CaliforniaHorse racing: satellite wagering facilities: authorizations.
What it does
(1) The Horse Racing Law prohibits a satellite wagering facility, except a facility that is located at a track where live racing is conducted, from being located within 20 miles of any existing satellite wagering facility or of any track where a racing association conducts a live racing meeting, except, in the northern zone, the racing association or existing satellite wagering facility is authorized to waive this prohibition and consent to locating the new satellite wagering facility within 20 miles of the facility or track.
More detail
This bill would expand that exception to the entire state.
(2) The Horse Racing Law requires, before a satellite wagering facility may be licensed for the 1997 and subsequent calendar years, the department to conduct a one-year test at the proposed site in order to determine the impact of the proposed facility on total state parimutuel revenues and on attendance and wagering at existing racetracks and fair satellite wagering facilities in the Counties of Alameda, San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Solano.
This bill would delete that requirement.
(3) The Horse Racing Law authorizes fairs to contract for the operation and management of a satellite wagering facility with an individual racing association or a partnership, joint venture, or other affiliation of 2 or more racing associations or fairs that are licensed to conduct thoroughbred meetings or simulcast wagering within the northern zone.
This bill would expand that authorization for fairs to contract, as specified above, for thoroughbred meetings or simulcast wagering within the state.
Where do you stand?
Choose your position
Tell your reps
Take a position to see your representatives and ways to contact them.
Where it stands
- Introduced
- Passed Assembly
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Looking ahead
No hearings or votes scheduled.
History
- 2026
- Aug 30Ordered to inactive file at the request of Senator Caballero.Latest
- Aug 6Ordered to third reading.Minor
- Aug 6From Consent Calendar.
- Aug 4Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar.Minor
- Aug 3From committee: Be ordered to second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8 and ordered to Consent Calendar.Minor
- Jun 23From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 14. Noes 0.) (June 23). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.Minor
- Vote recorded Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with the recommendation: To Consent Calendar. Result: pass.Upper
- May 13Referred to Com. on G.O.Minor
- May 5In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.Minor
- May 4Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 73. Noes 0. Page 4917.)Passed Assembly
- Vote recorded AB 2536 Blanca Rubio Consent Calendar Second Day. Result: pass.Lower
- Apr 23Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar.Minor
- Apr 22From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 13. Noes 0.) (April 22).Minor
- Vote recorded Do pass. To Consent Calendar. Result: pass.Lower
- Apr 9From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 22. Noes 0.) (April 8). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.Minor
- Apr 8
- Vote recorded Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. Result: pass.Lower
- Apr 6Re-referred to Com. on G.O.Minor
- Mar 27From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on G.O. Read second time and amended.Major
- Mar 9Referred to Com. on G.O.Minor
- Feb 21From printer. May be heard in committee March 23.
- Feb 20Read first time. To print.Introduced