Gambling policy.
Summary
The Gambling Control Act provides for the licensure and regulation of various legalized gambling activities and establishments by the California Gambling Control Commission and the investigation and enforcement of those activities and establishments by the Department of Justice. Existing law requires the commission to establish and appoint a Gaming Policy Advisory Committee of 10 members. Existing law requires the committee to be composed of representatives of controlled gambling licensees and members of the general public in equal numbers. Existing law requires the committee to be convened to discuss matters of controlled gambling regulatory policy and any other relevant gambling-related issue. This bill would instead provide that the commission shall appoint 5 representatives of controlled gambling licensees and 5 members of the general public to the committee. The bill would also provide that the Senate Committee on Rules and the Speaker of the Assembly shall each appoint one additional person employed by the Legislature to serve as ex officio members of the committee. The bill would include, among the issues that may be discussed by the committee, the extent to which the regulation of permitted games, game procedures, and gambling expansion impedes the economic growth of the gambling sector in California, the impact of those regulations on state and local tax and fee proceeds, and the impact of new technologies on gambling. Existing law requires the commission to investigate the consequences, benefits, and disadvantages of imposing a state tax on revenue generated by gambling establishments and the regulation of advertising for the purpose of limiting exposure of children to materials promoting gambling. Existing law requires the commission to report its findings on these matters to the Legislature and the Governor, as specified. This bill would repeal these provisions. Existing law authorizes the commission to adopt regulations for the administration and enforcement of the act. Existing law requires that, to the extent appropriate, regulations of the commission and the department take into consideration the operational differences of large and small establishments. This bill would additionally require the consideration of any fiscal and economic impact that may result from these provisions.
Bill status
failed
3 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2013
Committee Review
Jan 2014
Senate Passage
Jan 2014
Assembly Passage
Governor
Introduced Feb 22, 2013
Last action Nov 30, 2014
Floor votes · Senate Jan 27, 2014
How they voted
28–0
Passed · 6 other
Total votes 34
Jan 27, 2014
D
Democratic25
84% Yea
R
Republican9
77% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
15
Key actions
4
Committee
4
Jan 27, 2014
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (28-0-6)
senate
Jan 21, 2014
Upper · Passed
From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.
upper
Jan 14, 2014
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 2590.) (January 14). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jan 6, 2014
Upper · Passed
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on G.O.
upper
Mar 11, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on G.O.
upper
Feb 22, 2013
Introduced
Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Leland Yee
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 601
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 601. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline