Posts Tagged ‘jerry jamgotchian’
Sunday, July 26th, 2009
By Ray PaulickThe California Horse Racing Board has created a potential mess by appointing its former executive director, Ingrid Fermin, as one of three individuals on the board of stewards during the Del Mar Thoroughbred Club meeting that began on Wednesday.
Fermin’s tenure as head of the state agency, which lasted three years, ended in 2007  when she said she did not want to relocate to Sacramento, home of the CHRB’s headquarters, as required by the board. There were several controversies and internal turmoil during her time as executive director, and some critics reportedly accused her of showing favoritism in appointments and contracts.
Foremost among those critics is owner Jerry Jamgotchian, who has filed several lawsuits against the CHRB, sent hundreds if not thousands of e-mails critical of Fermin, former CHRB chairman Richard Shapiro and others, and recently told the Paulick Report Fermin was “the most corrupt†executive director and steward in CHRB history.
When Fermin (pictured, left) was named one of three stewards for the Del Mar meeting, resuming a career she began in 1981 as the first female steward in California history, Jamgotchian requested a hearing with the CHRB to stop the appointment, saying that Fermin was biased against certain trainers and owners. The furor over the appointment ramped up when several trainers, including Mike Mitchell, Jeff Mullins, Art Sherman and Doug O’Neill, appealed to have Fermin recuse herself from judging races in which they have horses. There have been accusations that Fermin specifically targeted certain trainers in post-race drug testing while she was CHRB executive director. Fermin told the San Diego Union-Tribune the accuslations were “baseless” and “twisted.”
Jamgotchian’s complaint against Fermin stemmed from an incident in 2005 involving a horse owned by Jamgotchian that he wanted to scratch from a race at Del Mar. After a steward refused to allow the horse to be scratched, the horse ran and suffered an injury. UPDATE: While Jamgotchian has alleged that the horse, John’s Kinda Girl, was injured in that Aug. 14, 2005, race, the filly subsequently worked out three times over the next six weeks, and raced Oct. 7, 2005, and 12 more times in the next year, winning two of those races.
Jamgotchian’s request for a hearing before the Del Mar meet opened was denied when Fermin declined to attend. After the board met privately in executive session on Thursday, CHRB chairman John Harris said during the public portion of the regularly-scheduled monthly meeting that the stewards named for the Del Mar meeting would be retained. Harris also was board chairman when Fermin was appointed CHRB executive director in 2004.
Things appeared to change somewhat on Friday, however, when owner Martin Wygod, a member of the Del Mar Thoroughbred Club’s board of directors and one of the most influential owners in California racing, reportedly asked Fermin to recuse herself from presiding over a race in which one of his horses was running. According to a report in the North County Times, former jockey Luis Jaurequi, now a “safety steward,†would have substituted for Fermin in judging any inquiry or claim of foul involving one of Wygod’s horses in that race. Does that mean Fermin would have judged foul claims in the same race if they didn’t involve Wygod’s horse?
Wygod is believed to have been upset with Fermin ever since an incident involving 2-year-old champion Sweet Catomine at Santa Anita three years ago when the filly left the grounds for medical treatment prior to the Santa Anita Derby. Wygod was charged, following an investigation led by Fermin, with having the filly falsely identified when she was vanned out of the stable area and exhibiting conduct detrimental to racing. The charges, which could have resulted in Wygod having his owner’s license suspended, were dismissed following a hearing.
Jamgotchian, citing numerous sources, provided the following commentary about the reported request by Wygod to have Fermin recuse herself from presiding over Friday’s race in which Wygod’s horse ran: “On July 24, 2009, around noon,†Jamgotchian wrote in a widely distributed e-mail, “a ‘secret’ meeting was held in the Steward’s office at Del Mar. At this meeting,Ingrid Fermin agreed to recuse herself from Race No. 2 at Del Mar. Her recusal was made orally at the demand of owner Marty Wygod because he believed that Fermin has a known, actual and direct bias and prejudice against him because of the Sweet Catomine incident and various statements made about Wygod in the Frank Moore declaration dated July 14, 2009.â€
Jamgotchian went on to say that Wygod threatened to scratch his horse from the race if Fermin failed to recuse herself as a steward in that race. “Fermin agreed,†Jamgotchian wrote, “and her recusal was made in front of fellow Stewards Scott Chaney, Tom Ward and in the presence of other parties in the room, including Wygod.â€
Jamgotchian said he called Wygod’s attorney, Roger Licht, “to confirm the above facts regarding their recusal agreement with Fermin†and that Licht told him “there was an ‘oral’ confidentiality agreement in place with Fermin and that he could not discuss Fermin’s recusal.â€
Jamgotchian said he also tried unsuccessfully to speak with Fermin by telephone before the first race and said he intends to file a complaint with the CHRB regarding the “Wygod recusal†and demand an investigation by the CHRB because of what he called a “unilateral†decision and one that was not publicly disclosed.
