California’s leading tribal gaming organization is distancing itself from a document authored by commercial gaming interests pushing support for a sports betting ballot measure, the latest split between the two groups in an ongoing effort to bring legal sportsbooks to the nation’s most populated state.
A Tribal advisory council of The Sports Betting Alliance (SBA), a wagering legalization advocacy organization led by major commercial sportsbooks, has reportedly issued a document looking to galvanize support for a ballot measure to bring sportsbooks to California. The SBA’s pledge would show support for a deal with the commercial sportsbooks.
InGame was the first to report the documents.
"It has come to our attention that recent reports and invitations have circulated regarding the so-called 'YES Pledge' campaign for online sports betting. I want to be clear: CNIGA did not originate this 'pledge,'" reads a statement from CNIGA chairman James Siva.
"While CNIGA fully supports the principles of tribal sovereignty and the right of each Tribal Nation to determine its own path in gaming, this effort appears to be a corporate-driven maneuver that has referenced tribal organizations, including CNIGA, in ways that may cause confusion among tribes, policymakers, and the public."
California sports betting overall
The latest rift between the nation’s major commercial sportsbooks and California gaming tribes comes as both sides have been unable to reach a deal that brings the major operators to the Golden State while maintaining tribal oversight of the process.
DraftKings, FanDuel and several other major commercial sportsbook operators invested tens of millions of dollars in 2022 on a ballot measure campaign to bring statewide mobile wagering independent of the tribes. The tribes fought back with tens of millions on their own campaign on a successful push to defeat the measure; the sportsbook’ proposal earned less than 20% support statewide.
Since the lopsided defeat, the sportsbooks have publicly apologized to California tribes and acknowledged that any California sports betting legalization effort must come with Indian Country’s approval. Several tribal gaming leaders who fought against the sportsbooks’ ballot measure have since been hired by the companies to help bridge the divide.
The two sides have discussed for months ways to bring legal third-party sportsbooks while assuring tribal sovereignty. But the more than 100 California gaming tribes, which have widely different histories, geographic reaches and financial resources, have not reached a deal to bring to the sportsbooks.
While other tribal gaming states with online sportsbook partnerships featuring commercial operators including Arizona, Michigan, and Connecticut have reached one-for-one deals between books and tribes, California’s massive, disparate tribal make up makes similar deals logistically impossible. Any arrangement between commercial sportsbooks and tribal stakeholders will require some sort of revenue sharing arrangement between tribes, further complicating a difficult process.
Even before this week’s conflicting announcements, progress has been slow going. Tribal leaders have said a join ballot measure push with the sportsbooks is highly unlikely for 2026. The contrasting messages reported this week mean such efforts will remain difficult in 2028.
