Schwartz Response to AG (Con't)

• Email
• Print
• Tweet

As with any business, there are both practical and financial limits as to what NYRA can do to prevent fraud.  Because NYRA is statutorily obligated to turn over its profits each year to the State in the form of franchise fees, NYRA is unable to expend limitless funds on security measures.  The Attorney General's comparison of NYRA's controls with those of private casinos is simply unfair and inappropriate.  Private gaming institutions have significantly more money available to them for security measures than NYRA because they do not use pari-mutuel wagering and are able to keep their profits.  Perhaps a far more helpful and revealing comparison would be between NYRA and other racetracks, which would show that NYRA does more than nearly any other racetrack to safeguard against crime of all types.  Such a comparison would not have fit well within the Attorney General's clear agenda to malign NYRA and its President, and thus his investigators did not do so.

At the end of the day, the cooperative manner with which NYRA conducted itself throughout the Attorney General's investigation speaks louder and has demonstrated far more convincingly than the Attorney General's ability to detract that NYRA's current management is committed to maintaining the integrity and preeminence of New York racing.  Within its fiscal constraints, NYRA has and will continue to do all it can to provide the preeminent racing experience that fans around the globe have enjoyed and trusted for the past fifty years.
 

• Email
• Print
• Tweet