increasingly well-positioned against its rivals. AT&T Inc. was forced last week to drop its $39 billion acquisition of No. 4 carrier T-Mobile USA amid fierce opposition from antitrust authorities, and Sprint Nextel Corp. remains unprofitable and has to fund an expensive network buildout and a burdensome contract with Apple Inc. to carry the iPhone.
But Verizon has stumbled recently despite its advantages. The carrier has suffered through three outages to its new 4G network this month, denting its reputation for network quality.
The company, based in Basking Ridge, N.J., has rolled out the network to more than 200 million Americans, ahead of AT&T's 70 million, and offers a lineup of pricey smartphones that can make use of the zippy broadband service.
With 107.7 million subscribers, Verizon is the largest carrier in the U.S. AT&T and Sprint have 100.7 million and 53.4 million subscribers, respectively. Verizon didn't disclose how many customers would have been affected by the abandoned bill fee.
Write to Greg Bensinger at greg.bensinger@dowjones.com
Read more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204720204577130802272138184.html#ixzz1iAxChK6k
A routine audit of the state breeding fund in early December turned up the colossal “oops” – that the New York Racing Association had been erroneously paying out 74 percent rather than 75 percent of its “super-exotic” (three or more horses) betting pools for the last 15 months. Every single racing and regulatory body in the state, not to mention those in the dozens of other states and foreign countries that bet into these NYRA pools, flat out forgot that the takeout rate on these bets was supposed to revert from 26 to 25 percent in September 2010. That was when a one-point takeout increase, hurriedly added to the 2008 NYRA franchise-renewal legislation as a sop to the state’s offtrack betting corporations, was supposed to expire.
You would think someone – anyone – would have had the expiration date circled on his calendar, but no one did. NYRA can be blamed for the oversight but no more so than the state Racing and Wagering Board, the Franchise Oversight Board, the state Department of Taxation and Finance, and anyone else charged with enforcing the racing laws of the state, or at least figuring out the current status of those laws. Takeout increases don’t usually have sunset provisions; this one did, but everyone forgot about it until the breeding-fund auditors stumbled on it.
At that point. FOB and SRWB officials angrily wagged their fingers at NYRA while neglecting to address why regulators had been equally negligent in overlooking the statute, and early reaction accused NYRA of knowingly keeping the extra money for itself. Then cooler heads pointed out that the primary beneficiary of the mistake was not NYRA, which only benefits from a higher takeout on the 15 percent of the handle bet directly through it ontrack or through its NYRA Rewards account-wagering system. For the 85 percent of the handle that is bet through OTB’s, simulcast outlets, and national-account wagering companies, NYRA gets the same negotiated percentage of handle regardless of the takeout rate. NYRA itself kept about $1 million more than the correct statutory rate, but over $7 million went straight into the profit margins of other bet-takers .
Few of those outlets have addressed whether they will try to track down and compensate the shortchanged bettors, whereas NYRA at least has agreed to make up the shortfall to NYRA Rewards customers, whose bets can be tracked. It also agreed to make up for the 15 months of overcharging with a remedial 15 months of undercharging – since the rate was applied at 26 rather than 25 percent, it will now be charged at 24 rather than 25 percent for at least an equal period of time.
This is a makeup, however, not the sort of forward-thinking takeout reform NYRA portrayed it as when it first addressed the issue with a press release misleadingly titled “NYRA Announces Takeout Reduction.” This was a little bit like someone being fined and sentenced to perform community service and then announcing that he has decided to take a more active role in community affairs.
NYRA also erred in saying it would not make up the overcharging on pick-six bets, citing an obscure statutory provision that actually allows takeout of as high as 36 percent in that pool. But no one had ever proposed or applied for such a rate, and it seems clear that the increase from 25 to 26 percent in the pick six was supposed to expire in September 2010 along with the increase on other super-exotics.
NYRA subsequently announced it will continue the new 24 percent rate past the 15-month makeup period, a positive gesture but still not enough. A 24 percent super-exotic rate is still higher than in most other major jurisdictions (including 19 percent in Kentucky). NYRA’s position has long been that it supports lower takeout, and it has opposed previous increases, including the 2008 one. After decades of losing that argument, however, NYRA is now positioned as never before to implement real and meaningful takeout reform.
The new Aqueduct racino is providing NYRA with as much as $100 million a year for purses and capital improvements, and some slice of that should be redirected to the public in the form of lower takeout. NYRA can finally afford it, and the crumbling of the state’s OTB system removes a major impediment to enacting it.
A short-term remedy to an error should not be mistaken for long-term reform.
TECHNOLOGY
DECEMBER 31, 2011
Verizon Drops Plan for New $2 Fee
By GREG BENSINGER
Verizon Wireless abruptly backed off a plan to charge some customers extra to pay their bills online or over the phone, joining the ignominious parade of corporate retreats in 2011.
Verizon Wireless backed off a plan to charge some customers $2 to pay their bills after a barrage of customer complaints and the scrutiny of federal regulators. George Stahl has details on The News Hub.
The reversal, just a day after the new $2 charge became public, followed a barrage of customer complaints and the scrutiny of federal regulators.
More
Earlier: Verizon Outages, Fees Irk Customers
It capped a tough month for the nation's largest cellphone carrier, which was beset by three nationwide service outages after boasting it had exceeded its own goals in rolling out a new high-speed wireless data network.
Verizon Wireless had planned to implement the fee Jan. 15 for customers making one-time payments via its website or over the phone. An online petition on change.org calling for Verizon to drop the fee quickly drew more than 100,000 signatures, and the Federal Communications Commission said Friday it was "concerned about Verizon's actions" and was looking into the matter.
"We take great care to listen to our customers," Verizon Wireless Chief Executive Dan Mead said in an emailed statement. "The best path forward is to encourage customers to take advantage of the best and most efficient options, eliminating the need to institute the fee at this time."
