Yes... I’m sure.
There are two CON committees:
• TRIBES FOR FAIR PLAY, NO ON 94, 95, 96, AND 97 (all contributions from Pala/Auburn, totalling $18 million)
- and
• CALIFORNIANS AGAINST UNFAIR DEALS; NO ON 94, 95, 96, 97, A COALITION OF TRIBES FOR FAIR PLAY, BAY MEADOWS AND HOLLYWOOD PARK RACETRACKS, LABOR, TAXPAYERS, EDUCATORS, PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICIALS
The contributions on the latter (totalling $26 million) include $16 million from the TRIBES FOR FAIR PLAY, NO ON 94, 95, 96, AND 97. Hence, to get the total amount spent, I couldn’t add $26 million and $18 million or I would double-count the $16 million. So, I took the $26 million and added $2 million (the difference between the total $18 million and the $16 million contributions to the other campaign).
I also looked at the expenditures and it shows the $16 million going to the other campaign account. The remaining $2 million was spent on signature gathering and such.
As to Pala and Auburn, they aren’t non-gambling concerns. They are just not one of the elite-four tribes that got these special compact deals. They have gambling compacts with the state with less favorable terms.
Thank you.
You are still opposed? Is that correct? I believe it is, but I want to make sure.