BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 441|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 441
Author: Hall (D)
Amended: 3/4/10 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE GOVERNMENTAL ORG. COMMITTEE : 9-0, 6/22/10
AYES: Wright, Harman, Calderon, Denham, Florez, Negrete
McLeod, Padilla, Price, Yee
NO VOTE RECORDED: Oropeza, Wyland
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : Not relevant
SUBJECT : Local gambling
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill modifies provisions of the Gambling
Control Act as it relates to the limit on increases in the
number of gambling tables that a local jurisdiction may
authorize without voter approval.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1. Provides for the licensure and regulation of various
legalized gambling activities and establishments by the
California Gambling Control Commission and the
CONTINUED
AB 441
Page
2
enforcement of those activities by the Department of
Justice (DOJ).
2. Authorizes a local jurisdiction to permit controlled
gambling, consistent with state law, if it has a local
gambling ordinance in effect, as specified.
3. Provides that an amendment of an ordinance permitting an
increase of gambling of less than 25 percent when
compared to that authorized on January 1, 1996 may occur
without voter approval.
4. Authorizes a local jurisdiction to increase that number
referenced in Section 19961 of the Business and
Professions Code by two tables, regardless of whether
that increase would equal or exceed 25 percent of the
number of tables authorized on January 1, 1996.
5. Requires that any amendment to a local jurisdiction
ordinance relating to gambling establishments or the
Gambling Control Act is required to be submitted to DOJ
for review and comment before the ordinance is adopted
by the local jurisdiction.
6. Places a moratorium on the authorization of legal gaming
by a local governing body or local electors and an
expansion of gambling, as defined, until January 1,
2015.
This bill:
1. Deletes an existing provision of the Gambling Control
Act that allows a local jurisdiction to increase the
number of gambling tables by two, regardless of whether
that increase would equal or exceed 25 percent of the
number of tables authorized on January 1, 1996, and,
instead, authorizes a local jurisdiction to amend its
local gaming ordinance, without voter approval, to
permit an increase by two gaming tables that may be
operated in a gambling establishment compared to the
number authorized on January 1, 2010.
2. Makes it explicit that a local jurisdiction may exercise
the authority provided by this section only one time,
AB 441
Page
3
but this authority shall be in addition to any
authorization under any other law for a local
jurisdiction to increase the number of gambling tables
that may be operated.
Comments
According to the author's office, this bill is necessary to
clarify some confusion in the provisions of current law
that allow for adding gaming tables at card clubs. The
existing moratorium prohibits local jurisdictions from
amending ordinances to authorize additional gaming without
voter approval. However, there are exceptions. Currently,
local jurisdictions may allow card clubs to increase the
number of tables in their establishments by 24.99 percent.
If they have 12 or fewer tables, they can authorize an
increase of up to four tables. These are two separate
sections and some have argued that a local jurisdiction is
not restricted from invoking both in order to allow for
such expansion without voter approval.
This bill is intended to clarify that local jurisdictions
can amend the provisions of their ordinances to allow for
such expansion only once. This bill provides that any such
expansion is based on the number of tables authorized as of
January 1, 2010, so as to allow the two-table expansion on
top of any expansion that has been authorized already.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/2/10)
California Gaming Association
Capital Casino Card Club
Lucky Derby Card Club
Lucky Lady Card Club
Village Club
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/2/10)
California Coalition Against Gambling Expansion
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Proponents contend that this bill
AB 441
Page
4
is necessary to correct a problem created by an ambiguous
and poorly drafted law. Two separate sections of law
provide for a modest expansion in the number of tables an
existing card club may put into service and two conflicting
legal opinions on the implementation of those two sections
have left card clubs and local jurisdictions unsure of what
they can and cannot do. Proponents claim that this measure
is designed to bring clarity to the provisions authorizing
local jurisdictions to amend their ordinances for a modest
expansion of existing card clubs. Proponents contend that
this bill will prevent some card clubs from being
considered in violation of current law even though current
law is confusing and conflicting.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Writing in opposition, the
California Coalition Against Gambling Expansion, emphasizes
that, "AB 441 allows for an increase in the number of
allowed tables in cardrooms/clubs without the voters'
consent, as required under current law."
TSM:mw 8/2/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****