California Gambling Control Commission and Department of Justice: postemployment restrictions.
Summary
Existing law, the Gambling Control Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of various legalized gambling activities and establishments by the California Gambling Control Commission and the investigation and enforcement of those activities and establishments by the Department of Justice. The act specifies qualifications for eligibility as a member of the commission and provides that a person is ineligible for appointment if, within 2 years prior to appointment, the person was employed by, retained by, or derived substantial income from, a gambling establishment. The act prohibits a member of the commission, the executive director, the chief, and any employee of the commission or department designated by regulation, for a period of 3 years after leaving office or terminating employment, for compensation, from acting as agent or attorney for any other person before the commission or the department if the appearance or communication is for the purpose of influencing administrative action, as specified. A person who willfully violates any provision of the act for which a penalty is not expressly provided is guilty of a misdemeanor. This bill would additionally prohibit a member of the commission, the executive director, the chief, any employee of the commission, and any employee of the department who works on or supervises over gambling issues for a period of 2 years after leaving office or terminating employment, from holding a direct or indirect interest in, holding employment with, representing, appearing for, or negotiating on behalf of, a gambling establishment, gambling enterprise, registrant, or licensee. By creating a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2017
Committee Review
Jul 2017
Senate Passage
May 2017
Assembly Passage
Aug 2017
Signed into Law
Sep 2017
Introduced Feb 17, 2017
Signed Sep 11, 2017
Floor votes · Assembly Aug 24, 2017
How they voted
70–0
Passed · 3 other
Total votes 73
Aug 24, 2017
D
Democratic51
96% Yea
I
Independent1
100% Yea
R
Republican21
95% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
26
Key actions
7
Committee
8
Sep 11, 2017
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Aug 24, 2017
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (70-0-3)
assembly
Jul 19, 2017
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. Ordered to consent calendar. (Ayes 16. Noes 0.) (July 19).
lower
Jul 6, 2017
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 21. Noes 0.) (July 5). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Jun 12, 2017
Committee
Referred to Com. on G.O.
lower
May 8, 2017
Upper · Passed
From committee: Be ordered to second reading pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.
upper
May 3, 2017
Upper · Passed
May 8 hearing postponed by committee.
upper
Apr 25, 2017
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 13. Noes 0. Page 827.) (April 25). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Mar 29, 2017
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on G.O.
upper
Mar 9, 2017
Committee
Referred to Com. on RLS.
upper
Feb 17, 2017
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Andy Vidak
RRepublican
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 666
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 666. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline