Indiana Standardbred Breed Development Advisory Committee Meeting Notes
Date: September 27, 2007
Please note: These are NOT official minutes of the Breed Development meeting. They are notes developed by our representative attending the meeting.
The Indiana Standardbred Breed Development Advisory Committee met on Thursday, September 27, 2007, at Indiana Downs. Committee Chairman Michael Christner called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.
The first item on the agenda was approval of the minutes from the September 6, 2007, meeting. These were approved unanimously by the committee, as written. The meeting then progressed to the other items included on the agenda.
By far the most involved portion of the meeting, discussion of the 2009 Breed Development Program was paramount. Chairman Christner noted the committee has had lots of input on the subject. At this point, they are working on putting together a proposal to present to the IHRC for approval. He noted each individual on the committee has his own thoughts, but compromise is needed to finalize the program.
Looking ahead, Christner noted the next IHRC meeting is tentatively set for October 16. If the BD committee has their proposal ready by then, they will move forward and submit it to the IHRC at that meeting. Although the actual submission deadline is January 1, 2008, the committee wants to have their recommendations ready prior to then to help those in the industry needing to make important decisions.
Christner then made an important clarification. He said the Breed Development program will have not changes in 2008. It will still be an Indiana Sired program. Any changes to the program would start in 2009, for foals born in 2010 and racing in 2012.
Christner said his personal feelings are not to stay with the status quo. Further, he said he had drafted a proposal, which was shared with the members of BD and distributed to all those attending the meeting. He then addressed his fellow committee members and asked, “Are we remaining status quo, or are we going to say we need to make changes and work on those?” Christner then made a motion to make changes to the current BD program (starting in 2009). This was seconded by Don Eash and passed unanimously.
Since the committee voted to make changes, Christner stated Indiana will have a different program in 2009. One of the goals for the remainder of the meeting would be to come up with a proposal which detailed the new program. The first decision to be made was with respect to various categories of horses eligible to the racing events in Indiana.
Under the proposal submitted by Christner, horse both Indiana Sired & Bred (ISB) would be eligible to race for the majority of money available from the Breed Development Fund. Indiana Sired (IS) horses would remain an integral part of the program and still be eligible to the Indiana Sires Stake (ISS) events. Horses being only Indiana Bred (IB), or sired by a horse standing outside of Indiana, would be given the opportunity to race in events offered in a late closer format. Christner said he wanted to work through the programs currently in place and make changes to them as needed. He then stated a goal: Promote the Indiana horse and get commitment to the State of Indiana.
The committee then discussed the possible categories of horses, as well as provided some definitions. Before beginning the conversation, Christner reassured everyone the ISS would remain the premier event for the Breed Development Program. Under his proposal, the ISS events would remain the same. The foals only need to be sired by a stallion registered in the State of Indiana to be eligible.
Committee member Gordon Tabor was the first to offer his thoughts. He explained his job on Breed Development was not something he sought out. In order to make the best decisions possible, he has talked with many people in the industry, including farms, breeders, etc. He has also had the opportunity to listen to the guest speakers at the previous BD meetings.
Tabor noted his opinion various greatly from Christner’s. He said he does not believe the committee should start off making major changes. Indicating he believes they should be more cautious, he said they should proceed slowly. In his opinion, there will not be a long line of trucks filled with horses headed to Indiana when other states also have slots.
Noting he was against restrictions, Tabor said only one of the guest speakers (Jim Reynolds) recommended restrictions for a breeding program. Further, Tabor stated the statistics refute Reynolds’ claim the Illinois program is successful.
Tabor said he feels the program should be simple for all involved, especially in the beginning. Once more money is coming into the program (from slots) and the committee has a better handle on the numbers involved, changes may be warranted. He stressed his view that INITIALLY the program should be left as IS only. The committee could consider other options once more is known about the amount of money available. Since the amount of money coming into the program is uncertain, Tabor said he is hesitant to make changes to what he feels is a good program. To summarize his thoughts, Tabor said he is not in favor of the 3 categories of horses presented.
