Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

California Proposition 5, the Tribal-State Gaming Compacts Initiative (1998)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
California Proposition 5
Flag of California.png
Election date
November 3, 1998
Topic
Gambling
Status
Approveda Approved
Type
State statute
Origin
Citizens

California Proposition 5 was on the ballot as an initiated state statute in California on November 3, 1998. It was approved.

A "yes" vote supported allowing gaming compacts to be formed between the state and Indian tribes; authorizing gambling devices at tribal casinos; and establishing contributions to trust funds for nongaming tribes, statewide emergency medical care programs, and programs benefiting communities near tribes.

A "no" vote opposed this initiative, thereby maintaining existing gambling activities on tribal lands.


Election results

California Proposition 5

Result Votes Percentage

Approved Yes

5,092,446 62.38%
No 3,071,422 37.62%
Results are officially certified.
Source

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Proposition 5 was as follows:

Tribal-State Gaming Compacts. Tribal Casinos. Initiative Statute.


Ballot summary

The ballot summary for this measure was:

  • Specifies terms and conditions of mandatory compact between state and Indian tribes for gambling on tribal land.
  • Mandates Governor to sign compact upon request by tribe. Permits alternative compacts only if consistent with prescribed compact.
  • Permits gambling devices and lotteries at tribal casinos.
  • Amends California law to allow slot machines and banked card games at tribal casinos.
  • Provides for contributions to trust funds benefiting nongaming tribes, statewide emergency medical care programs, and programs benefiting communities near tribes, if tribes retain monopoly on authorized gambling.
  • Provides for reimbursement of state regulatory costs.

Full Text

The full text of this measure is available here.


Fiscal impact

The California Legislative Analyst's Office provided the following estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact for Proposition 5:[1]

  • Uncertain impact on state and local revenues, depending on the extent of expansion of gambling on Indian lands in California and the amount of gambling diverted from outside the state.
  • Fiscal effect could range from little impact on revenues to significant annual increases.[2]

Support

Supporters

  • Daniel Tucker, Californians for Indians Self-Reliance[1]
  • Mary Ann Andreas, Morongo Band of Mission Indians[1]
  • David Edwards, Tyme-Maidu Tribe[1]

Official arguments

The official arguments in support of Proposition 5 can be found here.

Opposition

Opponents

  • Griselda Barajas[1]
  • Jack Gribbon, AFL-CIO[1]
  • Sheriff Glen Craig[1]

Official arguments

The official arguments in opposition to Proposition 5 can be found here.

Path to the ballot

In California, the number of signatures required for an initiated state statute is equal to 5 percent of the votes cast at the preceding gubernatorial election. For initiated statutes filed in 1998, at least 433,269 valid signatures were required.[1]


See also


External links

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 University of California, "Voter Guide," accessed May 7, 2021
  2. Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.