The retreat echoed flip-flops this year by Bank of America Corp. and Netflix Inc., which backed off controversial plans of their own in the wake of heavy public criticism.
Greg Bensinger joins the News Hub to discuss Verizon's planned $2 fee the company says it will impose on some customers in 2012. AP Photo/Alan Diaz
Facing a customer backlash and the ire of some regulators, Bank of America in November dropped plans to impose a $5 monthly fee on many customers using their debit cards to make everyday purchases. Other banks including J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. and Wells Fargo & Co. also killed regional debit card fee trials in the wake of the outcry.
Netflix, meanwhile, abandoned its plan to split its DVD-by-mail service into a separate business named Qwikster as part of a new pricing structure that upset some of its users. The movie-rental company didn't back off a price hike it implemented in July, however—an increase for which CEO Reed Hastings issued an apology for failing to explain it better.
"Companies need to make changes like this in a way that their customers understand and in a way that they can see the benefit," said Helio Fred Garcia, a New York University crisis-management professor. "Verizon recognized the reaction and backed off—unlike Netflix which dug in its heels and tried to explain the change in a way customers didn't understand."
Hewlett-Packard Co. was another company that found itself in retreat this year, deciding to keep its personal computer division after announcing that it would explore spinning off the unit into a standalone company.
Verizon Wireless's fee hike didn't rise to the same franchise-shaking level, but it nevertheless riled consumers.
Enlarge Image
verizon
verizon
Getty Images
Verizon had planned to charge a $2 fee on customers making one-time payments online or on the phone. Above, a Los Angeles store.
"How can it be they that they would charge their customers to pay their bill, except to extract just a little more money? Someone wasn't thinking when they tried to impose this fee," said Bill Eger, 76, a Verizon customer in Hilo, Hawaii. "I am delighted they took attention to the response; that was a pretty fast turnaround."
Verizon Wireless—co-owned by Verizon Communications Inc. and Vodafone Group PLC—had said the fee was necessary for "convenience," without providing additional details.
Users who paid through their bank's website or by automatic deduction from their credit cards, among other options, wouldn't have been subject to the extra charge. The company declined to comment beyond Mr. Mead's statement.
"Verizon thinks it can do anything to its customers, and that we're powerless to stop it," said one petition, begun by Molly Katchpole, who helped quash Bank of America's debit-card fee plan by gathering 300,000 signatures on an online protest.
Ms. Katchpole's letter calling on Verizon to drop the fee had secured more than 100,000 digital signatures by Friday evening. Other petitions against Verizon's plan popped up on sites including gopetition.com and petitiononline.com.
A Year of Flip-Flops
Several companies dropped pricing or strategic changes amid public push back
Netflix: Abandoned plans in October to separate its DVD-by-mail business from its Internet-streaming service, but stuck with price increases.
Bank of America: In November dropped plans to impose a $5 monthly fee on debit-card users that was announced five weeks earlier.
H-P: After saying it would explore a spinoff for its PC division, H-P ousted its CEO and later decided not to separate the business
Critics of Verizon's fee plan took a victory lap after the reversed decision. "The era of corporations walking roughshod over consumers without consequence is officially over," said Ben Rattray, chief executive of change.org.
The misstep comes as Verizon looks increasingly well-positioned against its rivals. AT&T Inc. was forced last week to drop its $39 billion acquisition of No. 4 carrier T-Mobile USA amid fierce opposition from antitrust authorities, and Sprint Nextel Corp. remains unprofitable and has to fund an expensive network buildout and a burdensome contract with Apple Inc. to carry the iPhone.
But Verizon has stumbled recently despite its advantages. The carrier has suffered through three outages to its new 4G network this month, denting its reputation for network quality.
The company, based in Basking Ridge, N.J., has rolled out the network to more than 200 million Americans, ahead of AT&T's 70 million, and offers a lineup of pricey smartphones that can make use of the zippy broadband service.
With 107.7 million subscribers, Verizon is the largest carrier in the U.S. AT&T and Sprint have 100.7 million and 53.4 million subscribers, respectively. Verizon didn't disclose how many customers would have been affected by the abandoned bill fee.
Write to Greg Bensinger at greg.bensinger@dowjones.com
Read more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204720204577130802272138184.html#ixzz1iAxChK6k
hey babe, Shelly Silver Esq. is a shyster? Vote Meredith Graves Not Guilty
Case Details - Summary
Case Information Court New York Criminal Court
Case # 2011NY092369
Defendant Graves, Meredith L Add Case to eTrack
Case # 2011NY092369
Defendant Graves, Meredith L Add Case to eTrack
Index
Defendant
- Name:Graves, Meredith L
- Birth Year:1972
- NYSID:11712923P
Incident and Arrest
Incident
- Date:December 22, 2011 12:41
- Summons/Ticket #:
- CJTN:65203809P
Arrest
- Date & Time:December 22, 2011 12:41
- Arrest #:M11710496
Officer
- No Officer Information on File
Attorney Information
Defense Attorney
- Name:
- Type:Legal Aid
- Court Date:December 23, 2011
- Court Part:APAR2
- Address:49 Thomas Street, New York, NY 10013
- Phone:212-732-5000
Assistant District Attorney
- Name:
- Assigned:December 23, 2011
Next Appearance
- Date:March 19, 2012
- Court:New York Criminal Court
- Part:F
Docket Sentence
Dear Meredith Graves:
Perhaps you have noticed that horse races are run every day of the year at tracks all across the United States that the bettors of New York want to bet.
