^[PDF] Proposition 26: Allows In-Person Roulette, Dice Games, Sports Wagering on Tribal Lands. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.

L E G I S L AT I V E A N A LY S T ’ S O F F I C E 5 (Continued) Allows Additional Gambling at Tribal Casinos „ Changes the California Constitution to allow roulette and games played with dice at tribal casinos, if tribal-state compacts are changed to allow them to do so.
https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/crimjust/2022/Proposition-26-081022.pdf

^[PDF] Proposition 27: Allows Online and Mobile Sports Wagering Outside Tribal Lands. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.

Each year, tribes pay around $150 million to tribes that do not operate casinos or have less than 350 machines, $65 million to support state regulatory and problem gaming costs, and tens of millions of dollars to local governments.
https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/crimjust/2022/Prop-27-081022.pdf

Gaming. [Ballot]

Dec 18, 2023 - The measure ’s fiscal impact would also depend on the number of tribes that offer sports wagering and the mechanisms they use to do so, as well as the extent to which members of the public cho ose to participate in sports wagering.
https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Initiative/2023-030

Online sports wagering. [Ballot]

Oct 20, 2021 - The fiscal effects described below only concern this measure and do not reflect the implementation of any other gaming measures. Increased State Revenues. The measure would result in increased revenues to the state from online sports wagering-related taxes, licensing fees, and penalties.
https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Initiative/2021-017

California gaming activities. [Ballot]

Oct 1, 2021 - For example, new economic activity could be generated by individuals from out of state visiting gaming facilities to place sports wagers and spending more in the state as a result. Local governments could also receiv e additional revenues from the newly authorized cardroom gaming activities.
https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Initiative/2021-009

Tribal gaming. [Ballot]

Dec 27, 2021 - The measure would increase workload for state agencies (predominantly CGCC and DOJ) to implement and regulate sports wagering. The magnitude of the increase would depend primarily on how sports wagering is implemented (such as the total number of tribes offering sports wagering and how they choose to do so) and regulated.
https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Initiative/2021-039

Sports wagering. [Ballot]

Dec 18, 2023 - If any new or amended compacts with tribes seeking to offer sports wagering are authorized, the measure requires these compacts to include certain sports wagering regulations. At minimum, these regulations must limit wagering to (1) bets made by people age of 21 and older; (2) professional or college sporting events that do not
https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Initiative/2023-031

^[PDF] California gaming activities.

The fiscal effects described below only concern this measure and do not reflect the implementation of any other conflicting gaming measures. Increased State Revenues. The measure would result in increased revenues to the state from sports wagering taxes and payments deposited into the CSWF.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2021/210468.pdf

Proposed constitutional initiative related to gaming activities. [Ballot]

Aug 1, 2018 - Specifically, it is unclear what types of businesses would be eligible to provide expanded gaming activities, how businesses would b e licensed, and whether state and local governments would receive a portion of gaming revenue from new gaming activities (as certain other states currently do in regards to sports wagering).
https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Initiative/2018-003

^[PDF] Overview of Gambling in California

Authorization of Sports Betting. The Federal Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PAPSA) of 1992 was previously interpreted to prohibit most state and local governments from authorizing wagering on nearly all sports.
https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/crimjust/2019/Gambling-Overview-022619.pdf