view raw text
Ohio Bill for Additional Dates Back to House Many Changes Made in Original Measure by Rep. Katterheinrich , Svecial to Daily Racing Form COLUMBUS, Ohio, May 16.— A bill that would leave the door open for considerably more horse racing in the state was back in the House of Representatives for concurrence today after being overwhelmingly approved, 31 to 1, by the Senate. The measure originated in the House, but the Senate made so many changes in it that probably not even its author, Representative Arthur Katterheinrich iR-Auglaize County would recognize it now. At present, the bill contains portions of both the original Katterheinrich proposal and also a measure introduced by Senator Raymond Hildebrand I R-Lucas County. The original Hildebrand bill was recommended for passage by the Senate State Government Committee, but since then it seems to have become lost in the shuffle. The revised proposal would give the state racing commission authority to approve an additional 44 days of racing on top of 44 under the present statute in the event the board would deem such a move in the public interest." Also, the bill now in the House would allow the commission to approve, if it sees fit, the transfer of one tracks dates to another, provided the two courses involved are within -60 miles of each other. Backers of the measure include Leon Slavin, president and general manager of River Downs, and Thomas R. Lloyd, a member of the state racing commission. Slavin claims Ohio will lose revenue to Kentucky because of a new track being planned at Florence, just across the Ohio River from Cincinnati, unless it relaxes the current law on racing dates. Commissioner Lloyd has often expressed himself as favoring a rule that would permit one track to shift its dates to another. He cites the case of Thistle Down and Cranwood Park in the Cleveland area, two tracks that are operated by virtually the same interests. Lloyd says: "I can see nothing wrong with a law that would allow Cranwood to utilize Thistle Downs improved and laager fa-cilties." Lone opposition to the omnibus bill, combining portions of the Katterheinrich and Hildebrand measures, in the Senate was voiced by William Beckett R-Butler County. He said he wished to voice "moderate disapproval" of what appeared to be "an almost unlimited extension of racing." Senator Beckett said he was fearful of the possibility that the measure might arouse public indignation against horse racing and pari-mutuel wagering.