Bribes or benefits? Opinions divided as members briefed on new $5B Rosehill Proposal

Cover image courtesy of The Image Is Everything

On Tuesday, Australian Turf Club (ATC) members received a 110-page Notice of Meeting, the most detailed and expansive proposal yet, concerning the potential sale of Rosehill Gardens.

The vote, now scheduled for 27 May, will determine whether the club proceeds with a $5 billion transaction to sell Rosehill to the New South Wales Government or a nominated entity. In return, the ATC has outlined a major infrastructure investment plan, including a complete redevelopment of Warwick Farm and upgrades to Royal Randwick and Canterbury Park.

A previous vote, originally slated for early April, was postponed after Racing NSW raised concerns that the information provided to members lacked sufficient clarity. The ATC subsequently withdrew the motion and used the intervening weeks to revise the proposal. The result: a significantly expanded document - and the addition of a $57 million Member Loyalty Program designed to reward current members and encourage broader support.

ATC Chairman Peter McGauran said the revised documentation was developed in response to direct feedback from members. “We have listened to the Members and racing industry who have called for full information on many aspects of this proposal,” he said. “The information pack has comprehensive details on Members’ benefits, racing infrastructure, timelines and clear funding certainty.”

While the additional material has been welcomed by some, others have questioned how the delay was used. Rather than simply address the gaps identified in the original proposal, some members say the ATC has repackaged the offer with financial incentives, while key uncertainties remain unresolved.

As the Save Rosehill group stated in its latest communication to members:

“Although repackaged in a shiny new document with personal incentives designed to distract from the flaws, the ATC has delivered yet another proposal that fails to address members’ concerns about the sale of Rosehill.”

At the heart of the debate are two competing views: one that sees the sale as a strategic opportunity to modernise and secure the Club’s future; and another that argues the proposal is still missing critical safeguards, transparency, and long-term planning.

The Club’s position is that the proposal represents a historic opportunity - unlocking capital for large-scale improvements while positioning Sydney to maintain two world-class racing venues beyond Rosehill’s closure in 2031.

McGauran emphasised that the infrastructure plan is designed to ensure long-term viability for the Club: “Without significant investment in year-round engagement strategies and modern facilities that appeal to contemporary audiences, we risk becoming a niche sport, trapped in a cycle of ageing infrastructure and declining relevance.”

He also defended the Member Loyalty Program. “It recognises and rewards our most loyal and long-term Members by sharing some of the proceeds. It’s also aimed at revitalising flagging raceday attendances while growing new membership over time.”

But not all members are reassured. The Save Rosehill group remains firm in its position, arguing that the new proposal still lacks key answers around financial oversight, infrastructure viability, and the long-term governance of the Club’s assets.

Renowned racehorse owner and ATC member Wilf Mula was pointed in his feedback: “I have one word for you - bribery,” he said. “There will be people who go for this, but it’s appalling. They’re hell-bent on selling Rosehill and keeping the money.”

He also pushed back against claims the industry lacks financial capacity. “The last time I looked at the balance sheets, there was $550 million in cash and $178 million in property under Racing NSW’s name.”

What does 'non-core' mean?

One of the most consequential elements of the upcoming vote is not the sale itself, but the reclassification of Rosehill Gardens as “non-core property.”

Under Section 41E of the Registered Clubs Act 1976 (NSW), core property is defined as land and assets that cannot be sold, leased, or otherwise disposed of without the approval of a majority of voting members. Once a property is reclassified as non-core, however, future decisions regarding its use or sale can be made by the board alone—without returning to the membership.

In short: if members vote “yes” on 27 May, they are not just approving the sale of Rosehill Gardens but they are permanently altering their rights to decision-making, even if the transaction with the State is delayed, materially altered, or falls through entirely.

For members like Brian Nutt, that distinction is critical. “If you vote for the sale of Rosehill and the deal falls over, then you’ve voted for a core asset to become a non-core asset - and it’s hard to come back from that,” he said.

The ATC has not publicly stated whether it would consider reverting Rosehill to “core” status in the event the deal does not proceed. Without such an assurance, opponents say the resolution gives away more than it appears.

As the Save Rosehill group noted, “Voting YES permanently removes your right to decide Rosehill’s future.”

Feasibility of the Warwick Farm rebuild

A centrepiece of the ATC’s proposal is an $802 million transformation of Warwick Farm into a modern Group 1-capable racing and training venue. The design includes a reoriented course with a 460-metre home straight, new grandstands and facilities, 600 on-course stables, and a second racing surface inside the main track. According to ATC Chairman Peter McGauran, it represents “the most significant infrastructure investment plan in ATC history.”

But despite the grand design, members remain concerned about whether Warwick Farm is a viable substitute for Rosehill.

The site, which borders the Georges River and the Hume Highway, has long been flagged for its flood risk. Previous proposals to upgrade sections of the track were delayed by Liverpool City Council due to flood zoning and planning constraints; issues that still hang over the current proposal. The ATC says mitigation strategies such as raising the course level and new grandstand have been factored into the rebuild, but no development applications have yet been lodged.

Bloodstock Agent and ATC member Will Johnson expressed a broader concern about the credibility of the project’s costings, comparing the proposal to government projects like the NDN, the NDIS and various tunnels and bridges, or to the Flemington grandstand.

"It's misleading to think that Warwick Farm can be redeveloped for the money stated."

He also questioned the evolving nature of the proposal itself. "First there was mention of building a new track, now it's the redevelopment of Warwick Farm which has me wondering what the next twist in the tale will be!"

Logistics and accessibility are also a concern. Johnson noted that while Randwick-based members could currently reach Rosehill within 30 minutes, “Warwick Farm is a good sixty minutes away. I can't see them going to a redeveloped track."

Wilf Mula echoed that sentiment. “During equine influenza we lost a third of our attendance and they never came back,” he said. “People can watch and bet from home and it's hard to get them to Rosehill let alone to Warwick Farm further out.”

On the racing side, Warwick Farm hasn’t held a Group 1 race since 2016 and currently hosts only lower-profile meetings. Mula recalled a past attempt to boost its stature. “We put on a Group 1 race and nobody turned up,” he said. “It's a furphy to think that you could redevelop the track and make it popular.”

Others, like Brian Nutt, were more focused on the implications for racing operations. “Warwick Farm is our biggest training centre with 700 horses in work—where will those trainers and horses go?” he said.

What happens next?

With just weeks until the 27 May vote, members are now faced with the most consequential decision in the ATC’s modern history.

The 110-page Notice of Meeting answers some of the questions that led to the original vote being delayed.

But for many, others remain unanswered. How long would Warwick Farm need to shut down for construction, and where would the displaced horses and trainers go? Will the $5 billion be delivered in full, under what conditions, and with what oversight? Who ultimately controls the flow of funds - and how is that governance protected from future changes in leadership or policy?

The Member Loyalty Program has created another layer of division. Supporters may see it as appropriate recognition of loyal members, while detractors describe it as an inducement that risks distracting from the weight of the decision at hand.

Most of all, the proposal will further ignite debate about racing’s future identity - whether it lies in modern, multi-use venues with lifestyle amenities and community access, or in the preservation of long-standing tracks with proven wagering figures and ability to deliver Group 1-quality racing.

Voting is now open via proxy for all eligible ATC members. Proxy appointments must be submitted in advance, and only count if the proxy is physically present at the meeting.

The outcome will shape the ATC’s assets, operations, and membership rights for decades to come. And with both sides of the debate continuing to campaign, the coming weeks are likely to bring more questions before a final decision is made.

Until then, the most valuable thing any member can do is read, ask, and decide with eyes wide open.