BILL ANALYSIS
SB 357
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 357 (Ducheny)
As Amended April 1, 2009
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :35-0
GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION 17-0 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Coto, Anderson, Chesbro, |Ayes:|De Leon, Conway, Ammiano, |
| |Cook, | | |
| |De Leon, Evans, Hall, | |Charles Calderon, Coto, |
| |Hill, Jeffries, Lieu, | |Davis, |
| |Mendoza, Nestande, | |Fuentes, Hall, Harkey, |
| |V. Manuel Perez, | |Miller, |
| |Portantino, Silva, | |Nielsen, John A. Perez, |
| |Torrico, Tran | |Skinner, |
| | | |Solorio, Audra |
| | | |Strickland, Torlakson, |
| | | |Hill |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Extends the sunset date from January 1, 2010 to January 1,
2021, on the law which specifies how the Indian Gaming Special
Distribution Fund (SDF) local mitigation grants monies are
distributed.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Creates, in the State Treasury, the SDF for the receipt and
deposit of moneys by the state from certain Indian tribes pursuant
to the terms of gaming compacts entered into with the state.
2)Authorizes moneys in the SDF to be used for the following:
a) Grants for programs designed to address problem gambling;
b) Grants for the support of state and local government
agencies impacted by tribal government gaming;
c) Compensation for regulatory costs incurred by the California
Gambling Control Commission (CGCC) and the California
SB 357
Page 2
Department of Justice (DOJ) in the implementation and
administration of compacts;
d) Payment of shortfalls that may occur in the Indian Gaming
Revenue Sharing Trust Fund (RSTF). This shall be the priority
use of monies in the SDF;
e) Disbursements for the purpose of implementing the terms of
tribal labor agreements promulgated in accordance with the
terms of the 1999 compacts; and,
f) Any other purpose as specified by law.
3)Provides that the priority for funding from the SDF is in the
following descending order:
a) To make payments for any shortfalls that may occur in the
RSTF;
b) Grants for programs designed to address gambling addiction;
c) Compensation to the CGCC and DOJ for regulatory functions
that directly relates to Indian gaming; and,
d) Grants for the support of local government agencies impacted
by Indian gaming.
4)Requires the Department of Finance, in consultation with the CGCC,
to calculate the total revenue in the SDF that will be available
for the budget year for those local government agencies who were
impacted by Indian gaming. Requires this information to be
included in the May Budget revision.
5)Establishes, until January 1, 2010, the methodology for the
allocation of SDF monies to local governments that have Indian
gaming in its jurisdiction. Authorizes eligible local governments
to establish Benefit Committees to award SDF monies to fund grant
projects pursuant to specified criteria.
6)Requires each county that administers grants from the SDF to
provide an annual report to the chairs of the Joint Legislative
Budget Committee, the Assembly and Senate Committees on
Governmental Organization, and the CGCC by October 1 of each year
detailing the specific projects funded by all projects funded by
SB 357
Page 3
all grants in its jurisdictions. Counties that do not provide the
annual report to the Legislature and the CGCC are ruled ineligible
to receive funding from the SDF for the following year.
7)Requires the State Auditor to conduct an audit every three years
and reports its findings to the Legislature regarding all
allocation and use of SDF grant monies.
8)Authorizes and requires the CGCC to collect and account for all
SDF contributions under the tribal gaming compacts [Executive
Order D-66-03].
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:
1)The 2009-10 Budget does not include any funding for local
mitigation grants. Continuing the local government grant formula
in state law would create significant pressure in 2009-10 and
2010-11 on the SDF and in 2011-12 the GF, likely in the range of
$30 million per year.
2)Assuming the $30 million in annual mitigation grants for local
governments resume due to the extension of this statute and the
SDF continues to be used to fund the $50 million annual RSTF
shortfall, estimates suggest that the state will use up all of the
SDF surplus in 2010-11 and will have a shortfall of approximately
$60 million in 2011-12. Under the 2007 compact amendments, the
state is now obligated to cover the RSTF annual shortfall if the
SDF cannot.
COMMENTS : This bill seeks to extend the sunset on the Indian Gaming
Special Distribution Fund local government grant statute from
January 1, 2010, to January 1, 2021. This extension ensures that
the grant allocation statute will be available for the remaining
life of the 1999 compacts.
Analysis Prepared by : Rod Brewer / G. O. / (916) 319-2531
FN: 0002604