What's happening
Writing a plain-English summary… Track this bill to get it by email.
Why it matters
Albany, before your first meeting.
Every bill that moved yesterday, summarized in a sentence and ranked by impact. The Albany Scorecard follows on Sundays.
Free. Unsubscribe in one click. Want alerts on specific bills? Create an account.
Who cares
Headline styles
Sponsors
No co-sponsors yet.
History
- Referred to racing, gaming and wagering
- Referred to racing, gaming and wagering
Companion bill
The same bill in the other chamber. A bill becomes law when one version passes both houses and the governor signs it, so either number can carry it.
Relates to commission hearings of racetrack ejectments and denials of access of commission licensees
In Assembly Committee · Racing And Wagering · Sponsor J. Gary Pretlow
Full text
The text isn't available here yet. Check nysenate.gov.
Sponsor's memo
BILL NUMBER:S5836 Revised 06/18/15
Title of bill
An act to amend the racing, pari-mutuel wagering and breeding law, in relation to commission hearings of racetrack ejectments and denials of access of commission licensees
Purpose
This legislation creates a due process structure at the New York Gaming Commission to provide horse racing licensees (drivers, trainers, horsemen, etc.) who have been barred or ejected from a participating licensed New York State race track with an administrative hearing. New York State currently has no regulatory structure in place to prevent private racetrack owners from arbitrarily denying licensees in good standing from participating in pari-mutuel racing at their state-licensed tracks and/or racinos. This legislation would simply mirror provisions in other racing states in which the state's racing Commission can conduct an independent, objective administrative hearing on the ejection or barring of racing licensees in good standing.
Read the full memo (652 words)
Summary of provisions
Section 321 of the racing, pari-mutuel wagering and breeding law is amended to provide any licensee in good standing barred or ejected from a licensed New York State racing facility with an administrative hearing conducted by the New York Gaming Commission.
Justification
Private racetrack operators in New York State can currently exclude for no reason whatsoever - individuals possessing a state-issued occupational license from plying their trade at that facility. And despite the fact that the United States Supreme Court has since determined that harness horse trainers and drivers possess a recognized property interest in their licenses sufficient to invoke the protection of the Due Process Clause in the event of suspension or revocation by the state, the right to a similar hearing on exclusion of a licensee in good standing by private track owners has never been legislatively addressed.
In light of numerous instances of legally licensed horsemen, drivers or trainers being barred or ejected by track owners with absolutely no explanation or legal justification (including a documented case in which a driver was barred for being "disloyal" to a track owner by racing elsewhere), the creation of a new, objective due process hearing structure at the New York Gaming Commission is critically important to ensuring that New York racing is conducted fairly and honestly. New York lags behind competing racing states such as Pennsylvania and West Virginia, who have had legally-mandated hearing processes in place for years. The West Virginia Racing Commission justified the need for such due process in a legal brief as follows (in a case that legally upheld the hearing process):
Who gets to race is at the core of the Commission's regulatory function. In reviewing ejectment appeals from its permit holders, the Racing Commission is not deciding whether the track serves filet mignon or prime rib in the dining room or whether it hires a particular accounting firm to do its books. Matters like these may be the internal business affairs of the track. But, whether someone who holds a permit gets to come on to the track to ride horses is, fundamentally, the Racing Commission's business. Having a permit to engage in a racing-related occupation is not the same as having a law license or a medical license or a license to practice dentistry. A lawyer or a doctor or a dentist can open a professional practice on any street comer in the State... They are not dependent upon the good graces of another to engage in their trades.
This legislation does nothing more than reinforce the statutorily granted right and obligation of the New York Gaming Commission to regulate racing in this state in the fairest and most transparent manner possible.
Legislative history
A new bill.
Fiscal implications
The Gaming Commission already has a hearings process established. This legislation could potentially add a handful of additional hearings to the already existing hearings process but the cost is expected to be minimal.
Local fiscal implications
To be determined
Effective date
180 days after it is enacted it shall become law.
Summaries, headlines and scores are AI-generated from the official bill text. How we score bills. Source: NYS Open Legislation.