NY PML Sec 105
§ 105. Supplementary regulatory powers of the board. Notwithstanding any inconsistent provision of law, the board through its rules and regulations or in allotting dates for racing or in licensing race meetings at which pari-mutuel betting is permitted shall be empowered to: (i) permit racing at which pari-mutuel betting is conducted on any or all dates from the first day of January through the thirty-first day of December, inclusive of Sundays but exclusive of December twenty-fifth and Palm Sunday and Easter Sunday; and (ii) fix minimum and maximum charges for admission at any race meeting.
does not define a single Sunday to be Easter Sunday. See eg the Gregorian and Julian
Calendars. Even a medical student or her husband may read the statute and think.
If you close the OTBs, public benefit corporations, in New York, only on ONE Easter Sunday,
you are not being fair, whatever your intent.
We live in a functionally bankrupt State and can't afford to have lawyers like Sheldon Silver
pass laws that violate the rights of New York Bettors secured by the NY Const. Art. 1, Sec. 3.
The law does not even apply to the OTBs.
It would seem plausible that if the State of New York wastes time, effort and money taking your case
to trial that the right thinking citizens on the jury or some of them might simply invoke
ttheir ability to vote NOT GUILTY, AKA JURY NULLIFICATION. See recent article on same in the
Wall Street Journal.
II hope you will remind Sheldon Silver that he is screwing the bettors of the State of New York
bby not ordering one of his qualified political associates to immediately obtain an Opinion from the Attorney
General that will(most likely) tell us that the Attorney General will not defend the constitutionality of
NY PML Sec 105 and that NY PML Sec 105 does not apply to the OTBs.
I I urge all New Yorkers who may be called to serve on the jury of Meredith Graves to vote
NOT GUILTY.
Open On 1st Palm Sunday, Otb Rakes In $2m - New York Daily News
articles.nydailynews.com/.../18220335_1_racing-and-wagering-boar...
Open On 1st Palm Sunday, Otb Rakes In $2m. BY JERRY BOSSERT DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITER. Monday, April 14, 2003. New York City Off-Track Betting ...No Sentence Information on File
Courts Email: eCourts@courts.state.ny.us
Thursday, December 29, 2011
and someone should review the Christopher Wright Nassau OTB
Race Palace Bond documents covenanted by Nassau County. Just like Jefferson County?
NIFA: State should audit Nassau procedures
Photo credit: Howard Schnapp | A file photo of the NIFA board. (Dec. 30, 2010)
NIFA's vote on Nassau 2012 budget Galleries
Edward Mangano photos Members of the Nassau Interim Finance Authority, which took control of the county's finances last January, said they continue to receive complaints from charities about late payments for contractual services provided to the needy. The members also said they have yet to see contracts for outside lawyers who are owed millions of dollars for work already completed even though NIFA is required to review and approve contracts of $50,000 and more.
"Because of certain irregularities that have come to our attention," NIFA chairman Ronald Stack said at a public meeting in Mineola, NIFA requested that State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli look at the process, "make sure it has been done right" and recommend improvements.
More: Complete coverage: NIFA and Nassau
The request originated with Chris Wright, who was appointed to the NIFA board by DiNapoli. Although Wright could not attend the meeting, he submitted a statement saying it was "clear" a review was needed "by a party that is not involved."
Though she had not seen NIFA's letter, DiNapoli spokeswoman Jennifer Freeman said, "Requests like this are reviewed very carefully and an appropriate response is determined."
Brian Nevin, an aide to County Executive Edward Mangano, said, "There's no government that has more oversight than Nassau County, where all contracts are approved by a 19-member legislative body, the comptroller, Independent Office of Budget and Review, and NIFA prior to execution by the county executive. Additional oversight is always welcome."
While Stack said NIFA was not making any accusations, board member George Marlin said he was "appalled at the county's lack of transparency." He noted that NIFA had not received contracts for attorneys hired by Nassau to fight the board's takeover last January or used for a failed Coliseum referendum last summer.
The Nassau Legislature on Monday approved a $6.8 million budget transfer to the county attorney's office to pay outside contractors -- more than three times the $2 million budgeted. Most of the work had not been authorized by the legislature.
NIFA member Robert Wild, chairman of United Way of Long Island, said the charities with county contracts "need to be paid. They're taking care of our citizens," Wild said.
Andrew Cuomo steals NY Const. Art. 1, Sec. 3 rights of gamblers and
Lotto players.
You would think that the OTBs of New York would be open on any of the year when tracks are running anywhere in the US. Nassau OTB sells and cashes non IRS Lotto tickets. You'd think that the Lottery and Cuomo would want the OTBs to be open to sell and cash Lottery tickets.
Andrew Cuomo can go to church on his Easter Sunday and we want to bet at Nassau OTB.
Note that the Greeks among us do not consider Andrew Cuomo's determination of Easter Sunday to be bind on anyone but him and his followers.
Gov. Cuomo, meanwhile, has all but wrapped up his second State of the State Address, to be delivered to the Legislature and hundreds of invited guests Jan. 4.
It’s expected to emphasize private-sector job creation, legalization of casino gambling and pension reform and mandate relief for fiscally hard-pressed New York City and other local governments and nonpartisan legislative and congressional redistricting.
You would think that the OTBs of New York would be open on any of the year when tracks are running anywhere in the US. Nassau OTB sells and cashes non IRS Lotto tickets. You'd think that the Lottery and Cuomo would want the OTBs to be open to sell and cash Lottery tickets.
Andrew Cuomo can go to church on his Easter Sunday and we want to bet at Nassau OTB.
Note that the Greeks among us do not consider Andrew Cuomo's determination of Easter Sunday to be bind on anyone but him and his followers.
Gov. Cuomo, meanwhile, has all but wrapped up his second State of the State Address, to be delivered to the Legislature and hundreds of invited guests Jan. 4.
It’s expected to emphasize private-sector job creation, legalization of casino gambling and pension reform and mandate relief for fiscally hard-pressed New York City and other local governments and nonpartisan legislative and congressional redistricting.
