BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    






                                                       Bill No:  AB  
          1992
          
                 SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
                       Senator Roderick D. Wright, Chair
                           2009-2010 Regular Session
                                 Staff Analysis



          AB 1992  Author:  Portantino
          As Amended:  March 24, 2010
          Hearing Date:  June 9, 2010
          Consultant:  Chris Lindstrom


                                     SUBJECT  

                Horse racing: safety standards: racing surface.

                                   DESCRIPTION
           
          AB 1992 requires the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB)  
          to establish and maintain its current safety standards for  
          racing surfaces whether the surface is synthetic or dirt,  
          and for the maintenance of the racing surface.

                                   EXISTING LAW

           Provides that CHRB regulate the various forms of horse  
          racing authorized in this state.

          Requires the CHRB to establish safety standards governing  
          the uniformity and content of the racing surface.

                                    BACKGROUND
           
           Purpose of the bill  .  According to the author, this bill  
          will ensure that California remains one of the most  
          proactive racing jurisdictions in the country in its  
          efforts to reduce racetrack injuries and afford  
          participants the most protection possible, whether in track  
          safety or in safe practices.  The bill will give the CHRB  
          and the racing industry a tool to stay committed to a high  
          degree of transparency in the conduct of all its activities  
          related to safety and integrity for its human and equine  




          AB 1992 (Portantino) continued                               
                                        Page 2
          


          athletes.  The author states that when owners, trainers,  
          tracks, and other industry participants work together on an  
          issue such as track safety, it will lead to standards which  
          will benefit the entire industry.

           Background  .  In 2006, the CHRB adopted a rule to require  
          the installation of a synthetic surface at all racetracks  
          that conduct more than four weeks of racing in California  
          by the end of 2007.  The tracks impacted were Santa Anita,  
          Hollywood Park, Golden Gate Fields, Bay Meadows and Del  
          Mar.  The CHRB stated that it viewed synthetic surfaces as  
          crucial to the health and safety of the jockeys, horses,  
          and other directly related participants in racing.  Various  
          racing associations (tracks), owners, trainers and jockeys  
          also expressed interest in converting to synthetic type  
          racing surfaces.  It was believed that this type of surface  
          would provide a more consistent and safer racing surface  
          which would save money in maintenance costs.  To date, all  
          of the tracks have met the mandate.  Bay Meadows has ceased  
          live racing operations.  It has been reported that the cost  
          of installing a synthetic surface costs between $6 million  
          and $10 million per track.

          Engineered racing surfaces typically include several layers  
          - a drainage system, then sometimes another layer of sand,  
          and a mixture of fibers, sand, and wax on top.  The mixture  
          is the "secret ingredient" of each racing surface.  There  
          are several types of synthetic racetrack surfaces being  
          used worldwide. Some of the different types of patented  
          synthetic surfaces used at California's racetracks include:  
          Polytrack, Cushion Track, Pro-Ride, and Tapeta Footings.   
          Manufacturers of synthetic racetrack surfaces promote the  
          fact that their products have drainage attributes that are  
          better than natural surfaces, which allows tracks to be  
          rated as fast under circumstances that would normally  
          result in sloppy, slow or muddy conditions.  

          The recipe for finding the correct mixture for each  
          racetrack surface has proven considerably more elusive than  
          anticipated.  Synthetic surfaces were touted as  
          low-maintenance alternatives to the constant tinkering that  
          goes hand-in-hand with dirt surfaces.  However, few of the  
          tracks that have switched to artificial surfaces have been  
          truly low-maintenance. Some of California's race meets have  
          struggled with climate vacillations-temperature and  
          moisture-and drainage issues on extremely raining days.




          AB 1992 (Portantino) continued                               
                                        Page 3
          



          To date, synthetic surfaces in California have been a  
          subject of much debate; there are naysayers and believers;  
          and at this juncture, there is no consensus about them  
          within California's racing industry, as they have been the  
          subject of much deliberation in front of the CHRB and other  
          related organizations.  California's racing surfaces have  
          been a subject of dispute for years pertaining to their  
          safety, make-up, and consistency.

           CHRB oversight of surfaces  .  In 2009, the CHRB stated that  
          the board would be coordinating a range of studies to gain  
          a better understanding of racing surfaces and determine any  
          relationship between racing surfaces and equine injuries in  
          order to improve these surfaces, reduce injuries, and meet  
          the CHRB's statutory obligation to develop track safety  
          standards for the protection of horses and riders.

          In 2010, subject to funding approval, the CHRB will  
          contract, equip, and train personnel for the continual  
          inspection of all racing surfaces (dirt, turf, and  
          synthetic). The inspections will include monitoring  
          maintenance practices and measuring such variables as  
          moisture content, track surface composition, and  
          temperature. The measurements eventually will be correlated  
          to injuries.  The CHRB has named a safety steward for each  
          racetrack to assist in this effort.  The CHRB requested a  
          budget appropriation to develop safety standards for racing  
          surfaces.  The money to fund this project would be paid for  
          by the industry.

                            PRIOR/RELATED LEGISLATION
           
           SB 1464 (Denham), 2005-2006 Legislative Session  .  Would  
          have required any horse racing track operating four weeks  
          or more of continuous thoroughbred racing in any calendar  
          year to install a polymer, synthetic-type racing surface  
          prior to December 31, 2007.  (Passed off the Senate floor  
          but no further action was taken.)

           SB 1237 (Maddy), Chapter 1120, Statutes of 1993  .  The CHRB  
          is required to establish safety standards for race tracks  
          and to designate a steward responsible for maintaining  
          safety standards at all horse race meetings.  No license to  
          conduct racing may be granted until a track is found in  
          compliance with the standards.




          AB 1992 (Portantino) continued                               
                                        Page 4
          



           SUPPORT / OPPOSE  :  None on file as of June 4, 2010.

           FISCAL COMMITTEE :  Senate Appropriations Committee



                                   **********