The California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) has made a bold decision that has sparked controversy and divided opinions. The future of horse racing in Northern California hangs in the balance.
On February 26, the CHRB met in Arcadia, California, and rejected the proposed race dates for the Tehama District Fair and the Humboldt County Fair. Both fairs had ambitious plans to revive racing in the region, but their proposals faced significant challenges.
In the months leading up to the meeting, the fairs presented detailed plans to restore a viable racing circuit. However, the CHRB staff's analysis, released prior to the meeting, highlighted major regulatory, financial, and operational concerns. These points were reiterated during the gathering, leaving little room for optimism.
The Thoroughbred Owners of California (TOC) and California Thoroughbred Trainers (CTT) voiced their opposition to awarding race dates to the Northern California fairs. Representatives from Southern California tracks also shared their concerns. According to the TOC, a revival of racing in the north would result in a 5% drop in purses in the south. Since the cessation of Northern California racing, simulcast revenue has been redirected to Southern California tracks, providing a much-needed boost to their fragile purses in a state without authorized gaming.
Tehama's proposal sought nine days of racing from April 29 to May 26 at Red Bluff, marking a potential return to sanctioned pari-mutuel racing after decades. Humboldt, a historical staple of the summer fair schedule, requested 12 race dates over four weeks from August 5 to September 1.
The CHRB's vice chair, Oscar Gonzales, and commissioner Brenda Washington Davis supported awarding dates to the fairs. However, the remaining commissioners in attendance, Dr. Greg Ferraro, Dennis Alfieri, Damascus Castellanos, and Peter Stern, opposed the idea. Commissioner Thomas Hudnut was notably absent from the meeting.
Gonzales has been a strong advocate for continued Northern California fair racing, emphasizing the need for more racing opportunities in a state experiencing a decline in foal drop. He also highlighted the importance of horse racing to the fairs and their local communities.
Washington Davis agreed, suggesting that broad statewide support might be crucial for tracks to receive authorization for historical horse racing gaming, which could be a lifeline for the equine industry in the region.
But here's where it gets controversial... Dr. Greg Ferraro, the chair of the CHRB, called racing in Northern California a "no-chance situation" after carefully considering the perspectives of speakers and the staff's analysis regarding Tehama. He expressed concern that pursuing this course of action could potentially jeopardize the entire racing industry in California.
"So you're going to end up destroying all of racing in California to bet on a no-chance situation in the north," he said. "There will come a time when the north will be ready for racing, but it's not right now."
The CHRB staff's analysis also criticized Humboldt's application, citing missing contractual documentation and unresolved agreements with industry stakeholders. Practical concerns were also raised about whether there would be enough horses, trainers, and wagering interest to sustain racing in Northern California after such a long absence.
While some Northern California horsemen have relocated their stables or portions of their stables to Southern California with limited success, many others have chosen to race out of state at lower-level tracks like Emerald Downs in Washington and Turf Paradise in Arizona. The Humboldt County Fair in Ferndale has traditionally attracted horses from Oregon as well.
Bill Nader, president and CEO of TOC, noted that Ferndale had experienced short fields during its last racing season.
Alan Balch, executive director of CTT, added, "The sad fact is that it has become a meeting primarily for horses from Oregon, Idaho, Washington, and other states."
Humboldt County Fair's proposed meet would have coincided with a prime time for simulcast wagering, with popular summer racing at Del Mar and Saratoga Race Course. This timing could have provided a much-needed boost to the fair's racing prospects.
And this is the part most people miss... The decision to reject the proposed race dates in Northern California is not just about the immediate future of these fairs. It's about the long-term sustainability and growth of the entire horse racing industry in California. With differing opinions and a complex web of factors at play, it's a delicate balance that requires careful consideration.
What do you think? Should the CHRB have taken a chance on Northern California racing, or was their decision to reject the proposed dates the right move? We'd love to hear your thoughts in the comments below!