Buy an Andrew? Andrew the man who has not yet asked the Attorney
General for a FREE OPINION so that he can see that NY PML Sec 105 is faithfully carried out and the rights of NY Bettors and Lotto Players secured by NY Const. Art. 1, Sec. 3 are not violated.
Working, for people who don't surf or are not politicians who can extend an entity to collect money?
Over the past few weeks, the governor's praises have been sung in a ubiquitous TV ad campaign financed by the Committee to Save New York, a coalition of banking and real-estate interests marshaled by Mr. Cuomo after his election last year.
"Despite the challenges, the governor and Legislature are getting things done," the announcer says as the ad extols Mr. Cuomo's "jobs plan" and claims he lowered "taxes for all New Yorkers," a claim disputed by critics.
The group has spent an estimated $2.8 million on the ads, according to one knowledgeable media buyer. Given its timing—an off-election year during the quiet political month of December—the sum is remarkable by Albany standards.
The ad campaign started this month after the Committee to Save New York released its agenda for the upcoming session of the state Legislature—a platform that included for the first time legalizing casino gambling.
The gambling plank came five days after Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, wrote a newspaper op-ed announcing his support for new "destination gaming locations." It also represented something of a departure for the committee, which had focused on an antitax, pro-fiscal-discipline message for much of 2011.
Placing gambling on its agenda apparently didn't have the blessing of its full board of directors. "The casino item has not yet gotten a full airing by the committee," said Andrew Rudnick, a Buffalo business advocate who is one of 14 people on the committee's board of directors, according to the group's website, letsfixalbany.org.
"I am not a big fan of gambling. I can understand the argument for constitutional-based gaming because of its public-finance benefits," said Mr. Rudnick, president of the Buffalo Niagara Partnership. "But it's not a fundamental platform issue of the upstate business community."
Mr. Cuomo has said he supports a constitutional amendment legalizing non-Indian casino gambling but has declined to endorse efforts by horse-racing interests to limit the expansion to the state's nine racetracks that already have video lottery terminals. An amendment would have to be passed by the Legislature in 2012 and again in a subsequent year. It would then go to a public vote.
Josh Vlasto, a spokesman for Mr. Cuomo, said the governor hasn't coordinated his policies with the group. Michael McKeon, a spokesman for the group, also said the committee doesn't coordinate its efforts with Mr. Cuomo. Mr. McKeon wouldn't discuss details of the advertising buy, nor who was donating to its campaign this year.
People familiar with the matter have said Mr. Cuomo has briefed members of the group on his plans in the past.
Mr. McKeon said its agenda was approved by a three-member executive committee, consisting of Rob Speyer, president of the real-estate firm Tishman Speyer, Kathryn Wylde, president of the Partnership for New York City, and Steven Spinola, head of the Real Estate Board of New York. Mr. McKeon said Mr. Rudnick serves on the group's advisory board, which meets less frequently.
Mr. McKeon said he didn't know when all of the committee's directors met last but said the group's executive board had extensive discussions about policy goals.
As Mr. Cuomo moves deeper into his first term, the committee's money is helping to burnish the image of a popular governor who works well with both parties.
Mr. McKeon, a Republican consultant, served as a senior aide under former Gov. George Pataki. Last year, he endorsed Mr. Cuomo and actively campaigned for him, leading the Democrat's efforts to reach out to Republican voters. He's a partner of Mercury Public Affairs, a consulting firm recently hired by the committee.
The committee's ad campaign marks a new phase for a group that intended to be a counterweight to union influence in Albany and an independent voice for fiscal restraint. While Mr. Cuomo has drifted from some of his more fiscally conservative platforms and ventured into new policy realms, the Committee to Save New York has followed suit.
Since Mr. Cuomo took office in January, the group has spent more than $12.5 million lobbying on behalf of Mr. Cuomo's agenda. Between January and October, the group reported more lobbying expenses—about $10 million at the time—than any other state interest group, according to a report by the New York Public Interest Research Group, a nonprofit watchdog that tracks lobbying data.
The committee—a 501c4 nonprofit—backed the governor's budget, with its deep cuts to school aid, and lobbied Albany to pass his plan for a 2% cap on local property taxes.
The committee can raise unlimited sums of money. It can campaign for political candidates, but that can't be the group's primary function.
Working, for people who don't surf or are not politicians who can extend an entity to collect money?
Business Funds Fuel Cuomo Agenda
Casino Gambling Included in Platform of Powerful Committee to Save New York
more in New York »
By JACOB GERSHMAN
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo has yet to roll out an agenda for his second year. But that hasn't stopped a lobbying coalition from pouring nearly $3 million into an ad campaign patting him on the back.Over the past few weeks, the governor's praises have been sung in a ubiquitous TV ad campaign financed by the Committee to Save New York, a coalition of banking and real-estate interests marshaled by Mr. Cuomo after his election last year.
"Despite the challenges, the governor and Legislature are getting things done," the announcer says as the ad extols Mr. Cuomo's "jobs plan" and claims he lowered "taxes for all New Yorkers," a claim disputed by critics.
The group has spent an estimated $2.8 million on the ads, according to one knowledgeable media buyer. Given its timing—an off-election year during the quiet political month of December—the sum is remarkable by Albany standards.
The ad campaign started this month after the Committee to Save New York released its agenda for the upcoming session of the state Legislature—a platform that included for the first time legalizing casino gambling.
The gambling plank came five days after Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, wrote a newspaper op-ed announcing his support for new "destination gaming locations." It also represented something of a departure for the committee, which had focused on an antitax, pro-fiscal-discipline message for much of 2011.
