Three powerful California tribes Monday submitted a letter to the California attorney general’s office strongly opposing the latest sports betting initiative proposals filed by a group of businessmen. The Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, and Wilton Rancheria wrote that the current proposals are rip-offs of a 2021 tribal proposal, but with two “problematic provisions” that “dramatically impact the effect, purpose, and fiscal impact” of the proposals.
Reeve Collins, Kasey Thompson, and Ryan Taylor Walz submitted the proposals in late October, and the public-comment period closed Monday. If approved by voters, the proposals would bring California mobile wagering and the tribes in the state would maintain their monopoly.
Since the proposals were filed, the tribes have pushed back, saying they don’t need others to tell them how to run their already successful businesses, and that they have a plan to legalize sports betting in America’s biggest state.
That plan does not include — and has not ever included — partnering with commercial operators or interests. It could include working with commercial interests, but as management services providers rather than as operators. In fact, the tribes are so opposed to bringing digital betting to the state through an initiative not of their own making that California Indian Country spent nearly $250 million to kill a proposal on the 2022 ballot brought by seven commercial operators.
Background checks, suitability critical 4m1j40
Thompson, who has spoken to Sports Handle on behalf of his group, says the proposals would benefit Indian Country and has publicly apologized for filing the initiative proposals without tribal . The proposals were drafted in partnership with the Pala Band of Mission Indians, but that tribe’s chairman ultimately stepped away from backing the proposals.
The trio of tribes say the latest proposal “hijacked the Tribal Online & In-Person Sports Wagering Initiative to enable the illegal multi-billion dollar offshore online sports betting industry to monetize and profit from their operations. As a result, our three tribes oppose this measure and believe the voters should be made aware of its true intent.” The initiative referred to was put forth by San Manuel in 2021, but did not get on the ballot.
According to the letter, Thompson’s proposal would “exempt assets sold by illicit offshore online gaming operations to California Tribes” from the stringent background checks and suitability requirements that were part of the original San Manuel proposal in 2021-22. In addition, the Thompson-led proposal would include a ramp-up period during which equipment and operating systems would be “exempt” from independent testing.
“This problematic new language advances the agenda of offshore online gaming operators to exploit and monetize their illicit assets,” tribal leaders wrote. “The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) was enacted, in part, to shield the tribal gaming industry from organized crime and other corrupting influences, to ensure that Indian tribes are the primary beneficiaries of their gaming operations, and to assure that gaming is conducted fairly and honestly. Rigorous regulation and oversight are critical to ensure the integrity and honesty of tribal gaming.”
Thompson told Sports Handle that “I agree with the integrity of tribal gaming and that will be evident in the amendments. There is a gold standard in the U.S. of how companies are licensed in a regulatory environment and we are in full of that.
“The [2021] initiative is considered to be the most inclusive of tribal input and had over 70 of the 109 tribes in . … We agree with the original sponsors [of the 2021 proposal] that this is the ‘gold standard’ to go by. … I am for rigorous regulation and oversight and was personally licensed in multiple states, so know what that process entails.”
Could tribes proposal with changes? 4n735t
The tribal leaders are requesting that these two provisions be part of the summary provided to voters, and at least imply that without them the tribes would the proposal, which was theirs to begin with. They do stop short of saying they would a proposal led by anyone outside of Indian Country, writing that “If California Tribes decide to pursue a measure in a future election cycle to legalize and regulate sports wagering, the Tribal Online & In-Person Sports Wagering Initiative serves as a good starting point for tribal leaders to consider. Changes would be necessary as the legal landscape has changed, but any changes must continue to ensure the integrity of tribal gaming. … [The current proposals] fulfill none of those requirements.”
The polling numbers for online sports betting in California has always been weak. We told the dummies of the SBA and they didn’t listen. Now, we have Thing 1 & Thing 2 trying to employ the same strategy that just failed so spectacularly. https://t.co/DIoPSr1m
— Victor Rocha (@VictorRocha1) November 28, 2023
In 2021, when commercial operators, including tribes said it wasn’t enough and, instead of standing with the operators, chose to oppose them.
Thompson previously told Sports Handle that he expects amendments to this latest proposal to be filed by or ahead of the Friday deadline to do so. But if history is an indicator, tribal input may not result in tribal . Thompson also said that his group would not move unless it had the backing of the “majority” of Indian Country.
