BILL ANALYSIS
Bill No: SB
1483
SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
Senator Roderick D. Wright, Chair
2009-2010 Regular Session
Staff Analysis
SB 1483 Author: Committee on Governmental Organization
As Introduced: March 8, 2010
Hearing Date: April 27, 2010
Consultant: Chris Lindstrom
SUBJECT
Indian gaming.
DESCRIPTION
SB 1483 clarifies references in the Government Code
relative to the definition of "eligible recipient Indian
tribes".
Specifically, the bill:
1)Strikes reference to "Section 4.3.2(a)(i)" of the 1999
Model Tribal-State Gaming Compacts (compacts) that
defines the term, "noncompact tribe".
2)Replaces the stricken language with the actual definition
of noncompact tribe found in all compacts.
3)Makes other technical and conforming changes.
EXISTING LAW
Existing law creates the Indian Gaming Special Distribution
Fund (SDF) in the State Treasury for the deposit of monies
from specified gaming tribes pursuant to the terms of the
1999 tribal-state gaming compacts. A portion of the monies
from the SDF are available for appropriation by the
Legislature, on a quarterly basis, for the backfill of
shortfalls in the RSTF. Specifies that the first priority
SB 1483 (Committee on Governmental Organization)
continuedPage 2
use of SDF monies is the backfill of shortfalls in the
RSTF.
Existing law creates the RSTF within the State Treasury for
the deposit of monies from tribal-state gaming compacts for
the purpose of making distributions to non-compact and
non-gaming tribes, as specified.
Requires the California Gambling Control Commission to
determine the aggregate amount of shortfalls in RSTF and to
provide certain legislative committees an estimate of the
amount needed to backfill that fund such that each eligible
recipient tribe will receive $1.1 million for the fiscal
year.
BACKGROUND
Purpose of the bill . SB 1483 is a technical clean-up
measure that corrects references to "eligible recipient
Indian tribes" in existing law [Government Code Section
12012.90].
Background . Noncompact tribes are defined in Tribal-State
Gaming Compacts as "federally-recognized Indian tribes that
operate fewer than 350 gaming devices". Noncompact tribes
are eligible for distributions of $1.1 million a year from
the RSTF.
In the 1999 model compacts negotiated by the Davis
administration, the definition of "noncompact tribes" is
found in compact Section 4.3.2(a)(i). In newer compacts
concluded and ratified under the Schwarzenegger
administration, the definition of "noncompact tribes" is
located in other compact sections, such as Section 5.1(c)
of the Coyote Valley Compact and the Fort Mojave Indian
Tribe Compact, among others.
To eliminate any ambiguity in the law [Government Code
Section 12012.90], SB 1483 replaces the reference to
"eligible recipient Indian tribes" defined in "Compact
Section 4.3.2(a)(i)" with the actual definition of
"eligible recipient Indian tribes" common to all compacts,
namely, "federally-recognized Indian tribes that operate
fewer than 350 gaming devices."
PRIOR/RELATED LEGISLATION
SB 1483 (Committee on Governmental Organization)
continuedPage 3
AB 1740 (Governmental Organization), 2007-2008 Legislative
Session . Clarifies references in the Government Code
related to "eligible recipient Indian tribes" as it relates
to the distribution of RSTF monies. (Died on the Assembly
Inactive File.)
AB 1750 (Governmental Organization), Chapter 720, Statutes
of 2005 . Authorizes the quarterly backfill of the
shortfall to RSTF. Specifies that an "eligible recipient
Indian tribe" means a noncompact tribe, as defined in
Section 4.3.2(a)(i) of the tribal-state gaming compacts.
AB 673 (Horton, Jerome) Chapter 210, Statutes of 2003.
Among its provisions, the measure provided for the
allocation of funds from the Indian Gaming Special
Distribution Fund, for the purpose of backfilling
shortfalls in the Indian Gaming Revenue Sharing Trust Fund,
and for problem gambling prevention as well.
AB 1385 (Battin), Chapter 874, Statutes of 1999 . Creates
the SDF and the RSTF in the State Treasury, as specified.
SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : None on file as of April 23, 2010.
FISCAL COMMITTEE: No.
**********