Should the tribal gaming compacts negotiated by Governor Brown with the North Fork and Wiyot Tribes and ratified by legislative statute be allowed to go into effect?
A "Yes" vote approves, and a "No" vote rejects, a statute that:
- Ratifies tribal gaming compacts between the state and the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians
and the Wiyot Tribe.
- Omits certain projects related to executing the compacts or amendments to the compacts from
scope of the California Environmental Quality Act.
- One-time payments between $16
million and $35
million from the North Fork tribe to local
governments in the Madera County area to address costs related to the operation of a new casino.
- Annual payments over a 20-year period averaging around $10
million from the North Fork tribe
to the state and local governments in the Madera County area to address costs related to the
operation of a new casino.
- Increased revenue from economic growth in the Madera County area generally offset by revenue
losses from decreased economic activity in surrounding areas.
- A YES vote on this measure means:
state's compacts with the
North Fork Rancheria of
Mono Indians and the Wiyot
Tribe would go into effect. As
a result, North Fork would be
able to construct and operate a
new casino in Madera County
and would be required to make
various payments to state and
local governments, Wiyot, and
- A NO vote on this measure means:
state's compacts with North
Fork and Wiyot would not go
into effect. As a result, neither
tribe could begin gaming unless
new compacts were approved
by the state and federal
- Summary of Arguments FOR Proposition 48:
- Supported by
BROWN, a YES vote on 48
will create THOUSANDS OF
JOBS, generate ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITIES in one
of the state's poorest regions,
retain LOCAL CONTROL
of a strongly-supported
project, provide REVENUE
TO STATE and LOCAL
tribal self-sufficiency, and avoid
development in environmentally
- Summary of Arguments AGAINST Proposition 48:
- Opens floodgate for off-
reservation gaming. Bad
deal for California.
promise that Indian casinos
would be on original tribal
land. Authorizes massive off-
reservation casino bringing
more crime and pollution to
Central Valley. No new money
to the state general fund or
schools. Vote NO on Prop. 48.
- Contact FOR Proposition 48:
- Gary Gilbert, Former Chairman, Madera County Board of Supervisors
Vote Yes 48 Campaign
P.O. Box 155
Oakhurst, CA 93644
- Contact AGAINST Proposition 48:
- No on Prop. 48--Keep
Vegas-Style Casinos Out of
Secretary of State
Campaign Finance Data
- Funding Summary for Prop 48
- the most complete information: everything on this page plus funding, news articles, endorsements, ads. From MapLight and the Smart Voter team of LWV California Education Fund
- Details of committee campaign finance filings submitted to the Secretary of State.
League of Women Voters
Pros & Cons: Santa Clara County
Pros & Cons: Alameda County
News and Analysis
- Oct. 27, 7:00 to 9:00 pm, Fremont Main Library, 2400 Stevenson Blvd., Fremont
KQED News Election Watch
- San Diego U-T
- San Diego tribes keep close eye on Prop. 48
Links to sources outside of Smart Voter are provided for information only and do not imply endorsement.
This election is archived. Any links to sources outside of Smart Voter may no longer be active. No further links will be added to this page.