Placing gambling on its agenda apparently didn't have the blessing of its full board of directors. "The casino item has not yet gotten a full airing by the committee," said Andrew Rudnick, a Buffalo business advocate who is one of 14 people on the committee's board of directors, according to the group's website, letsfixalbany.org.
"I am not a big fan of gambling. I can understand the argument for constitutional-based gaming because of its public-finance benefits," said Mr. Rudnick, president of the Buffalo Niagara Partnership. "But it's not a fundamental platform issue of the upstate business community."
Mr. Cuomo has said he supports a constitutional amendment legalizing non-Indian casino gambling but has declined to endorse efforts by horse-racing interests to limit the expansion to the state's nine racetracks that already have video lottery terminals. An amendment would have to be passed by the Legislature in 2012 and again in a subsequent year. It would then go to a public vote.
Josh Vlasto, a spokesman for Mr. Cuomo, said the governor hasn't coordinated his policies with the group. Michael McKeon, a spokesman for the group, also said the committee doesn't coordinate its efforts with Mr. Cuomo. Mr. McKeon wouldn't discuss details of the advertising buy, nor who was donating to its campaign this year.
People familiar with the matter have said Mr. Cuomo has briefed members of the group on his plans in the past.
Mr. McKeon said its agenda was approved by a three-member executive committee, consisting of Rob Speyer, president of the real-estate firm Tishman Speyer, Kathryn Wylde, president of the Partnership for New York City, and Steven Spinola, head of the Real Estate Board of New York. Mr. McKeon said Mr. Rudnick serves on the group's advisory board, which meets less frequently.
Mr. McKeon said he didn't know when all of the committee's directors met last but said the group's executive board had extensive discussions about policy goals.
As Mr. Cuomo moves deeper into his first term, the committee's money is helping to burnish the image of a popular governor who works well with both parties.
Mr. McKeon, a Republican consultant, served as a senior aide under former Gov. George Pataki. Last year, he endorsed Mr. Cuomo and actively campaigned for him, leading the Democrat's efforts to reach out to Republican voters. He's a partner of Mercury Public Affairs, a consulting firm recently hired by the committee.
The committee's ad campaign marks a new phase for a group that intended to be a counterweight to union influence in Albany and an independent voice for fiscal restraint. While Mr. Cuomo has drifted from some of his more fiscally conservative platforms and ventured into new policy realms, the Committee to Save New York has followed suit.
Since Mr. Cuomo took office in January, the group has spent more than $12.5 million lobbying on behalf of Mr. Cuomo's agenda. Between January and October, the group reported more lobbying expenses—about $10 million at the time—than any other state interest group, according to a report by the New York Public Interest Research Group, a nonprofit watchdog that tracks lobbying data.
The committee—a 501c4 nonprofit—backed the governor's budget, with its deep cuts to school aid, and lobbied Albany to pass his plan for a 2% cap on local property taxes.
The committee can raise unlimited sums of money. It can campaign for political candidates, but that can't be the group's primary function.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
CEO Charles Hayward tells Bank of New York he's on the way! hold on
Internal BNY Mellon Documents Show Panic
By JEAN EAGLESHAM And MICHAEL SICONOLFI
An informant in a state fraud case against Bank of New York Mellon Corp. has provided prosecutors a rare inside peek into how the bank allegedly scrambled to contain the fallout from a fast-growing government investigation, according to hundreds of pages of confidential documents.Documents Relating to State Fraud Case Against Bank of New York Mellon Corp.
The bank also altered its website, changing the wording of its trading practices. And when a veteran bank official heard about the government investigation, she said: "It's over, it's all over," according to the informant.
The documents, which include company materials, emails and observations, were submitted to Florida prosecutors by lawyers for whistleblower Grant Wilson and obtained by The Wall Street Journal in an open-records request.
Mr. Wilson operated as a government informant for two years while working as a currency trader at BNY Mellon, giving him an extraordinary view of what was happening inside the bank as the investigation unfolded. The extensive documentation, including his descriptions of how the bank processed trades that allegedly resulted in client overcharges, could increase pressure on BNY Mellon as it battles a widening law-enforcement probe.
Five states, including Florida, and the Manhattan U.S. attorney have filed civil lawsuits over the past several months against BNY Mellon, seeking a total of more than $2 billion in damages. The suits allege the bank defrauded pension funds and other clients by systematically overcharging them on currency transactions.
BNY Mellon denies any wrongdoing and is fighting the suits. A bank spokesman said, "A handful of purported statements cherry-picked from millions of documents gathered over a decade, do not reflect the way we do business or the value we provide our clients."
Mr. Wilson declined to comment. His lawyer, Michael A. Lesser of Thornton & Naumes LLP in Boston, declined to comment on the documents, saying the matter is in "active litigation."
Mr. Wilson, 53 years old, is part of a whistleblower group that can seek a share of as much as 25% of any recovery the states obtain in many of the BNY Mellon cases.
![[fxprobe1228]](http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-RE299_fxprob_D_20111228085113.jpg)
Bloomberg News From the Archive
- BNY Mellon Strikes Balance in Currency Suits 11/15/2011
- BNY Mellon in Talks Over Currency Suit 11/4/2011
- Suits Claim BNY Mellon Overcharged 10/27/2011
- Informant Surfaces in BNY Probe 10/12/2011
- BNY Mellon Forex Trades Cost Pensions 9/14/2011
- Inside a Battle Over Forex 5/23/2011
- Trading Dispute Divides BNY, Fund 3/11/2011
- Suit Alleges Mellon Created Fake Trades, Overcharged 2/04/2011
Mr. Wilson in the documents provides intimate snapshots of his colleagues, including details about their families, personal problems and financial standing. The information could be used by prosecutors to help determine who could be witnesses in the case against BNY Mellon—and who could be hostile. Mr. Wilson cited one trader whom he described as "not a happy camper" who "hates the bank as it has not appreciated her vast talent over the years."
