California Proposition 48, Referendum on Indian Gaming Compacts (2014)

From Ballotpedia
Revision as of 09:29, 5 August 2014 by RyanB (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search


Proposition 48
Flag of California.png
Click here for the latest news on U.S. ballot measures
Quick stats
Type:Veto referendum
Topic:Gambling
Status:On the ballot

California Proposition 48, the Referendum to Overturn Indian Gaming Compacts, is on the November 4, 2014 ballot in California as a veto referendum.

If the measure is approved by the state's voters, it will:

  • Ratify AB 277 (Ch. 51, Stats. 2013);
  • Ratify two gaming compacts between California and, respectively, the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians, and the Wiyot Tribe;
  • Exempt execution of the compacts, certain projects, and intergovernmental agreements from the California Environmental Quality Act.

This measure is a veto referendum; this means that a "yes" vote is a vote to uphold or ratify the contested legislation (AB 277) that was enacted by the California State Legislature while a "no" vote is a vote to overturn AB 277.

Text of measure

See also: Ballot titles, summaries and fiscal statements for California's 2014 ballot propositions

Ballot title:

Indian Gaming Compacts. Referendum.

Official summary:

"A “Yes” vote approves, and a “No” vote rejects, tribal gaming compacts between the state and the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians and the Wiyot Tribe. Fiscal Impact: One-time payments ($16 million to $35 million) and for 20 years annual payments ($10 million) from Indian tribes to state and local governments to address costs related to the operation of a new casino."

Support for the referendum

Note: Supporters of the referendum are campaigning for a "no" vote.

The organization leading the campaign in support of the referendum is Stand Up for California.[1]

Donors

Total campaign cash Campaign Finance Ballotpedia.png
as of July 1, 2014
Category:Ballot measure endorsements Support: $3,074,358
Circle thumbs down.png Opposition: $0

The following are the donors to the campaign fighting against AB 277 and for the referendum as of July 1, 2014:[2]

Donor Amount
Table Mountain Rancheria $1,528,099
Brigade Capital Management, LLC and Affiliated Entities $1,166,769
Riva Ridge Recovery Fund, LLC $226,232
DG Capital Management, LLC and Affiliated Entities $113,258
Chukchansi Economic Development Authority $25,000
Club One Casino, Inc. $15,000

Lawsuits

See also: List of ballot measure lawsuits in 2014

In March 2013, the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians filed a lawsuit in the Madera County Superior Court challenging the veto referendum. The petitioners are putting forward two legal arguments against the measure: (1) AB 277 is final because federal law allows tribes to own and operate casinos, as long as state law does not prohibit casino gambling. However, a compact, like AB 277, must be signed by the Governor and approved by the US Secretary of the Interior. Thus, they argue, a ratified compact can not be challenged via veto referendum because the compact has been approved by the federal government pursuant to federal law; (2) A contract between a state and a tribe may not be subject to the initiative and referendum process.[3]

Path to the ballot

See also: Signature requirements for ballot measures in California

Cost of signatures

The Keep Vegas-Style Casinos Out of Neighborhoods, a Project of Stand Up for California campaign committee paid money to vendors to elect signatures to qualify the referendum for the ballot.

The cumulative expenditure on signatures was $2,030,422.60. This amounted to a per-required-signature cost of $4.02.

$1,882,387.20 went to Arno Political Consultants. $148,035.40 went to The Monaco Group.

See also: California ballot initiative petition signature costs

External links

BP-Initials-UPDATED.png
Suggest a link

Basic information

Support

References


Flag of California.png

This article about a California ballot proposition is a stub. You can help people learn about California's ballot propositions by expanding it.