If the North County Times article and Jamgotchian’s assertions are accurate, it appears either the CHRB or Fermin are applying a double standard when it comes to Fermin recusing herself from races in which the principals involved feel as though there is a bias by her against them. If she recused herself in a race involving Wygod, shouldn’t she do the same in races involving the trainers who have made similar appeals?
Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report
Savvy businesses recognize value. Advertise in the Paulick Report.
Support the Paulick Report. Make a donation today.
Sign up for our Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick
(UPDATED: SUNDAY, 5:15 P.M. , FIFTH PARAGRAPH)
Tags: art sherman, California Horse Racing Board, CHRB, del mar thoroughbred club, doug o'neill, Horse Racing, ingrid fermin, jeff mullins, jerry jamgotchian, john harris, luis jaurequi, martin wygod, mike mitchell, north county times, Paulick Report, racing stewards, Ray Paulick, roger licht Posted in California, California Horse Racing Board, Regulatory Issues, Stewards | 26 Comments »
Monday, March 9th, 2009
By Ray Paulick
Responding to complaints from racing secretaries that horses were being claimed in California races and immediately shipped out of state – often to tracks with purses enriched with slot machine revenue — the California Horse Racing Board in 2005 amended its rules to prohibit any claimed horse from racing outside of the state (except in a stakes race) until 60 days after the end of the meeting at which it was claimed.
The problem with the restrictive regulation, alleges horse owner Jerry Jamgotchian in a lawsuit filed on Monday in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, is that it is unconstitutional because it violates the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Jamgotchian filed the action against the CHRB, its executive director, Kirk Breed, CHRB chairman John Harris and vice chairman David Israel.
Click here to read CHRB rule 1663. Click here for a copy of Jamgotchian’s lawsuit and attached exhibits.
Jamgotchian, no stranger to lawsuits against the CHRB, isn’t the only one who believes the section of CHRB rule 1663, prohibiting a horse claimed in California from racing out of state for an extended period of time, is unconstitutional. In 2003, when the proposed rule was discussed for at least the second time (it also was brought up in 2001), the state’s deputy attorney general, Derry L. Knight, provided informal advice to the board to the effect that the rule, if challenged, would be “found invalid as a violation of the Commerce Clause.”
“A California restriction on the out-of-state racing of a California-claimed horse would, as noted by the opponents of the suggested CHRB rule 1663 amendment, have a very direct extraterritorial effect on the owner of that animal,” the deputy attorney general wrote to then-executive director Roy Wood in September 2003. “Other states imposing similar, or perhaps conflicting, restrictions on the out-of-state racing of horses claimed in their states could lead to the very inconsistent projection of one state regulatory regime into the jurisdiction of another state that (the 1989 Supreme Court ruling, Heely v. Beer Institute) counsels the Commerce Clause is intended to prevent. … It would seem undeniable that the proposed 60-day post-race meeting prohibition of out-of-state racing of a California-claimed horse would have the effect of controlling commercial activity occurring wholly outside the boundary of the state.”
In other words, the rule restricts owners from doing what they feel is in the best interest of the horses they own, and places the CHRB in the position of dictating racing regulations to other states.
The CHRB has issued fines and suspensions against horsemen violating rule 1663. In a 2007 case, CHRB licensee Edgar Clarke was fined $6,000 and suspended 60 days for violating rule 1663. Other CHRB licensees have also had their horses scratched by CHRB officials in other states for violation of this rule.
Jamgotchian says he claimed a filly named Look Closely at Del Mar on Sept. 3, 2006, three days before the end of that track’s meeting, and entered her within the 60-day “jail time” in a race at Turf Paradise in Arizona on Oct. 27. Following a call to a Turf Paradise steward from Ingrid Fermin, then the executive director of the CHRB, Jamgotchian alleges, the filly was scratched because of the 60-day clause in rule 1663.
He said last month he is interested in the private purchase of a recently claimed horse for the purpose of sending it out of state and sought a clarification of the rule from the CHRB’s executive director.
Prior to filing the suit, an attorney retained by Jamgotchian sent a letter to the CHRB asking that the claiming rules be suspended in order for both parties to avoid litigation. The CHRB has not acted on that request.
Amending the rule so that horses could race out of state 60 days after being claimed (rather than 60 days after the close of the meeting at which they were claimed) was discussed at last month’s meeting of the CHRB. Staff analysis prepared for the discussion publicly disclosed the 2003 letter from the attorney general’s office for the first time. The vote to approve the restrictive clause came two years after the attorney general’s advised the CHRB that it was unconstitutional.
John Harris, a member of the board since 2000 and currently the CHRB’s chairman, mentioned potential legal problems with the rule when it was proposed at a 2001 board meeting. “We’re really dealing in interstate commerce, which is not really one of our expertise areas in the Racing Board,” Harris said at the time. “And we can get ourselves into trouble and run up a lot of legal bills and lose.”
Thoroughbred Owners of California opposed the restrictive rules proposed in 2001. Jim Ghidella, then with the TOC, commented: “We believe it is a violation of the Interstate Commerce Clause. I think any time you put a restrictive covenant on property, any kind of property … you lessen the value.”
The proposal came up again in July 2003 when trainer Roger Stein spoke at a board meeting in support of the restrictions. Stein said he claimed numerous horses at Emerald Downs in Washington to send to California, and Washington regulators quickly put in restrictive rules to prevent that from happening again. No action was taken by the CHRB at the July 2003 meeting, and only three months later the board received the opinion from the deputy attorney general.
In 2005, however, after racing secretaries again said horses were being claimed to be sent out of state, the board approved the new restrictions to claiming rules. Harris again commented that “it could be argued on an interstate commerce issue that we’re trampling on that.”
When discussions to change the claiming rule were held last month, CHRB member Jesse Choper, the Earl Warren professor of public law at the University of California school of law, said he agreed with the position taken by the attorney general’s office in 2003. Still Choper said the board “ought to stick with (rule 1663) until someone challenges it …”
“Until we get caught – I mean, challenged,” Harris interjected, drawing some laughter. “Yeah,” said Choper.
“Caught’s kind of a severe term,” Harris added. “But, I mean, that’s what it really amounts to, which is the one reason I was leaning toward a lesser period of time, because that lessens the challenges that might be out there.”
Jamgotchian, who recently won another legal battle against the CHRB in the court of appeals concerning the role of stewards, seems more than willing to offer that challenge. His action seeks the rule be overturned and that he be reimbursed for the cost of the suit, including attorney’s fees.
“We believe that the Federal Court will send a clear message to the CHRB to strike this oppressive rule and hope that by eliminating this rule many recently claimed horses from other states will relocate to California,” Jamgotchian said in a press release.
Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report
Sign up for our Email flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick
Visit the Paulick Report for all the latest news throughout the racing world.
Tags: California Horse Racing Board, CHRB, claiming restrictions, commerce clause of the U.S. constitution, david israel, derry l. knight, edgar clarke, ingrid fermin, jamgotchian, jerry jamgotchian, jesse choper, jim ghidella, john harris, kirk breed, roger stein, roy wood, rule 1663, thoroughbred owners of california, toc Posted in California, California Horse Racing Board, Regulatory Issues, Uncategorized | 6 Comments »
Wednesday, February 4th, 2009
By Ray Paulick
December was a cruel month for Richard Shapiro, who stepped down as chairman of the California Horse Racing Board on Dec. 15, only a few days after learning that a significant portion of his life savings and pension was lost in the $50-billion Ponzi scheme allegedly perpetrated by Bernard Madoff.
January wasn’t much better.
Shapiro on Jan. 12 sent a letter asking for help from his Congressman, Brad Sherman, a Democrat representing the San Fernando Valley near Los Angeles. He suggested, among other things, that Sherman push for the Internal Revenue Service to relax time restrictions for victims to recover taxes they paid on false income reported to them by Madoff. Shapiro sent the letter to some other members of Congress and to another Madoff victim he knew, asking that he consider writing similar letters to elected officials. He also suggested his friend contact others who lost their investments, urging them to write members of Congress for help.
Shortly thereafter, the letter Shapiro thought was private was being widely distributed by California-based Thoroughbred owner Jerry Jamgotchian, who for the past few years has been a relentless critic of Shapiro and many of the policies he influenced as CHRB chairman. Shapiro’s personal tragedy became a very public matter.
How Jamgotchian got a copy of Shapiro’s letter, however, is in dispute.
Shapiro insists Jamgotchian was forwarded a copy of the letter by Los Angeles attorney Roger Licht, whose CHRB seat Shapiro filled when he was appointed to the board by Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in October 2004. Licht, an appointee of Democrat Gray Davis, served from February 2001 through July 2004, including one year as chairman, in 2003. Shapiro was chairman from January 2006 until his resignation from the board last December.
Both Licht and Jamgotchian deny Shapiro’s charge that Licht sent Jamgotchian a copy of the letter.
The other Madoff victim contacted by Shapiro forwarded a copy of the letter to Los Angeles entrepreneur Steve Weston, who also was victimized in the investment scam. When rumors about Shapiro being stung by Madoff began circulating in horse racing circles, Shapiro contacted Weston to find out whether he had forwarded the letter to anyone else, and Weston confirmed he had sent it on Jan. 13 to Licht, who was representing him in the Madoff case.
