Ballot drive to end dog racing rounds another corner

Backers of a racing ban turned in signatures this week. (Jason Johns for the Boston Globe/file 2007)

Supporters of a statewide ban on greyhound racing completed one important step Tuesday, turning in more than four times the voter signatures needed to get a binding referendum placed on the November election ballot.

The question, if approved by voters, would outlaw greyhound racing in Massachusetts by 2010, closing two longtime dog tracks - Raynham-Taunton Greyhound Park in Raynham and Wonderland Greyhound Park in Revere.

The Committee to Protect Dogs, the group behind the Greyhound Protection Act, turned in 45,000 signatures Tuesday, more than four times the 11,099 needed.

That number, added to an initial 104,000 signatures the group gathered when it began its effort late last fall, puts the collected total at nearly 150,000.

According to spokesman Brian Adams, who represents the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals-Angell, more than 2,000 volunteers were involved in the signature drive. "And they come from every single community in the state," he said, which demonstrates the initiative's broad base of support.

A potential obstacle to the question's inclusion on the fall ballot remains. A suit, filed by Raynham-Taunton Greyhound Park owner George Carney in the state Supreme Judicial Court, claims state Attorney General Martha Coakley should not have certified the petition for the Greyhound Protection Act as acceptable for the ballot when it was initially submitted several months ago.

In the complaint, Carney's attorney, Lee Kozol, contends the ballot initiative doesn't meet state requirements for such questions because "it would operate only in particular districts or localities." The issue is now awaiting a ruling by the Supreme Judicial Court.

Carney was successful in keeping a similar ban off the state election ballot in 2006, through a complaint that argued the ban proposed that year was too broad. The justices agreed.

Kozol said that proposal called for the abolition of dog racing along with several amendments related to dog fighting and police dogs. "The Supreme Judicial Court found in that case the initiative contained unrelated subjects, and it must contain only related subjects," Kozol said.

Backers of this latest ban are looking for quick action by the high court on Carney's complaint, because they want information on the ballot question included in the election guide that will be mailed to all voters in the state in early fall.

"The SJC is under orders to expedite the decision by the first or second week in July," Adams said. "That should coincide with the signatures all being certified [as belonging to registered voters] and the printing of the voters' guide."

A month ago, the greyhound initiative suffered a blow when the state Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure overwhelmingly came down on the side of the dog tracks. In its majority report, legislators cited the 70-year history of dog racing, and noted the industry provides much-needed jobs as well as entertainment. Members voted 11 to 1 against recommending the act to the full Legislature.

Donald Jordan, research director for the Joint Committee, said the Greyhound Protection Act is one of the first petitions submitted that is exclusionary. "It would take a business that's been here for 70 years and say 'Let's do away with it,' " Jordan said.

"Track owners have been pounding this as a job-loss issue," Adams said. "But the figures being passed around for jobs are greatly inflated. They say there are 650 part-time and full-time employees with benefits. That number is closer to 250, according to the census."

Carney says that's wrong. "I'm sticking with the 650," he said Tuesday. "And jobs are more important now than they have ever been."

In 2000, activists were successful in placing a similar proposed ban on commercial dog racing before Massachusetts voters. It was narrowly defeated, with 46.7 percent in favor of the ban and 48.5 percent opposed.

The backers of the ban say the issue has gained public interest over the last several years, and they predict a victory this fall.

"The public is increasingly sensitive to the needs and well-being of animals, and protecting dogs from needless suffering is a priority concern," said Wayne Pacelle, president and chief executive officer of the Humane Society of the United States. That organization supports the Massachusetts initiative.

Carney, meanwhile, said he's willing to place his fate in the hands of voters.

"If it goes to the voters, it doesn't faze me one iota," Carney said. "I think they will do the same thing they did eight years ago."

Christine Legere can be reached at christinelegere@yahoo.com.