SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT

The MTHA Board of Directors would like to respond to misleading and inaccurate accounts of the Association’s actions. The dispute concerns the October 1, 2026 Special Membership Meeting, at which the candidate slate for the forthcoming Board election was finalized. Members deserve the facts, and the Board should not allow mischaracterizations of this process to go unanswered.

Beginning in early September, well before the meeting, the MTHA and its Nominating Committee widely publicized the opportunity to run for the Board and actively encouraged members to participate. Many members were contacted personally to help build a diverse slate of candidates. The full membership received notice of the meeting and the nomination requirements, with participation available both at Laurel Park in person and through Zoom.

Every eligible member had an opportunity to seek nomination. All were required to follow the same established rules.

The nomination process dates to the MTHA’s founding and its predecessor organization. Members interested in serving on the Board have any one of three avenues to seek nomination:

1. Request consideration by the Nominating Committee.
2. Be nominated from the floor at a Special Membership Meeting, with endorsement by at least 10 members and the nominee’s written consent.
3. Submit a written petition signed by at least 25 members, accompanied by the nominee’s written consent.

Article 5 of the bylaws states, in relevant part:

“A special meeting of members shall be held at least forty-five (45) days prior to the voting date established by the Board of Directors for the purpose of announcing the report of the Nominating Committee and receiving additional nominations from the floor. A nomination from the floor will be accepted if it (i) receives the endorsement of not less than ten (10) Members and is accompanied by the written consent of the nominee to the nomination, or (ii) is accompanied by a petition signed by no fewer than twenty-five (25) Members and the nominee has consented to the nomination in writing”.

At the October 1 meeting, the Nominating Committee presented 26 nominees—one of the largest slates in the Association’s history. Every candidate on that slate had communicated an interest in serving to the MTHA or a member of the Nominating Committee before the meeting began. No eligible candidate who sought nomination through that process was excluded. Following the committee’s report, counsel clearly explained the nomination procedures on numerous occasions, and the floor was opened for additional nominations. John J. Robb and Hugh I. McMahon then handed counsel nine written petitions, each bearing 10 member signatures.

Counsel reviewed the submissions and advised that the bylaws distinguish between a nomination from the floor, endorsed by at least 10 members, and a nomination submitted by written petition, which requires at least 25 member signatures.

Based on counsel’s advice, the Board determined that the petitions received did not comply with the bylaws.

No nominations from the floor were received.

Accordingly, the Board then closed the nominations and finalized the slate. The Special Membership Meeting was then adjourned, and the Board proceeded with its regular business meeting and full agenda.

The Board welcomes participation and is encouraged by the diverse slate of candidates and the fresh perspectives they bring. We are excited by the positive momentum in Maryland racing and look forward to engaging new voices as we build on that progress. We remain committed to serving Maryland horsemen and working together to strengthen the industry at this pivotal moment in its future. Any questions can be directed to info@mdhorsemen.com.

The MTHA Board of Directors

‍