Christner then explained he decided to add in the IB class to give an opportunity to those people who keep horses in Indiana, but choose to breed to stallions located elsewhere. Eash added to this by stating, “If the stallions in Indiana have unlimited breeding opportunities, why shouldn’t the mares?” He said a limited part of the BD budget should be earmarked for allowing improvement of bloodlines.
Tabor responded to Eash’s comments by stating he understands the concept, but feels Indiana BD money should be available for the Indiana product. With respect to the ISB category, Tabor pointed out the fact every breeder coming before the committee said it was not profitable to run a boarding operation. He said he is basing his recommendations on what was put before the committee.
Christner stressed the need to reward those investing in the state. If anything was cut from his proposal, he felt it should be the IB part of it.
Tabor then asked how much more money would be available for the ISB horses. Eash said the additional money would be similar to the owner’s bonus for IS horses. Christner then shared the projections based on several scenarios of the value of revenue from slots. This information was provided in a spreadsheet included in the proposal. As written, ISB would be eligible to 91% of the funds, while IS would have 54% available.
Tabor asked if the committee members believed the difference in percentages mentioned would make a difference in choosing to send a mare to Indiana or not. Indicating his doubt, Tabor noted the stallion is the key in a breeding program. He said mares will follow the stallions. If Indiana gets good stallions, the mares will come. In Tabor’s opinion, Indiana should do what is necessary to get first class stallions, while having no changes to the program. He suggested then re-evaluating the situation down the road.
Christner acknowledged Tabor’s viewpoint, but said he did not want to get the BD proposal rejected and be sent back to the drawing board for a program to recommend. With this in mind, Christner said he had tried to come up with a way to see economic benefit. Tabor then stated, “So, the commission would like to see a new category of horses.” Jessica Barnes, Director of Standardbred Racing – IHRC, also offered a comment. She said, “If we continue with the status quo, there is going to continue to be no way to have measurable economic impact.”
Christner then asked everyone to take a short break from the meeting. After the break, a decision would be made on the categories of horses and the current BD programs would be examined individually.
When Christner reconvened the meeting, he again stressed the committee would be working through the options available for the program. Goals of the meeting were to establish parameters for races and the types of horses eligible to the various events. As a part of this process, the definitions of the various categories of horses were discussed earlier. After deciding the categories of horses, Christner said he hoped to move through the existing program to decide if any changes were going to be made.
With no motion made to add all three categories (IS, ISB, & ISB), Christner made a motion to add two for now. Those would be IS & ISB, dropping the category of IB. This was seconded by Eash. When put to a vote, it passed on a vote of 2-1, with Tabor opposed. He did not feel adding ISB was warranted at this time.
The committee then took a look at the Indiana Sires Stakes events. According to the proposal presented: The Indiana Sires Stakes is the premier event for the Standardbred Breed Development Program. The eligibility requirements would remain the same as in past years, in that foals need only be sired by an Indiana registered stallion to be eligible. By default, IS & ISB horses would be eligible.
Next, the committee discussed the Indiana Sired Fair Circuit (ISFC) program. The original proposal stated that, beginning in 2012, all two-year-olds (and subsequent crops of horses) must be ISB to be eligible. However, Christner indicated he had changed his stance and would like to leave the ISFC alone, meaning there would be no change in the type of horses eligible. He also noted approximately 90% of the horses currently competing in ISFC events were actually ISB.
When mentioning this change, Barnes stated she would like to go on the record as disagreeing. She would like to see the ISFC eligible horses be ISB.
Tabor then made a motion to adopt Christner’s modified stance and leave the ISFC as IS horses eligible. He suggested taking another look at it once there is a better count of the types of horses racing in the events. Although Eash said he wanted to leave it as ISB eligible, Tabor’s motion was seconded by Christner. The motion passed on a vote of 2-1, with Eash voting against it.
The next BD program addressed was purse supplements for additional races at the Indiana county fairs. The proposal said: Breed Development will continue to support special events at Indiana county fairs by matching nomination, sustaining, and, in some cases, sponsorship dollars for each event. There will be no requirement to change the type of horses eligible to any of the special event races. However, any new events requesting funding will be required to be for ISB horses. This was modified to leave future events as IS only. Tabor made it a point to make sure the committee would be keeping the Hoosier Home Run in place, as he indicated he thinks it is a great program.