On Jan. 15, when the first published reports of Shapiro’s letter to Rep. Sherman appeared, Weston sent an email to Shapiro saying he had “queried Licht as to whether or not he had sent it to anyone. It was at that point,” Weston continued, “that he told me that he had faxed it to some guy I had never heard of named Jamgotchian. When you and I spoke later that same morning you asked me to call Licht and confirm who he had sent it to and ask them to stop sending it out, I did as you asked. I called Licht again and he confirmed it was Jamgotchian he had sent it to. He placed the phone down so that I could hear him call this guy and I heard him ask Jamgotchian to please stop sending the letter out to anyone else. When he got back on the phone with me he told me that Jamgotchian had told him that he would stop.”
Licht was asked by the Paulick Report if he had sent a copy of the letter to Jamgotchian. “No,” he said. “What’s this all about? You’re the third reporter who’s called about this.”
When Weston’s email to Shapiro was read to Licht, he responded, “I don’t know what Steve Weston is talking about.”
“He told you that?” Weston said, when informed by the Paulick Report of Licht’s comments. “I have emails from him to me apologizing for what he did. I was also on the phone with him when he called Jamgotchian and asked him to stop sending it around. Did he actually deny it? I’m surprised to hear he would lie like that.”
Weston went on to say it would be “ludicrous” to criticize Shapiro or anyone else who invested money with Madoff. “Look at the people who got burned,” he added, “people like Mort Zuckerman and Steven Spielberg. Some of the smartest people in the financial world were victims. This was a failing of the SEC. No investor’s judgment should be called into question.”
“I question the ethics, morals and purpose for Mr. Licht in turn forwarding a copy of the letter to Jerry Jamgotchian,” Shapiro said in a statement. “Clearly doing so was not related to the services he was asked to perform as an attorney representing a client, and his dissemination of my letter to an unrelated third party was done with the sole purpose of malicious intent towards me at the minimum.” Shapiro now questions if it’s possible “much of what Jamgotchian has claimed for years has in fact been fed to him by Licht since he was a prior member of the CHRB.”
Jamgotchian readily admits distributing Shapiro’s letter but categorically denies receiving it from Licht.
“Shapiro is nothing but a blatant and pathological liar,” Jamgotchian said. “Put that in red letters and bold. Somebody faxed it to me. I got it two days after the fact, and I immediately started blasting it out (Jan. 14). I got it from somebody in the press. Why would I get anything from Roger Licht? That’s like saying I got it from (CHRB acting chairman) John Harris. They’re (CHRB) not going to help me with this.”
Jamgotchian’s public criticism of the CHRB and Shapiro began in 2005, after Licht had left the board. Jamgotchian has filed several complaints against the CHRB since then and has been a constant thorn in Shapiro’s side. The Paulick Report asked Jamgotchian why he has been so critical of Shapiro, who is best known for pushing the mandate that California tracks install synthetic surfaces.
“The destruction of California racing,” Jamgotchian said. “My inability to race in California. The destruction of the California breeding industry. The inability to race on dirt tracks. Millions of dollars he’s cost me as an owner. Loss of purses in California. The ADW mess. Reduced track attendance. Closing of racetracks in California. Increased training and vet fees. When I sold all my horses at a huge loss at Barretts. He’s solely responsible for it. He and his stupid decisions with synthetic racetracks, heel nerving and other mistakes he’s made. The last thing he did was get the CHRB budget thrown out in front of the GO (Governmental Organization) Committee.”
In a later email, Jamgotchian wrote: “Shapiro vacuous decisions has put track employees, tote sellers and many horseracing people out of work and took away their dreams!”
After feeling his personal life had been invaded, Shapiro contacted Bloodhorse magazine and Thoroughbred Times to tell his side of the story and express his belief that Licht was responsible for sending a copy of the letter to Jamgotchian. Neither publication, Shapiro told the Paulick Report, would publish the story.
For his part, Shapiro said he has “endured for years the insults and ridiculous claims” from Jamgotchian. “It is beyond the bounds of decency that (Licht and Jamgotchian) would find joy in someone else’s difficulties,” he said.
Shapiro also said his resignation from the board was unrelated to the financial problems resulting from his Madoff investments. Shapiro, in fact, did tell the Paulick Report during a visit to Lexington for the Keeneland September yearling sale that he was contemplating leaving the CHRB and pursuing a non-regulatory industry position. He has been widely rumored to be a leading candidate to head up the Sacramento-based Federation of California Racing Associations.
“I remain committed and hopeful of helping the sport in any way possible,” he said.
Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report
Visit the Paulick Report for all the latest news throughout the racing world.
Sign up for our Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary.
Tags: bernard madoff, brad sherman, California Horse Racing Board, jerry jamgotchian, john harris, mort zuckerman, Paulick Report, Ray Paulick, richard shapiro, roger licht, steve weston, steven spielberg Posted in California, California Horse Racing Board, People | 12 Comments »
|
|