If you got NBA hearsay I cant help myself.
Love that Bball. And I got some slight association
with some of the Spurs staff. I give them the once
over on every detail. Pester them I do. I will tell you
RC Buford is a good man. Ask your cousin. And if he
did not know it, tell him. Man knows talent.

And Morton really likes me. Mutual respect of the
bizarre and childish.

Agreed. I also have much involvement in that not-for-profit/non-profit world. However we are an independent contractor that makes our profit on making these non-profits/not-for-profits capital gain. If we don't enable them to increase capital, we don't make our income. Many sides of the die in the non-profit/not-for-profit world. It truely is an issue that, I feel, should be debated in the case of NYRA and NYS, but perhaps not in this discussion in this thread, it seems complicated and agressive enough...

I'm no expert and certainly I have gored the odd wrong ox many a time in my day. My point of view is as a fan of a sport I like and since 1 out of every 5 or 6 dollars wagered in the U.S. is on nyra races, the subject is of some interest to me. It is not as if nyra is going away. Bit there ARE reasons that actions furthering nyra are viewed with a jaundiced eye.

I'm not sure how the awarding of the deal to Schwart's family without going through bid does not constitute violation of the Racing and Breeding law. Sec 213.5.a reads like this:

"All contracts entered into by a non-profit racing association for the procurement of goods or services of a value in excess of two hundred fifty thousand dollars shall be awarded only by a process of competitive bidding approved by the board."

In fairness, the next pp does list two exemptions to the comp bidding requirement, specifically "sole source" and "Emergency" exemptions. In my readings, I didn't come across any reference an exemptiom related to the Schwartz family deal.

In addition to the NY Racing law, nyra's own policy guidelines require certain competitive bidding actions and also make specific reference to "related third-party" dealings.

If, as you say, Schwartz, et al were somehow unencumbered by these requirements, so be it. But the fact that this no-bid deal was cited in the Deferred Prosecution Agreement is probably enough to cause a lot of folks to have a negative view, notwithstanding the fact that the results of the work were arguably admirable.

As far as nyra being a non-profit and some of the comments I've read about cost control and positive financial results having less importance than in for-profit models, that's a bunch of hogwash (oxen-wash?) I spent 20+ years working for a mutual insurance carrier and the model is similar to a non-profit... you are supposed to make money. It's not called profit but instead is referred to as "contribution to surplus." Some is used to grow the business but much is returned to certain policyholders as a dividend. NYRA should be run no differently.

I'm just a guy who is a fan and my only point is that public-trust entities have a very difficult time overcoming acts of impropriety and, more importantly, acts of perceived impropriety. I just hope things are run better there in the future. Most important, all of this slot-machine stuff is just awful for the sport. The life cycle of slots producing positive results for racing is going to be very, very short. At most, the positive results will last 10 years (Mountaineer) but more likely 10 weeks (Gulfstream).

And, yes, the state employees lining up for free car washes, etc.. should be punished.

I must hit the road. There's a herd of ox I've identified I need to pursue out on Alligator Alley.