Another was valued by managers as a risk taker who "brings guts to the table," Mr. Wilson says in the documents. A colleague deemed by Mr. Wilson as less-talented "spends all his income on exotic fishing trips," he says.
At issue in the suits filed against BNY Mellon is its "standing-instruction" service. That is when pension funds and other clients allow the bank unilaterally to handle their foreign-exchange, or FX, transactions. Clients could instead negotiate their own foreign-exchange trades, but that would require staff and technology.
In the documents, Mr. Wilson described how a "transaction desk" collected currency trades for BNY Mellon's "standing-instruction" clients and then later in the day set the price at which the bank would record those transactions. The prices often were at or near the day's least-favorable exchange rates, state attorneys general and prosecutors allege, with the bank profiting from the difference.
Mr. Wilson describes the pressure inside BNY Mellon after California prosecutors accused rival State Street Corp. in an October 2009 civil suit of overcharging customers in currency trading. State Street denies wrongdoing and is fighting the currency-trading litigation.
Soon after news of the State Street suit, BNY Mellon changed its description of its standing-instruction service, according to copies of pages from the bank's website submitted by the whistleblower. The bank had called the service "free of charge" and designed to help clients "minimize risks and costs."
By November 2009, the "free of charge" wording had disappeared; instead, the bank described its service as a "complete FX solution."
BNY Mellon said in court filings that it routinely updates its marketing materials and the "free of charge" language referred to the fact there was no transaction fee for the currency trades.
Richard Mahoney, former chief of BNY Mellon's global markets division, told an employee meeting in early 2010 that the company had by then received 16 subpoenas, according to Mr. Wilson.
Mr. Mahoney—who the whistleblower said was nicknamed "Rambo" by co-workers for his military background and propensity "to rant and rave"—told staff "we do not have to tell anyone how much money we make on our dealings," according to the informant. Mr. Mahoney, who retired from BNY Mellon earlier this year, couldn't be reached for comment.
The whistleblower also told prosecutors how one of his colleagues in Pittsburgh, Susan Pfister, allegedly reacted when she learned in early 2010 that BNY Mellon, as well as State Street, was being investigated for its currency-trading practices. She said: "It's over, it's all over," according to Mr. Wilson, allegedly reflecting concerns within BNY Mellon that big profits the bank had long generated from standing-instruction currency trading were going to disappear.
Ms. Pfister's alleged comment wasn't included in the civil suit filed by the Florida state attorney general in August, which alleges that BNY Mellon overcharged Florida state pension funds in currency trading.
Ms. Pfister declined to comment through a spokesman for BNY Mellon.
An internal BNY Mellon memo in October 2009 provided by Mr. Wilson said some clients were shifting away from the standing-instruction service to a "negotiated" model—agreeing on the exchange rate for each trade—where the bank's profit margin was lower "by a factor of 10-20 times."
"Once this is done they will never return to their previous model," according to the confidential memo.
The BNY Mellon spokesman said: "We are confident that we provide our clients and their investment managers with valuable foreign-exchange services at competitive prices and the information needed to make informed trading decisions."
After reports surfaced that BNY Mellon was under investigation, executives were torn over how to deal with inquiries from customers demanding to know if they had been overcharged, Mr. Wilson told prosecutors in May 2010. He told prosecutors that Mr. Mahoney "wants to tell them to 'go pound sand,' " but another executive who was "afraid of upsetting custody clients" disagreed.
The documents reveal that at least one other former BNY Mellon employee has offered to help prosecutors build their case against the bank. The salesperson told the Florida attorney general in a letter earlier this year that he could describe how he had been "trained in committing fraud using various strategies."
A spokeswoman for the Florida attorney general declined to comment.
Mr. Wilson faced pressure operating for two years inside BNY Mellon as a secret whistleblower, where he collected internal bank documents and recounted to the government what colleagues said, according to a person familiar with the matter. As news surfaced that an informant was assisting the government in the currency investigation, the bank's foreign-exchange traders grew concerned about a leaker, according to a person familiar with the matter.
On the trading desk, in downtown Pittsburgh, they tried to guess the identity of the whistleblower, asking each other, "Is it you?" this person says.
Mr. Wilson "is concerned about the security of his identity, as he continues to work at the bank," according to a March 3, 2010, letter from his lawyer, Mr. Lesser, to the Florida attorney general's office. "Things are reaching a fever pitch in the office."
Write to Jean Eaglesham at jean.eaglesham@wsj.com and Michael Siconolfi at michael.siconolfi@wsj.com
OZONE PARK, N.Y. – Though he admitted that there were others who could have discovered it, New York Racing Association president and CEO Charles Hayward on Tuesday took responsibility for the mistake that led to NYRA charging too high a takeout rate on certain wagers for a 15-month period, an error that cost bettors $7.9 million.
“I’m the CEO, ultimately I’m responsible,” Hayward said Tuesday in his first public comments on the issue, which surfaced on Dec. 21. “If you’re looking to blame somebody, that’d be me. The buck stops here. There’s a lot of people both inside NYRA and the state that had the opportunity to review that and the bottom line is we missed it.”
It was revealed last week that NYRA had improperly charged a takeout rate of 26 percent – 1 percentage point higher than allowed by law – on exotic wagers, including trifectas, superfectas, pick threes, pick fours, and the grand slam – from Sept. 15, 2010 through Dec. 18, 2011. Hayward clarified that the pick six wager was not impacted by this overcharge because state law allows NYRA to charge a takeout rate of up to 36 percent on that wager.
As an attempt to rectify the situation, NYRA on Wednesday instituted a 2 percentage point decrease on the takeout rate on the wagers in question. Hayward said the takeout reduction on those wagers would be permanent and not for only 15 months as had been reported by some outlets. Hayward declined to comment on whether NYRA would seek a takeout reduction on straight win, place and show wagers and two-horse wagers such as the exacta and daily double.
