Quote:
Originally Posted by parsixfarms
It doesn't matter what it is called. Yes, NYS is contractually obliged to pay NYRA the racino "continuation" payments (and it's probably also on the hook for NYCOTB), but just because you have a contractual right to something doesn't mean you are going to get it. NYS also has contracts with the government employee unions. The governor just tried to unilaterally impose furloughs in a manner that a federal court judge concluded was in violation of those contracts. So it's not like NYRA is the only party in whom the state may be in default on its obligations.
The simple fact is, that given the tarring that it has endured in recent years, NYRA is not viewed in a particularly sympathetic light by a general public that doesn't think the state should be in the gambling business, especially when they perceive it to be losing money. At a time when hospitals are closing and teachers are being laid off, many people (I'm not one of them) believe that giving money to NYRA is a misplaced priority. Just read the many blogs on the newspaper websites, including the Times-Union and Saratogian, to get a sense of this sentiment. This is why what should be a simple thing to do contractually is proving problematic from a legislative perspective.
|
Well let me ask you a question. If all this is true (and I do believe it to be that) then what chance does NYRA or any other racing entity for that matter, have if the state which owns the OTB, controls a great deal of what NYRA/franchise holder does and is broke, can simply opt out of its financial obligations because of poor public perception of racing, the vast majority of which was falsely created by the state? Seriously, if the state can simply turn up the bad news meter everytime they don't want to pay NYRA monies owed to them ask yourself the question that you originally posed. Why would any of the board of directors (or anyone for that matter) loan money to NYRA under those circumstances?