A New Voice in the Debate
In a formal letter to Senate Appropriations Chair Anna Caballero, Sherwood Valley leaders criticized the bill’s rapid progress and lack of consultation with smaller tribes. They argued that AB 831 reflects the interests of large, casino-operating tribes while ignoring the perspectives of communities that do not benefit from resort-style gaming.
“AB 831 is moving too fast and does not reflect the voice of all California tribes,” the letter stated, calling on lawmakers to pause and engage in broader dialogue.
Economic Survival at Stake
For Sherwood Valley, sweepstakes-style platforms are more than entertainment. Leaders describe them as one of the few scalable economic opportunities available to rural tribes struggling with high poverty rates, overcrowded housing, and scarce employment.
Secretary Buffey W. Bourassa outlined the community’s challenges, noting that residents often travel long distances for work and that basic needs remain unmet. According to tribal estimates, roughly 92 percent of rural tribal households experience food insecurity, compared with a national average of 14 percent.
In this context, digital revenue streams are seen as essential to sustaining programs for housing, healthcare, and nutrition. Sherwood Valley leaders warn that AB 831 would eliminate one of the only viable economic pathways available to them.
A Fractured Tribal Front
AB 831 initially appeared to enjoy unanimous tribal support, with major organizations such as the California Nations Indian Gaming Association (CNIGA) and the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation backing the measure. That image of unity is now fading.
Sherwood Valley joins the Kletsel Dehe Wintun Nation and Big Lagoon Rancheria in opposing the bill, creating an increasingly visible divide between larger, casino-operating tribes and smaller rural communities. The split raises questions over who speaks for tribal interests in California’s fast-changing gaming policy landscape.
Industry Pushback Gains Momentum
Opposition is not limited to tribes. The Social & Promotional Games Association (SPGA) has criticized AB 831 as a “fast-tracked” and “undercooked” bill, warning that a blanket prohibition could undermine local jobs, advertising partnerships, and digital engagement.
The Social Gaming Leadership Alliance (SGLA) has also weighed in, arguing that California could lose millions in potential tax and licensing revenue if sweepstakes platforms are banned outright. Their message to lawmakers is clear: “Regulate, don’t eliminate.”
What Comes Next
AB 831 has already advanced through the Assembly and cleared key Senate committees, but the growing opposition has introduced new uncertainty. The bill now heads to the Senate floor, where it needs 21 votes to pass.
Lawmakers face three options: amend the bill to address tribal and industry concerns, delay it for broader consultation, or push ahead despite the risks of backlash.
Whatever the outcome, Sherwood Valley’s intervention underscores that AB 831 is not only a legal matter but also a question of economic survival for many small tribes. Their message to Sacramento is that policy decisions must reflect the realities of all communities, not just the most powerful voices.
Blaise Luis
