California 2015-2016 Regular Session Status: Enacted

AB 2914 — Gaming: Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 110, Statutes of 2016.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Assembly
  4. ✓
    Passed Senate
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced March 17, 2016. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 70% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 4 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

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 expressly ratifies a number of tribal-state gaming compacts, and amendments of tribal-state gaming compacts, between the State of California and specified Indian tribes. Existing law establishes the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund within the State Treasury for the receipt and deposit of moneys derived from gaming device license fees that are received from tribes pursuant to the terms of tribal-state gaming compacts for the purpose of making distributions to noncompact tribes. Existing law provides that moneys in that fund are available to the California Gambling Control Commission, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for the purpose of making those distributions in accordance with plans specified in tribal-state gaming compacts. This bill would clarify that the purpose of the fund is for making distributions to eligible recipient Indian tribes. Existing law requires the California Gambling Control Commission to, on or before the day of the May budget revision for each fiscal year, determine the anticipated total amount of shortfalls in payment likely to occur in the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund for the next fiscal year, and to provide to the committee in the Senate and Assembly that considers the State Budget an estimate of the amount needed to transfer from the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund to backfill the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund for the next fiscal year. Existing law requires, at the end of each fiscal quarter, the commission's Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund report to include specified information, including, among other things, the amount paid into the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund by each of the tribes pursuant to the applicable sections of the tribal-state gaming compact. This bill would provide that tribes contributing to the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund on a net win or gross gaming revenue basis may be aggregated in the quarterly report described above. Existing law requires the California Gambling Control Commission to determine the amount of money needed to be transferred from the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund to the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund to ensure that each eligible recipient Indian tribe receives a specified amount of the funds. Existing law defines "eligible recipient tribe" for those purposes to mean a noncompact tribe, as defined in the tribal-state gaming compacts ratified and in effect, as specified. Those compacts define "noncompact tribe" to mean a federally recognized tribe that operates fewer than 350 gaming devices. This bill would clarify that "eligible recipient Indian tribe" means a noncompact, nongaming, or limited-gaming tribe, as defined in the tribal-state gaming compacts ratified and in effect, as provided. The bill would delete other related, obsolete provisions.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 110, Statutes of 2016.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4:30 p.m.

  4. In Assembly. Ordered to Engrossing and Enrolling.

  5. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 37. Noes 0. Page 4643.).

  6. Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar.

  7. From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (June 14).

  8. In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  9. Referred to Com. on G.O.

  10. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  11. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 4791.)

  12. Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar.

  13. From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 21. Noes 0.) (May 5).

  14. Joint Rule 62(a), file notice suspended. (Page 4614.)

  15. Referred to Com. on G.O.

  16. From printer. May be heard in committee April 17.

  17. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Committee on Governmental Organization · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Committee on Governmental Organization

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.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Consent Calendar 2nd AB2914 Committee On G.O.

Passed 37 Yea · 0 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 34003
Democratic 3000
Total 37003
% of votes cast 93%0%0%8%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Block — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Leno — Yea
Mendoza — Not Voting
Roth — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Hall — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Allen — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
De León — Yea
Hill — Yea
Bates — Yea
Beall — Yea
Lara — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Liu — Yea
Monning — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Pan — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Runner — Not Voting
Huff — Yea
Vidak — Yea
Wolk — Not Voting
Glazer — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

AB 2914 G.O. Consent Calendar Second Day

Passed 78 Yea · 0 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 68002
Democratic 5000
Republican 5000
Total 78002
% of votes cast 98%0%0%3%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Achadjian — Yea
Baker — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Yea
Brown — Yea
Holden — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Not Voting
Linder — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Yea
Thurmond — Yea
Ting — Yea
Williams — Yea
Wood — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Daly — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Chang — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Salas — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Harper — Yea
Chau — Yea
Kim — Yea
Levine — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Low — Yea
Mayes — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Gray — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Chu — Yea
Chávez — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Dababneh — Yea
Dodd — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Steinorth — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Weber — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Lopez — Yea
Hadley — Yea
Burke — Not Voting
Campos — Yea
Medina — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
Travis Allen — Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass. To Consent Calendar.

Passed 21 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 18000
Democratic 2000
Republican 1000
Total 21000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (21)
Member Party Vote
Alejo — Yea
Levine — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Campos — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Daly — Yea
Salas — Yea
Gray — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Linder — Yea
Steinorth — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety finance labor
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 2914 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 expressly ratifies a number of tribal-state gaming compacts, and amendments of tribal-state gaming compacts, between the State of California and specified Indian tribes. Existing law establishes the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund within the State Treasury for the receipt and deposit of moneys derived from gaming device license fees that are received from tribes pursuant to the terms of tribal-state gaming compacts for the purpose of making distributions to noncompact tribes. Existing law provides that moneys in that fund are available to the California Gambling Control Commission, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for the purpose of making those distributions in accordance with plans specified in tribal-state gaming compacts. This bill would clarify that the purpose of the fund is for making distributions to eligible recipient Indian tribes. Existing law requires the California Gambling Control Commission to, on or before the day of the May budget revision for each fiscal year, determine the anticipated total amount of shortfalls in payment likely to occur in the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund for the next fiscal year, and to provide to the committee in the Senate and Assembly that considers the State Budget an estimate of the amount needed to transfer from the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund to backfill the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund for the next fiscal year. Existing law requires, at the end of each fiscal quarter, the commission's Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund report to include specified information, including, among other things, the amount paid into the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund by each of the tribes pursuant to the applicable sections of the tribal-state gaming compact. This bill would provide that tribes contributing to the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund on a net win or gross gaming revenue basis may be aggregated in the quarterly report described above. Existing law requires the California Gambling Control Commission to determine the amount of money needed to be transferred from the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund to the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund to ensure that each eligible recipient Indian tribe receives a specified amount of the funds. Existing law defines "eligible recipient tribe" for those purposes to mean a noncompact tribe, as defined in the tribal-state gaming compacts ratified and in effect, as specified. Those compacts define "noncompact tribe" to mean a federally recognized tribe that operates fewer than 350 gaming devices. This bill would clarify that "eligible recipient Indian tribe" means a noncompact, nongaming, or limited-gaming tribe, as defined in the tribal-state gaming compacts ratified and in effect, as provided. The bill would delete other related, obsolete provisions.
Who sponsors AB 2914?
AB 2914 is sponsored by Committee on Governmental Organization.
What is the current status of AB 2914?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced March 17, 2016. Enacted.
Where can I track AB 2914?
Track AB 2914 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 2914

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.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 2914

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →