BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SB 662
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   July 8, 2009

                   ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
                                 Joe Coto, Chairman
                       SB 662 (Yee) - As Amended:  May 14, 2009

           SENATE VOTE  :   34-0 
           
          SUBJECT  :   Horse racing: pari-mutuel wagering: real time  
          monitoring.

           SUMMARY  :   Authorizes the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB)  
          to provide real time monitoring of all pari-mutuel wagering  
          transactions on California horse races.  Specifically,  this  
          bill  :   

          1)Expands the responsibilities of CHRB to include:

             a)   Providing real time transactional monitoring of all  
               pari-mutuel wagering on California horse races.

             b)   Maintaining independent technology services to provide  
               for capturing, saving, transmitting, receiving, and  
               otherwise disseminating technology resources.  CHRB may  
               contract with the Department of Technology Services or seek  
               suitable accommodations with vendors of CHRB's choosing for  
               the purpose of furthering the CHRB's chosen business  
               objectives.

          1)Requires any association or fair that conducts a racing  
            meeting to pay a license fee to the state to fund real time  
            transactional monitoring of all pari-mutuel wagering on  
            California horse races.

           EXISTING LAW  : 

          1)Provides the CHRB shall have all powers necessary and proper  
            to enable it to carry out the purposes of the Horse Racing Law  
            and specifies certain responsibilities of CHRB including, but  
            not limited to, all of the following:

             a)   Adopting rules and regulations for the protection of the  
               public and the control of horse racing and pari-mutuel  
               wagering.









                                                                  SB 662
                                                                  Page  2

             b)   Administration and enforcement of all laws, rules, and  
               regulations affecting horse racing and pari-mutuel  
               wagering.

             c)   Adjudication of controversies arising from the  
               enforcement of those laws and regulations dealing with  
               horse racing and pari-mutuel wagering.

             d)   Licensing of each racing association and all persons,  
               other than the public at large, who participate in a horse  
               racing meeting with pari-mutuel wagering.

             e)   Allocation of racing dates to qualified associations in  
               accordance with law.

          1)Provides that, as of July 1, 2009, any association or fair  
            that conducts a racing meeting shall          only pay a  
            license fee to the state to fund CHRB and the Kenneth L. Maddy  
            Equine Research Laboratory at UC Davis as follows:

             a)   All racing associations and fairs including all breeds  
               of racing shall participate in the funding of CHRB in  
               accordance with a formula devised by CHRB in consultation  
               with the horse racing industry.

             b)    The baseline funding for CHRB and equine drug testing  
               in  
                       the first fiscal year after the enactment of this  
                       section shall be the amount approved in the  
          2008-2009  
                       state budget.

             c)   Adjustments to the funding in subsequent budget years  
               may only be made by an act of the Legislature.

          1)Provides that, after payments to fund CHRB and the equine  
            drug-testing program, the remaining amount of license fees  
            shall be distributed to the association that conducts the meet  
            and the horsemen participating in the meet as follows, 50  
            percent to the association as commissions, and 50 percent to  
            the horsemen as purses.

          2)Authorizes CHRB to permit licensed racing associations and  
            fairs to operate satellite wagering facilities.









                                                                  SB 662
                                                                  Page  3

          3)Authorizes and defines "advance deposit wagering (ADW)" as a  
            form of pari-mutuel wagering in which a person "establishes an  
            account with a CHRB-approved betting system or wagering hub  
            where the account owner provides 'wagering instructions'  
            authorizing the entity holding the account to place wagers on  
            the owner's behalf."

           FISCAL EFFECT  :   Unknown.

           COMMENTS  :   

          According to the author's office, "SB 662 requires the CHRB to  
          provide for real time transactional monitoring of all  
          pari-mutuel wagering on California races.  The CHRB sorely needs  
          to have the independence and ability to monitor all pari-mutuel  
          wagers on California horse races. 

          The author states, "This need was brought to the forefront  
          during the 2008 Kentucky Derby."  A California bettor placed a  
          "Quick Pick" wager of $1,500 on the Kentucky Derby.  This wager  
          was intended to randomly select horses from numbers 1 through 20  
          to fill the wager.  The winner of the Derby was the number 20  
          horse.  

          The author reports, "Two days after the running of the Derby,  
          the California bettor came into the Stewards Office at Golden  
          Gate Fields and told the official, "It's really strange that out  
          of all these tickets the number 20 horse did not show up  
          anywhere."  The steward asked the mutuel manager (an employee of  
          the racetrack) what he thought about this coincidence and the  
          employee said something to the effect that it was "bad luck."   
          The steward (a contract employee of CHRB) then reported the  
          coincidence, or bad luck, to the Executive Director (ED) of  
          CHRB.  The ED then contacted the mutuel manager who stated:  
          "there may be a problem with the tote machines."  