NYRA also has committed, as per request by the Franchise Oversight Board and the State Racing and Wagering Board, to refund money to those customers it can successfully identify as being overcharged. Hayward said that of the $7.9 million overcharged, approximately $1.1 million was to bettors ontrack. Of that total, approximately $420,000 was wagered through NYRA Rewards, making it possible for NYRA to track down those bettors.
“The rest of the off-track monies the simulcast holder was largely the beneficiary of that higher takeout,” Hayward said.
Hayward pointed out that NYRA’s takeout rates are published daily in the racing program, Daily Racing Form, as well as in all simulcast contracts, which are approved by the New York State Racing and Wagering Board.
The board has also instructed New York State’s off-track betting corporations to track down bettors who may have been affected by the takeout overcharge.
Hayward noted that NYRA “opposed initially” the takeout increase when it was proposed as part of the franchise agreement because “we felt it was bad for business.”
Robert Megna, the state’s budget director and chairman of the Franchise Oversight Board, which also didn’t detect the mistake, sent a scolding letter to Hayward last week which in part chastised him for comments he made defending NYRA’s wages paid to its executives.
“You have repeatedly argued that the high compensation paid to NYRA officials is needed to ensure that the best talent is attracted to the Association,” Megna wrote. “That position, of which we are skeptical to begin with, rings hollow in light of NYRA’s failure to manage a most basic accounting task.”
Since Oct. 5, NYRA has been operating without a designated chief financial officer. Ellen McClain, who had been the CFO since July 2009, was promoted to chief operating officer, replacing Hal Handel, who left the company in September. Hayward said NYRA hopes to hire a CFO sometime in January.
“We made a mistake,” he said. “We’re trying to do what we can to fix that for the customers, but it doesn’t eliminate the fact that we made a mistake, for which I apologize. The most important thing for the state is to have a healthy racing and breeding program, and I think we’re a lot better off today than we were two years ago, a lot better off than we were four years ago, a lot better off than we were six years ago.”
“I’m the CEO, ultimately I’m responsible,” Hayward said Tuesday in his first public comments on the issue, which surfaced on Dec. 21. “If you’re looking to blame somebody, that’d be me. The buck stops here. There’s a lot of people both inside NYRA and the state that had the opportunity to review that and the bottom line is we missed it.”
It was revealed last week that NYRA had improperly charged a takeout rate of 26 percent – 1 percentage point higher than allowed by law – on exotic wagers, including trifectas, superfectas, pick threes, pick fours, and the grand slam – from Sept. 15, 2010 through Dec. 18, 2011. Hayward clarified that the pick six wager was not impacted by this overcharge because state law allows NYRA to charge a takeout rate of up to 36 percent on that wager.
As an attempt to rectify the situation, NYRA on Wednesday instituted a 2 percentage point decrease on the takeout rate on the wagers in question. Hayward said the takeout reduction on those wagers would be permanent and not for only 15 months as had been reported by some outlets. Hayward declined to comment on whether NYRA would seek a takeout reduction on straight win, place and show wagers and two-horse wagers such as the exacta and daily double.
NYRA also has committed, as per request by the Franchise Oversight Board and the State Racing and Wagering Board, to refund money to those customers it can successfully identify as being overcharged. Hayward said that of the $7.9 million overcharged, approximately $1.1 million was to bettors ontrack. Of that total, approximately $420,000 was wagered through NYRA Rewards, making it possible for NYRA to track down those bettors.
“The rest of the off-track monies the simulcast holder was largely the beneficiary of that higher takeout,” Hayward said.
Hayward pointed out that NYRA’s takeout rates are published daily in the racing program, Daily Racing Form, as well as in all simulcast contracts, which are approved by the New York State Racing and Wagering Board.
The board has also instructed New York State’s off-track betting corporations to track down bettors who may have been affected by the takeout overcharge.
Hayward noted that NYRA “opposed initially” the takeout increase when it was proposed as part of the franchise agreement because “we felt it was bad for business.”
Robert Megna, the state’s budget director and chairman of the Franchise Oversight Board, which also didn’t detect the mistake, sent a scolding letter to Hayward last week which in part chastised him for comments he made defending NYRA’s wages paid to its executives.
“You have repeatedly argued that the high compensation paid to NYRA officials is needed to ensure that the best talent is attracted to the Association,” Megna wrote. “That position, of which we are skeptical to begin with, rings hollow in light of NYRA’s failure to manage a most basic accounting task.”
Since Oct. 5, NYRA has been operating without a designated chief financial officer. Ellen McClain, who had been the CFO since July 2009, was promoted to chief operating officer, replacing Hal Handel, who left the company in September. Hayward said NYRA hopes to hire a CFO sometime in January.
“We made a mistake,” he said. “We’re trying to do what we can to fix that for the customers, but it doesn’t eliminate the fact that we made a mistake, for which I apologize. The most important thing for the state is to have a healthy racing and breeding program, and I think we’re a lot better off today than we were two years ago, a lot better off than we were four years ago, a lot better off than we were six years ago.”
Monday, December 26, 2011
Mineola 2012 2/27/
|
and the New Year Proudly Presents the media event for all to see
|
and the thieves should open for simulcasting on Palm Sunday and
each and every Easters Sunday when great races are run without the State of New York.
OZONE PARK, N.Y. – Horsemen and horseplayers alike should be getting a little help with their holiday bills when racing returns to Aqueduct on Wednesday following a nine-day break.
For horsemen, the much anticipated purse increase from revenue derived from the recently opened casino at Aqueduct goes from fantasy to reality beginning Wednesday. Total purse money for Wednesday’s nine-race card is $390,000 – led by a $65,000 open maiden race – which is a 30.8 percent increase over what those same nine races would have been worth just 10 days ago.