Moving along with the existing programs, the committee then discussed the late closer program. The proposal before the committee said: The Late Closer requirements would change to a degree. The main requirement would be that horses must at least be IS, but would be second preference to those that are ISB. It would remain this way until a point in time when the ISB horse population would reach a point that separate Late Closers could be created for the two categories.
Tabor stated he was opposed to the suggested change to the late closer program, viewing it as being another fence around Indiana. Christner then asked Tabor if he would support the late closers written for both categories. Tabor replied, “Possibly, but it is going to be ‘fun’ for the race secretaries.”
Tabor then made a motion to leave the late closers as IS and looked at them again in 2013. At that time, it may be possible to create new late closers where certain categories can race for more money. He felt a better recommendation can be made once the ISB numbers are known. The motion was seconded by Eash and passed unanimously.
Then next element of the current BD program to be discussed was the current IS and IB Bonus Program. The proposal stated: This program awards a bonus to the owner of an IS or IB horse who finishes first or second in open company (any race not restricted to IS or IB horses) at either of the state’s two pari-mutual tracks excluding $4,000 or $5,000 claiming races. The bonus is paid to the owner/lessee of the horse in the following amounts: 1st Place - 10% of the total purse for that race & 2nd Place - 4% of the total purse for that race. This program would change in that horses that are ISB only would be eligible for the bonus awards. This change would occur for foals of 2010 and beyond. Foals of 2009 and prior that are IS would remain eligible for the bonus program. The IB bonus would remain unchanged from its current state. This program should be monitored over the next two years, as the slot revenue becomes available. First, it should be examined in terms of the percentage allotted, and then the types of races that allow a horse to be eligible for the bonus (i.e. claiming races).
When the committee began to offer their thoughts about the changes in the proposal, Tabor again expressed concern over this being a way to try to build another fence around Indiana. Eash added he would like to see a 2% bonus for 3rd place put back into the program, as it was removed a couple years ago. At that time, some of the checks being sent from BD were so small it was hardly worth the time and effort to send the bonus checks. He said he believes the increase in purses from slots will make it worthwhile to send out the money. Furthermore, Eash said it could serve to put more of a premium on the Indiana raised horses. A premium on this type of horse gives buyers an incentive to obtain them.
Eash made a motion to keep the bonus system for ISB, as written, adding a bonus for 3rd place finishes, based on total purses. Eligibility to these awards would be restricted to only ISB horses. The bonus would be applicable to all races, including claimers, sires stakes events, etc., for foals beginning in 2010. After some discussion, he modified the types of races involved to exclude the bottom claimer classes. In addition, the committee would monitor the sires stakes monies expended in this program.
As far as the IB bonus, Tabor moved to eliminate them completely. Eash cautioned his fellow committee members not to be so hasty. Christner then seconded the motion by Tabor. When put to a vote it was 1-1, with Christner abstaining. Thus, the motion failed. This resulted in the IB bonus remaining unchanged.
Christner suggested creating the category (IB), if necessary, to get the bonus. The category would exist, but it the award amount listed would remain as written. It is important to note this category would apply solely to the Owner’s Bonus program. This motion was seconded by Eash. It passed on a 2-1 vote, with Tabor voting against the motion.
The committee then moved on to the Breeders Awards Program. Within the proposal, it said: This program would remain the same in terms of structure, except for the eligibility requirements for the awards, beginning for foals of 2010 and beyond. The horse must be ISB in order to receive the award for any of the following: Leg or Final of the ISS, Leg or Final of the Hoosier Breeders Futurity Series (to be explained later), Final of the ISB late closing event, or the host track’s open or preferred. Foals of 2009 and prior that are IS will remain eligible for the Breeder’s Awards.
Essentially, this meant the program would remain unchanged, except for the eligibility requirements being for ISB in 2010 and beyond. The award was currently 4% of the total purse of the event, to be paid for the winner only.
