BH Daily Letters to the Editor, May 21 Issue

Light Up Racing: What we learned For the past three years, Light Up Racing has been close to the work: supporting stakeholders, responding when issues escalated, watching public narratives build in real time, and trying to understand why this industry so often struggles to speak clearly when it matters most. These are not observations made from the sidelines. They come from being inside the work, dealing with the pressure points, the hesitation, the politics, the goodwill, the frustration, and the genuine desire from many people to do better. There is no silver bullet One of the most common questions we heard from leaders was some version of this: What is the solution? The campaign. The message. The strategy. The thing that will finally "fix" public perception? The honest answer is that there is no single thing. But there is a clear starting point: Do the right thing, and be willing to change when the old way is no longer good enough. Public scrutiny is a mirror the industry has too often been afraid to look into. If there are areas where racing is exposed—in safety, welfare, aftercare, transparency, accountability, or the way decisions are explained—then the work has to begin there. Public trust is not rebuilt through one campaign, one clever slogan, or one organization carrying the load. It is built slowly, through consistent and credible action over time. It is built when the industry explains itself before a crisis, responds properly during one, and remains willing to listen when the conversation is uncomfortable. "That is how it has always been done" is not a strategy. In many cases, it is the very thinking that creates the risk. Public trust is built through consistent, coordinated, credible engagement over time. Not in moments. Not in reaction. And not by any one organization alone. The future has to be approached with more curiosity than cynicism, and with the conviction that a better version of the industry is within reach. The industry is fragmented by design In almost every part of the work, we saw the same pattern: Good people and good organizations working hard, but largely working separately with different messages, different priorities, and different levels of response. Inside the industry, those differences feel obvious and reasonable. A racetrack is not a research center. A horsemen's group is not an aftercare organization. A promotional body is not a veterinary authority. But the public does not experience racing that way. To the public, racing is racing. A welfare issue in one state, a safety question at one track, a controversial moment in one race, or a weak response from one organization can affect confidence in the whole sport. That gap between how the industry is organized internally and how it is judged externally is one of the biggest barriers to progress. Work that matters most often least resourced The issues that carry the greatest reputational weight—public perception, safety, aftercare, and welfare—are largely being addressed by small, under-resourced nonprofit organizations. Light Up Racing experienced this directly. Organizations tasked with solving industrywide challenges are required to: Seek funding from multiple sources Navigate unclear, non-transparent, and inconsistent funding processes Operate within a philanthropic model that ties future investment to demonstrated impact without first funding the basic infrastructure required to achieve that impact The result is a structural contradiction: Organizations are expected to deliver industry-level outcomes without being resourced to operate at that level. That creates an obvious contradiction. The industry wants professional, coordinated, effective public trust work, but often funds it as if it is a side project. The result is predictable. Progress is slower than it should be. Reach is more limited than it needs to be. Relationships can become transactional because everyone is operating inside the pressure of limited time, limited money, and limited certainty. This is not a sustainable model. It is a structural limitation on impact. Pride, need can exist at same time Across tracks and organizations, we encountered strong communications teams with a deep sense of ownership over their work. There are capable people across this industry who care deeply about what they do. But pride does not remove the need for support. We also heard plenty of questions. How should we respond to this? What should we say when this issue comes up? How do we correct misinformation without sounding defensive? How do we talk about welfare, safety, or aftercare in a way that is credible to people outside the industry? When training sessions, working groups, and shared discussions were created, people engaged. They asked smart questions, they wanted practical tools and they wanted to understand what was working elsewhere and how they could apply it in their own roles. The issue was not a lack of willingness. It was the lack of consistent spaces where people could come together, learn from one another, and build a more unified approach. When the industry is brought together, it does show up One of the most encouraging lessons was that, when stakeholders were properly convened, they did show up. People shared openly. They aligned more quickly than expected. They were often relieved to have a space where difficult issues could be discussed honestly, without every organization having to solve the same problem alone. What is missing is the infrastructure to sustain it. Without structure, collaboration becomes episodic. But with structure, it becomes strategy. Again and again, the same lesson surfaced: The industry needs to be better connected. Not in a vague "let's all work together" way, but in the practical sense. Shared information, resources, understanding of risk, language—and a shared responsibility for the future of the sport. At times, the industry values its individual parts more than the strength of its whole. Grassroots support is real, but lacks a pathway. We consistently heard from individuals across the industry who want to engage more actively. They care deeply about the future of the sport and want to be part of the solution. But many asked the same questions: Where do I plug in? What do I say? How do I help? Without a clear pathway, that energy remains scattered. With one, it could become one of the industry's greatest strengths. Final observation Strong industries do not only invest in their own immediate success. They invest in the systems that allow the whole ecosystem to remain healthy. A series of strong individual castles does not automatically create a strong kingdom. Without shared direction, resourcing, and coordination, the industry will continue to have moments of progress without the sustained impact it needs. This cannot stop at naming the problems. There is no shortage of commentary in racing about what is not working. Light Up Racing is not interested in simply adding another critique to the pile. The purpose of this reflection is not to point fingers but to be honest about what the work has shown. This is a moment for leadership. Not just to acknowledge the issues, but to participate in building what comes next. Light Up Racing will be bringing forward solutions in the coming months. Over the coming months, Light Up Racing will bring forward practical solutions shaped by what has been learned through this work. We also invite stakeholders across the industry to contribute their own perspective. Where are you seeing friction? What would make collaboration easier? What support would help you communicate better? What should the next version of this work look like? Between now and the release of our final piece ahead of Breeders' Cup 2026, we welcome direct engagement. To share your perspective or participate in solution-focused discussions, reach out via hello@lightupracing.com. What comes next Light Up Racing's next and final piece will not focus on what is broken. It will focus on what is possible, and what it will take to move forward, together. A rising tide lifts all boats. Light Up Racing board of directors, Amy Brin, interim executive director