Horseplayers who dabble in exotic wagers will be getting a 2 percent decrease in the takeout rate on trifectas, superfectas, pick threes, pick fours, the pick six, and the grand slam. This reduction comes after it was discovered that the New York Racing Association had for 15 months been overcharging bettors by 2 percentage points on those wagers. Part of NYRA’s franchise agreement in 2008 was to increase takeout on those wagers by 1 percent for a two-year period, but when the provision expired in September 2010, NYRA failed to revert back to the previous takeout rates. This takeout reduction will be in place for 15 months.
It remains to be seen how the purse increase will affect the quality of racing in New York this winter and how takeout reduction will impact handle. In the case of the former, little is expected to change in the immediate future. First, there remains a dearth of quality horses throughout the country, and many that are usually based in the Northeast have left for warmer climes. There were 88 horses entered for Wednesday’s card, only 74 for Thursday’s nine-race program.
While NYRA hopes to have more horses on the grounds this winter than last, the majority will remain mid-to-low-level claimers and New York-breds. One positive sign, however, is that an open second-level allowance/optional claiming race carded for Thursday – now worth $69,000 compared to $55,000 – drew a field of nine.
While a takeout reduction is always welcome news to bettors, will some customers be turned off by NYRA’s mistake and look to other tracks to wager?
Three New York-bred allowance races highlight Wednesday’s program. The fifth is a second-level allowance/optional claimer for males going a mile and 70 yards. The $59,000 race drew a field of 10.
Pin Number, trained by Dominic Galluscio, tries a mile and 70 yards and two turns for the first time in his second start off a layoff. On May 15, in his second start off a layoff, Pin Number won a first-level allowance race stretching out to a mile from a poor result in a 6 1/2-furlong race in his previous start. On Dec. 8, Pin Number finished eight, beaten six lengths, in a six-furlong race over the inner track.
“I think he needed that race,” said Galluscio, who got off to a sizzling 7-for-17 start to the inner track meet. “He’s better a tad longer than that. He’ll show speed going long.”
There are others who are also likely to be forwardly placed, including The Noz, Southbeachsandy, and Artie Luvsto Party.
Good Karma and Stud Muffin, both in for the optional claiming price of $25,000, would benefit from a contentious pace.
The first race on the program is a first-level allowance race for New York-bred juvenile fillies led by Shot Gun Pennie, who won the Lady Finger Stakes at Finger Lakes in September, and the Chester and Mary Broman-owned entry of Bait and Beautiful But Blue.
The eighth, a first-level route for New York-breds going a mile, drew an overflow field of 14. Lunar Victory, a rare New York-bred from Juddmonte Farms, makes his second start off a layoff after finishing second last out at 7-5 odds.
For horsemen, the much anticipated purse increase from revenue derived from the recently opened casino at Aqueduct goes from fantasy to reality beginning Wednesday. Total purse money for Wednesday’s nine-race card is $390,000 – led by a $65,000 open maiden race – which is a 30.8 percent increase over what those same nine races would have been worth just 10 days ago.
Horseplayers who dabble in exotic wagers will be getting a 2 percent decrease in the takeout rate on trifectas, superfectas, pick threes, pick fours, the pick six, and the grand slam. This reduction comes after it was discovered that the New York Racing Association had for 15 months been overcharging bettors by 2 percentage points on those wagers. Part of NYRA’s franchise agreement in 2008 was to increase takeout on those wagers by 1 percent for a two-year period, but when the provision expired in September 2010, NYRA failed to revert back to the previous takeout rates. This takeout reduction will be in place for 15 months.
It remains to be seen how the purse increase will affect the quality of racing in New York this winter and how takeout reduction will impact handle. In the case of the former, little is expected to change in the immediate future. First, there remains a dearth of quality horses throughout the country, and many that are usually based in the Northeast have left for warmer climes. There were 88 horses entered for Wednesday’s card, only 74 for Thursday’s nine-race program.
While NYRA hopes to have more horses on the grounds this winter than last, the majority will remain mid-to-low-level claimers and New York-breds. One positive sign, however, is that an open second-level allowance/optional claiming race carded for Thursday – now worth $69,000 compared to $55,000 – drew a field of nine.
While a takeout reduction is always welcome news to bettors, will some customers be turned off by NYRA’s mistake and look to other tracks to wager?
Three New York-bred allowance races highlight Wednesday’s program. The fifth is a second-level allowance/optional claimer for males going a mile and 70 yards. The $59,000 race drew a field of 10.
Pin Number, trained by Dominic Galluscio, tries a mile and 70 yards and two turns for the first time in his second start off a layoff. On May 15, in his second start off a layoff, Pin Number won a first-level allowance race stretching out to a mile from a poor result in a 6 1/2-furlong race in his previous start. On Dec. 8, Pin Number finished eight, beaten six lengths, in a six-furlong race over the inner track.
“I think he needed that race,” said Galluscio, who got off to a sizzling 7-for-17 start to the inner track meet. “He’s better a tad longer than that. He’ll show speed going long.”
There are others who are also likely to be forwardly placed, including The Noz, Southbeachsandy, and Artie Luvsto Party.
Good Karma and Stud Muffin, both in for the optional claiming price of $25,000, would benefit from a contentious pace.
The first race on the program is a first-level allowance race for New York-bred juvenile fillies led by Shot Gun Pennie, who won the Lady Finger Stakes at Finger Lakes in September, and the Chester and Mary Broman-owned entry of Bait and Beautiful But Blue.
The eighth, a first-level route for New York-breds going a mile, drew an overflow field of 14. Lunar Victory, a rare New York-bred from Juddmonte Farms, makes his second start off a layoff after finishing second last out at 7-5 odds.