Eash then made a motion to make the Breeders Awards a percentage of the budget, to be paid for ISB horses only. As far as amounts, Eash suggested 5%, but noted the amount was not set in stone and it must be reviewed. He added that the award should be for all races held within Indiana. He did not ask for a second to his motion, withdrawing it.
After some consideration, Eash offered a second motion. He suggested setting aside a percentage of the budget for a Breeder’s Award Pool. Choosing to take a short break, nothing was decided on this issue. Instead, Breeders Awards were the first item to be decided when the meeting reconvened.
As soon as the meeting was called back to order, Eash made a motion on Breeders Awards. He asked that the Breeders Awards program be restricted to ISB horses only, and a percentage of the BD budget be directed to a breeders award pool. Awards earned would be paid once a year based on each horse’s earnings relative to the combined earnings of all the horses in the pool. Eash suggested a possible earnings cap on the bottom end (i.e. horse must earn at least this amount to be eligible for an award) of $20,000. In addition, the awards would cover all races, not only the types outlined in the current program. The motion was seconded by Christner. The vote on the motion was 2-1, with Tabor against it because it only includes the ISB horses. The change will go into effect for foals of 2010 and beyond.
The proposal before the committee also included a few newly proposed programs. The earlier discussion of not limiting the current late closers to ISB horses meant the topic of new ISB only late closers was dead by default.
Another new suggestion in the proposal was a Hoosier Breeders Series. According to the information provided: This series would be an additional racing opportunity for ISB horses. It would be structured similar to the ISS in that horses would participate in 2-3 legs, accumulating points to race in a championship final. It was presented as an example of an incentive to breed or buy an ISB foal. It would be an additional racing opportunity restricted to a certain category and a chance to earn more purse money.
When the committee began to discuss this event, Tabor said he felt another series raised concern about the number of races being created, especially for two-year-olds. He said he thinks the money being allocated for such events could be put into the ISS to increase the purses, allowing the ISS to compete with sires stakes finals in other racing jurisdictions. For example, Kentucky is increasing their finals to $300,000, with a $2.5 Million Dollar Night of racing in 2008, when all finals would be contested.
Eash said he did not really have much comment on the topic. He said he is more likely to support it if the event was to be one race only, not a series. Further, he said he likes the idea of waiting to see what happens with the horse population, etc. and then decide.
Following Eash’s comments, Barnes reiterated her fear of putting the decisions off until later (like 2013). She said she thought it would give the buyers no incentive to buy the ISB horses instead of the IS only horses.
Eash stated he would like to see this program. However, he did not want to take from the ISS to have it.
Christner then made a motion to withdraw this race category from the proposal and use the 15% of the budget allotted to it to add to the ISS and bonuses outlined earlier. The motion was seconded by Tabor and passed unanimously.
The other new program included in the proposal was an Indiana Championship Bonus Program. As stated in the proposal: The Indiana Championship Bonus Program would be awarded to any horse who would win both Indiana Sires Stakes Championships, as well as the proposed Hoosier Breeders Series Championship (which was deleted earlier). This would make up to $1 Million in bonus money available to the winner, depending on the number of horses qualifying for it. The committee expressed concern over integrity issues of such a large bonus creating a “can of worms.” Thus, they decided not to add it to the program.
Since the committee had gone through all of the programs available and made recommendations, Christner assigned a duty to Barnes. He asked her to put all of the information together, allowing the data to be cleaner and in writing. For the IHRC, the program needs to be put at least into percentages allocated to the various parts of the program. They do not necessarily need specific dollar amounts. Christner also suggested scheduling a meeting the following week to iron out the decisions made at this meeting, after the exact percentages are listed.
With their meeting focus seeming to be on the racing program, Tabor noted something the committee may be overlooking. He said he felt they need to work on promotions more. This should be a larger portion of their budget. Indiana has a rich heritage of harness racing and it should be presented to the public to help promote the industry. Tabor said he felt it was important to expand promotions, even if it means hiring someone to work toward this.
With nothing further to discuss and not other new business pending, Tabor moved to adjourn the meeting. The next meeting date will be conveyed by Barnes.