          The tote machines are property of a contractor, who contracts  
          with the racing associations.  The ED then contacted the tote  
          company's Regional Manager who stated that he had heard of a  
          similar problem nine months earlier in Indiana.  Based on this  
          information, the ED ordered an           audit of the tote  
          system in California.  

          At that point, about two weeks after the Derby, the possible  
          failure in the tote system became public knowledge.  Senator  








                                                                  SB 662
                                                                  Page  4

          Leland Yee called the ED to ask the question:  "Don't you have  
          any way of monitoring the system to know if something is going  
          wrong?"  The ED responded that the CHRB is conducting an audit  
          of the tote company to find out if there was or is a problem,  
          and, that the CHRB is dependent on the numbers furnished by the  
          tote company through a system called the Consolidated Horse  
          Racing Information Management System (CHRIMS).  

          The CHRB reports, "The audit of the tote company revealed an  
          "anomaly" on some machines and only on the "Quick Pick" wager.   
          The Quick Pick wager was withdrawn from the betting format, and  
          the tote company was ordered to pay restitution for not bringing  
          this to the attention of the CHRB in a more timely fashion.

          "In addition, on April 23, 2009, Thoroughbred Times reported  
          that a wagering system foul-up on April 22 impacted wagering  
          pools in five states and affected bettors across the country.   
          $2 bets placed at New York City Off-Track Betting and processed  
          through AmTote were deposited into wagering pools as $200 bets.   
          Thoroughbred facilities affected were Aqueduct, Golden Gate  
          Fields, Gulfstream Park, Indiana Downs, Keeneland Race Course,  
          and Tampa Bay Downs.

          The author states, "These known incidents make it clear that  
          California consumers need independent, real time oversight of  
          all pari-mutuel wagering on California horse races."

          Currently, New York State Racing and Wagering Board passed  
          legislation requiring independent real time monitoring of all  
          pari-mutuel wagering.  New York aimed to have the system in  
          place by January 1, 2009, but missed that target date.  New York  
          is working closely with the industry and system providers to  
          develop the parameters of and implement the system.  The state  
          of Indiana and Minnesota are looking at adding oversight  
          software for its horse racing pari-mutuel         wagering  
          pools.  

          The author's office, through this bill, is committed to working  
          with the industry to establish a real time system to protect  
          California's wagering public as soon as possible.  The author's  
          office indicates that if and when a national system is  
          developed, then California could participate in the national  
          program.  

           Background  :








                                                                  SB 662
                                                                  Page  5

           
          Consolidated Horse Racing Information Management System  
          (CHRIMS)  .  CHRIMS is a database system developed in 1989 that  
          keeps track of wagers and the flow of money in horse         
          racing.  CHRIMS provides end-users access to information by  
          selected data ranges and a variety of data-sorting options.    
          Using CHRIMS, end-users can see what has actually taken place on  
          the prior day, in terms of handle, takeout, total amount payable  
          to the public, distributions, etc., and can be further sorted by  
          location groups (California on-track, off-track, and  
          out-of-state wagers) or by various date ranges, breeds and a  
          variety of other options.  CHRIMS can also run "what-if"  
          scenarios to project the effects of proposed changes to law that  
          would change distribution percentages.

          CHRIMS does not provide real time information.  Utilizing  
          software tools, CHRIMS staff loads and balances California  
          pari-mutuel data on a daily basis.  Each night following the  
          close of wagering, CHRIMS computers download complete wagering  
          files from the three totalizator hubs.  

           Totalizator  .  A totalizator is the name of the system, which  
          runs pari-mutuel wagering, calculating payoff odds as wagers are  
          made and payouts once a race is complete.  Electronic terminals  
          are used by pari-mutuel clerks to key in wagers into the system  
          and by customers who place bets into the system directly or  
          through a wagering hub.

           Independent Monitoring System (IMS)  .  IMS is a computerized  
          system that has been designed, built and/or operated or  
          supported by a company or companies other than the totalizator  
          provider or related entity and is not related to the totalizator  
          provider or authorized pari-mutuel wagering entity in any way.   
          The system must, among other things, monitor all transactions  
          received and processed by the totalizator, produce alerts  
          corresponding to potential wagering rule violations or other  
          situations that could compromise the integrity of the wagering  
          process.

           Real Time Transactional Monitoring System  .  A real time  
          transactional monitoring system is an operating system that can  
          respond to input immediately (ranging from a few seconds to  
          minutes depending on the function).  The system must be able to  
          react to a steady flow of new information without interruption  
          and perform its tasks within the same time constraints of the  








                                                                  SB 662
                                                                  Page  6

          totalizator system it monitors.

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :

           Support 
           
          None on file

           Opposition 
           
          None on file

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Eric Johnson / G. O. / (916) 319-2531