Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when AB 1155 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on AB 1155.
You're tracking AB 1155
We'll email you the moment it moves.
AB 1155 — Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund.
Last action — Died on inactive file.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed Assembly
-
4Passed Senate
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2021-2022 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
Existing federal law, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988, provides for the negotiation and execution of tribal-state gaming compacts for the purpose of authorizing certain types of gaming on Indian lands within a state. The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to negotiate and conclude compacts, subject to ratification by the Legislature. Existing law ratifies a number of tribal-state gaming compacts between the State of California and specified Indian tribes. Existing law creates in the State Treasury the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund for the receipt and deposit of moneys received by the state from Indian tribes pursuant to the terms of gaming compacts entered into with the state. Existing law authorizes moneys in that fund to be available for appropriation by the Legislature for certain purposes. Existing law requires first priority for funding from the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund to be made to the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund to make payments of any shortfalls that may occur in that fund and requires 2nd priority for funding to be made to the Office of Problem Gambling for problem gambling prevention programs. This bill would require 2nd priority for funding from the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund to be made to the Office of Problem Gambling for developing and providing, for the people of California, quality statewide prevention and treatment programs and services to address gambling disorder.
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
1 added · 1 removed1 line(s) added, 1 removed.
Bill Number Bill Keyword Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Bill Information >> Bill Search >> Text Bill TextBillText Information PDF2 Bill PDF |Add To My Favorites | Version:
View plain text versions (2)
- Introduced 02/18/21 - Introduced Current pdf February 18, 2021
- AB1155 View text html
Action History
-
Died on inactive file.
-
Ordered to inactive file at the request of Assembly Member Salas.
-
Ordered to third reading.
-
From Consent Calendar.
-
Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar.
-
From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (May 19).
-
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 22. Noes 0.) (April 8). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Referred to Com. on G.O.
-
From printer. May be heard in committee March 21.
-
Read first time. To print.
Sponsors
- Salas · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Salas
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (121)
121 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 121 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 7 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 15 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 94% | 0% | 0% | 6% |
How each member voted (16)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Levine | — | Yea |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Yea |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Not Voting |
| Lorena Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Luz Rivas | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Carrillo, Juan | Democratic | Yea |
| Fong, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Gabriel, Jesse | Democratic | Yea |
| Rivas, Robert | Democratic | Yea |
| Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah | Democratic | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Yea |
| Davies, Laurie | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (22)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Cooper | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Yea |
| Mathis | — | Yea |
| Frazier | — | Yea |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Yea |
| Smith | — | Yea |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Low | — | Yea |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Yea |
| Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Berman, Marc | Democratic | Yea |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Gipson, Mike A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Quirk-Silva, Sharon | Democratic | Yea |
| Ramos, James C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Rivas, Robert | Democratic | Yea |
| Rubio, Blanca E. | Democratic | Yea |
| Davies, Laurie | Republican | Yea |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Yea |
| Lackey, Tom | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does AB 1155 do?
- Existing federal law, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988, provides for the negotiation and execution of tribal-state gaming compacts for the purpose of authorizing certain types of gaming on Indian lands within a state. The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to negotiate and conclude compacts, subject to ratification by the Legislature. Existing law ratifies a number of tribal-state gaming compacts between the State of California and specified Indian tribes. Existing law creates in the State Treasury the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund for the receipt and deposit of moneys received by the state from Indian tribes pursuant to the terms of gaming compacts entered into with the state. Existing law authorizes moneys in that fund to be available for appropriation by the Legislature for certain purposes. Existing law requires first priority for funding from the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund to be made to the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund to make payments of any shortfalls that may occur in that fund and requires 2nd priority for funding to be made to the Office of Problem Gambling for problem gambling prevention programs. This bill would require 2nd priority for funding from the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund to be made to the Office of Problem Gambling for developing and providing, for the people of California, quality statewide prevention and treatment programs and services to address gambling disorder.
- Who sponsors AB 1155?
- AB 1155 is sponsored by Salas.
- What is the current status of AB 1155?
- This bill died with 2021-2022 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track AB 1155?
- Track AB 1155 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on AB 1155
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of AB 1155
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →