A California Bureau of Gambling Control hearing Thursday included public comment from elected officials, cardroom owners and employees, and community members who oppose Attorney General Rob Bonta’s plan to ban blackjack and baccarat in cardrooms across the state.
Most of the testimonies focused on the importance of cardrooms and the need to keep them as is.
The potential ban of blackjack at California cardrooms stems from a lawsuit filed by California tribes earlier this year that claimed cardrooms were violating the state constitution.
Ban would be a severe blow to cardrooms
According to a Standard Regulatory Impact Assessment (SRIA) issued by Bonta’s office, his proposed bans would eliminate 50% of jobs and revenue at California cardrooms. That translates to about 12,000 positions and millions in tax revenue for the state.
Big cities such as Sacramento, San Jose, Bay Area, Central Valley Los Angeles County, and San Diego County would be hit the hardest. Juan Garza, executive director of California Cities for Self-Reliance, noted in a release that tax revenue funds “essential services like fire protection, police, parks, and senior programs.”
Hawaiin Gardens Mayor Dandy de Paula said the town southeast of Los Angeles relies heavily on cardrooms.
“We strongly oppose the attorney general introducing unwarranted regulations to games that have been played legally for decades and that will devastate and worst yet potentially bankrupt our city.
“We rely on our cardroom not only to provide high-quality jobs but for the tax revenue generated that makes up over 60% of our city’s general fund. We strongly call on the attorney general to not move forward with these punitive and needless regulations.”
Several people opposed to the ban spoke at the virtual hearing on Thursday; more are expected to testify on Friday.
Tribes’ complaint against cardrooms
The California Gaming Association, which represents the state’s cardrooms, has defended the legality of the blackjack and baccarat games.
The tribes, however, contend that cardrooms are operating against the state constitution.
Third-party bankers are at the core of the tribes’ complaint with cardrooms. Cardrooms pay these contractors to sit in on games and essentially act as the house. The tribes argue that this pits the player-banker against every hand at the table.
Cardrooms generally seek volunteer player-bankers, but they say players typically don’t want that role. Without a player-banker, the games can’t operate.
In the lawsuit, tribes say cardrooms are simply breaking the law.
“But for years, California cardrooms and their partner third-party proposition players have ignored the law and refused to recognize tribes’ exclusive rights. Instead, they have reaped illegal windfalls by offering banked games that are barred by the California Constitution, California Penal Code, and relevant judicial decisions.”
There are 84 licensed cardrooms currently operating in the state.
