If there’s a word to describe the process of legalizing California sports betting, it’s this: frustrating. That has been evident once again in events taking place this week.
On Tuesday, a report indicated tribal gaming leaders and national operators were in agreement about a potential framework for California sports betting. That stemmed from a roundtable discussion organized by the Sports Betting Alliance during the Indian Gaming Tradeshow and Convention this week in San Diego. One day later, two tribal groups issued a statement saying they were “offended” a reporter was invited to what they assumed to be a “private roundtable discussion among tribal leaders regarding this controversial issue.”
In the end, what this means is the odds for California voters deciding whether to legalize sports betting as part of next year’s election, which is exactly 19 months away from today, remain long.
What Happened
According to an article from CasinoReports.com, members of the Sports Betting Alliance pitched a concept where its members—BetMGM, DraftKings, Fanatics and FanDuel—would compete against each other but share revenue with each of the more than 100 federally recognized tribes in the state. Later, the news site reported that the market could include other operators across California betting apps.
The article also noted that James Siva, chairman of the California Nations Indian Gaming Association, said tribal leaders have considered a similar framework. That’s not to say CNIGA is ready to jump on board. Still, if the entities whose members spent hundreds of millions of dollars three years ago in what was a futile campaign are at least considering the same type of plan, then that means we’re closer to seeing the sides work as colleagues toward a common plan.
Right?
Two Sides To The Story
Well, roughly 24 hours later, CNIGA and the Tribal Alliance of Sovereign Indian Nations issued their two-paragraph statement indicating that the sides reaching an agreement was “simply false” and accusing the SBA of “a breach of trust” on the issue.
“Further discussions among tribal governments are expected to take place in the coming weeks and months,” the statement concluded. “Let there be no false illusion: establishing an acceptable framework and governance model will take time. This is a complex matter that involves navigating federal, state and tribal laws, which requires thorough debate and careful resolution.”
In between the article and statement, Victor Rocha, the editor of Pechanga.net and the IGA’s conference chair, posted on X Tuesday that the concept is “DOA” after speaking with a few California tribal leaders.
In response to the CNIGA statement, Casino Reports posted one on its site saying it stands by its reporting and that the meeting was open for coverage.
The Issue
California’s tribes are the dominant gaming operators in the state. There are 109 federally recognized tribes in the state, and more than 60 have casinos, which provide a critical revenue stream for those sovereign entities and their members. That’s why they want not just to be involved but also to be in control of sports betting. But how do you equitably divide sports betting revenue, especially with that large of a group?
Facts To Know
There have been a couple well-documented facts that have emerged in the seven years since the U.S. Supreme Court opened the doors for all states to legalize and regulate sports betting.
First, there have been clear winners in the early stages of expanded sports betting. FanDuel and DraftKings have parlayed their fantasy sports backgrounds to become the top two online sports betting operators across the country. It’s estimated they control about 75% to 80% of the market in the 38 states that allow sports betting. Behind them are a pack of operators vying for most of the remaining 20% to 25%, which would include BetMGM CA and Fanatics, bet365, Caesars Sportsbook and ESPN BET.
Second, because there have been so few winners on the sports betting side, it’s also meant there have been few winners on the gaming side, too. In most cases, states have required sportsbooks to partner with an in-state casino or other establishment in order to get a license.
That’s what makes what the SBA proposed and CNIGA said it has considered unique. It wouldn’t be one nation aligning with FanDuel, one partnering with DraftKings and the rest fighting for scraps. If successfully implemented, it could provide a framework for other states with significant tribal gaming operations, such as Minnesota and Oklahoma, to legalize sports betting as well.
However, even members of the SBA’s Tribal Advisory Board admit that consensus will take time. Jeff Grubbs, the former chairman of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, said “a final agreement” between all parties “remains a long way off” and that nothing will move forward “without the full support and leadership of tribal nations.”
Why This Matters Now
If California voters wouldn’t get to decide for another year and a half, then what’s with all the fretting now?
There’s not as much time as one might think for the sides to reach an agreement since the proposal will likely require registered voters to sign petitions.
According to the California Secretary of State’s office, which oversees the process, those petitions would need to be submitted to county election officials by April 17, 2026—just 54 weeks away. Before that, the California Attorney General’s office will need to prepare petitions and have a fiscal impact statement ready by Oct. 17, a little more than six months from now.
So, an agreement really needs to be in place by the time many expect the Los Angeles Dodgers to play in MLB postseason games this fall. Any delays in that would likely push the ballot measure to 2028.
Missed Opportunity?
Let’s be frank – sports betting is alive and well in California. It’s just that neither the state nor tribal nations are benefitting from it. Federal authorities have investigated and charged individuals with running illegal gambling operations that have involved millions of dollars. What the feds have stopped, though, may just be the tip of the iceberg.
On top of the illegal gambling rings, several offshore operators still take wagers from residents in the state. Then, there’s the rise of sweepstakes operators, which argue their sportsbooks are legal.
However, several of those companies face lawsuits in California and other states seeking to shut them down.
At the same time, companies like Kalshi have started offering sports markets through their federally regulated online exchanges. Kalshi and similar operators have also been cited by regulators in four states requesting it take down its sports markets. Kalshi has responded by filing two federal lawsuits, and more may be coming as they seek to disrupt how sports betting has operated under state-by-state oversight.
What all this means is that while California tribes and commercial sports betting operators wait for an agreement to be reached, they could very easily see their window of opportunity close on them before they can act.
BetCalifornia.com will continue to monitor the developments in the state on sports betting.
