Track owner won't roll over

[bigdoglover]

The Taunton Gazette

By Gerry Tuoti

RAYNHAM - If the petition to ban racing in the Commonwealth is successful, Raynham's budget could take a massive hit, town officials said.

A group of animal rights activists Wednesday delivered a petition with 150,000 signatures supporting an initiative called the "Dog Protection Act." The document proposes stiffer penalties for assaulting police dogs and breeding dogs for fighting, and calls for dog racing to be gradually phased out by 2008.


Raynham-Taunton Greyhound Park owner George Carney's Massasoit Greyhound Corp. owns $10.7 million worth of property in Raynham and pays the town $135,000 in taxes. The dog track is also required to share a percentage of its earnings handle with the town. According to Fiscal 2007 projections, the town's share will be $455,000.


"If the track were to close or racing were to be prohibited, that's a half-million-dollar hit to the town," assessor Gordon Luciano said. "This year, if we didn't have that money, we wouldn't have three new teachers in the schools or a new police officer."


Once the signatures are verified, the proposal will likely be put on the November general election ballot.


Christine Dorchak, who co-authored the "Dog Protection Act," explained her group's stance.


"It is the position of the Committee to Protect Dogs that an economy should not be based on cruelty to dogs," she said. "If the Dog Protection Act is not accepted, hundreds of greyhounds will continue to get injured at Raynham-Taunton Greyhound Park."


Luciano said a shutdown of the track - which, with nearly 800 workers is the town's largest employer - would also impact many surrounding cottage industries.


"The proponents of the ballot question are lying when they say this would not dramatically impact anyone but the track owners," Luciano said.


Over the past decade, Raynham-Taunton Greyhound Park has seen attendance and revenue figures decline as it's faced competition from the Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun casinos in Connecticut, and Rhode Island's Lincoln Park greyhound track, which has slot machines. Lincoln Park recently completed a $125 million expansion.


Selectman Donald McKinnon said the town's share of the park's handle has dwindled from $700,000 to $400,000.


"It's probably already gone down by $300,000," he said. "We adjust our budget depending on revenue."


Voters in 2000 narrowly defeated a ballot initiative to ban dog racing in the Commonwealth.


Six years ago, Grey2K USA, a grass-roots organization, organized the ballot campaign mostly on its own. That has changed this year. Several established organizations, including the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the Humane Society of the United States and the Animal Rescue League of Boston, have pledged their support.


The "Dog Protection Act" differs from the 2000 initiative in several ways. In addition to proposing a ban on dog racing, it includes protections for law enforcement and guide dogs and new penalties for dog fighting.


Carney in February filed a complaint with the Supreme Judicial Court in an attempt to prevent the proposal from reaching the ballot. He claimed that packaging racing with other issues is a deceptive move designed to hide the racing ban behind other causes. The Committee to Protect Dogs argues that the components of the proposal all are part of an effort to protect the animals. The court has not yet delivered a ruling.


Carney's attorney, Joel Kozol, argued that the "Dog Protection Act" is unconstitutional.


In the complaint he filed to the Supreme Judicial Court Feb. 21, Kozol wrote that "the petition contains subjects that are not related or mutually dependent; would operate only in particular districts or localities; would constitute a taking of property without providing compensation... and is not in proper form for submission to the people."


Since Raynham-Taunton Greyhound Park and Wonderland in Revere are the only two tracks in Massachusetts that hold dog races, Luciano doesn't think the issue should necessarily be decided by voters who live in regions of the state that aren't economically linked to the racing industry.


"There are 500-plus jobs at the dog track," Luciano said. "How many of those employees live in our general area. That's money that will now not be spent in the Bridgewater-Raynham-Taunton area... and somebody from a place like Williamstown is going to vote?"


McKinnon said a shutdown of the track would hurt the town, but added that Raynham could survive the setback.


"Dog racing is a vital part of Raynham," the selectman said. "We don't want to lose them, but if they go we'll either adjust our revenue by new businesses coming in, or we'll have to reduce the budget if need be."


Luciano said he doesn't think the Committee to Protect Dogs realizes the impact a ban on racing would have on towns like Raynham, a charge Dorchak answered by saying she does not support an "economy based on cruelty to dogs."


"They're really hiding behind their emotions," Luciano claimed. "They're not dealing with what the impacts would be."

[jcsperson]

This initiative is fraudulent.

Grey2K came up with a new alias, The Committee To Protect Dogs, which is headed by Christine Dorchak, wife of Grey2K head Cary Theil who tried to ban racing 5 years ago and failed. This time he's hiding behind the nebulous theme of "dog protection" when there are already fighting and abuse laws on the books. His real target is greyhound racing.

Follow the money. Theil earns his income entirely from his efforts to ban racing. Grey2K has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from donors like Greyhound Friends of Massachusetts, The Greater Boston SPCA, the Humane Society of the United States and other "animal welfare" groups. One would think their money would be better spent actually caring for animals in need rather than racing Greyhounds whose adoptions in Massachusetts are funded by racing. BTW, Theil does not even have a Greyhound as a pet.

Approximately 800-1,000 Greyhounds are retired from Mass. tracks and the state allocates $350,000 per year from taxes on racing to place them with adoption groups---that's $350 a dog or more. On top of this groups charge $200-300 to the adopter. In other words, G2K is trying to ban racing in a state where adoption is not a problem.

[jcsperson]

Grey2K's deception was proven in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court as it ruled 5-0 in favor of greyhound racing in the state:

SJC rules that greyhound dog question cannot go on ballot