The 2025-26 Budget

California State Library

Introduction

Post Focuses on the California State Library (State Library). This post first provides background on the State Library. The post then analyzes the Governor’s budget proposals to upgrade the State Library’s cybersecurity system and reinstate a certain fee that helps fund the Witkin State Law Library.

Background

In this section, we provide background on the State Library’s operations and funding, along with describing how local libraries are funded.

State Library Oversees Both State Activities and Local Assistance Programs. The State Library’s main state-level functions are (1) serving as the central library for state government; (2) collecting, preserving, and publicizing state literature and historical items; and (3) providing specialized research services to state agencies. In addition to these state-level activities, the State Library passes through state and federal funds to local libraries for specific purposes. These local assistance programs fund literacy initiatives, internet services, and resource sharing, among other things. The State Library provides oversight and technical support for these local assistance programs.

State Library Relies Primarily on State and Federal Funds. The State Library’s ongoing funding comes primarily from the state General Fund (67 percent) and federal funds (28 percent), with the remainder coming from special funds and reimbursements. For 2025-26, the Governor’s budget includes $37 million in ongoing state operations funding for the State Library and $30 million in ongoing local assistance funding. The Governor’s budget also includes $78 million one-time General Fund, nearly all of which reflects carryover funds associated with one-time local assistance initiatives funded in recent years. The majority of this carryover funding already has been encumbered. (This EdBudget table provides more detail on the State Library’s budget, including spending by program and fund source.) In the nearby box, we identify some one-time savings associated with a one-time initiative from a previous year.

Local Libraries Receive Most of Their Funding From Local Sources. In California, counties, cities, special districts, and joint powers authorities can operate local public libraries. Usually the local government operator designates a central library to coordinate activities among all the library branches within a jurisdiction. Preliminary data from the most recent Public Libraries Survey (2023-24) show that 187 jurisdictions, with 1,127 sites (including central libraries and their branches) are operating in California. Local libraries provide various services that are influenced by the characteristics of their communities. A core part of the mission of all libraries, however, is to provide patrons with access to books, media, and other informational materials. Around 94 percent of local library funding comes from local governments and the remaining 6 percent comes from the state and federal governments.

Cybersecurity

In this section, we provide background on the State Library’s existing cybersecurity tools and processes. We then describe the Governor’s proposal to upgrade the State Library’s cybersecurity tools, assess the proposal, and offer an associated recommendation.

Background

State Library Has Existing Cybersecurity Tools. The State Library currently has multiple layers of defense for cybersecurity protection. For example, the State Library has tools that remove malicious emails, secure data transmitted over the internet, create encrypted internet connections, and create firewalls to insulate sections of its network.

Current Hardware and Software Are Aging. The State Library notes that while the hardware and software it uses for cybersecurity defense are not currently at their end of life, it would like to be proactive in attaining updated tools. The State Library notes, for instance, that as hardware and software become outdated, vendors sometimes discontinue their support services, which can, in turn, amplify security risks. Additionally, it would like to update its cybersecurity tools before its existing ones become obsolete or begin to fail. Furthermore, the State Library notes that state procurement processes require planning multiple years in advance to acquire these types of new technologies. If an agency begins the procurement process at the point when its cybersecurity hardware and software have already reached the end of their useful life, then installation and implementation processes could go less smoothly and lead to increased risk exposure.

Recent Security Assessments Indicate Some Vulnerabilities. The State Library recently underwent two cybersecurity assessments. The California Military Department performed an independent cybersecurity assessment. This assessment found that employee behavior is currently the greatest area of vulnerability. For example, employees might inadvertently make mistakes, such as accidently clicking on a malicious link or downloading harmful materials. The California Department of Technology (CDT) also conducted an assessment. This assessment found that the State Library’s cybersecurity policies and procedures for risk assessments were not compliant with state requirements. Despite these shortcomings, the State Library indicates there have not been any cybersecurity breaches over the past 25 years.

Proposal

Governor Proposes Funding for New Cybersecurity Hardware and Software. The Governor proposes providing $332,000 General Fund in 2025-26 and $282,000 ongoing General Fund thereafter, to replace outdated networking and security infrastructure. The funds would pay for updated hardware and a renewable cloud-based security subscription service. The State Library indicates that the primary rationale for the new hardware and software subscription service is to ensure that as its current system reaches its end of life, new defense tools are put into place to protect against cybersecurity threats.

Assessment

Protecting Sensitive Data From Cyberattacks Is a Salient Issue. Between January 2020 and February 2025, over 2,600 cyberattacks were reported that have targeted California businesses and government agencies. State law mandates that businesses or agencies notify residents if their unencrypted personally identifiable information (PII) is acquired, or suspected to be acquired, by unauthorized individuals. Examples of PII include names, addresses, phone numbers, e-mail addresses, health records, social security numbers, and driver’s license information, among others. In the first two months of 2025 alone, 70 cyberattacks have already been reported, averaging more than one attack per day, triggering notification requirements.

Acquiring These Resources Would Ensure State Library Is Using Latest Protective Tools. The State Library notes newer cloud-based firewalls that have more advanced features would replace its current firewall system. The State Library would also upgrade to Office 365, which includes extra security features compared to what the current Office suite provides. Additionally, the State Library would subscribe to CDT’s Security Operations Center as a Service (SOCaaS), which performs continuous, year-round, comprehensive monitoring for cybersecurity threats. With the State Library’s current CDT subscription, it can only take advantage of a small subset of the features SOCaaS provides. This proposal would upgrade the State Library’s subscription so that it could take advantage of an upgraded suite of protective cybersecurity tools.

Updating Cybersecurity Infrastructure Now Could Protect Against Larger Future State Costs. In recent years, state agencies that suffered a cybersecurity attack have subsequently requested General Fund support to upgrade their defense systems. For example, in December 2022, Department of Finance (DOF) suffered a cyberattack. This attack led to a $2.1 million General Fund request in 2023-24 to improve DOF’s cybersecurity defenses. The Legislature subsequently approved this funding request. More recently, in March 2024, the Department of Food and Agriculture (DFA) suffered a cyberattack. This attack led to a $2.5 million General Fund proposal in the 2025-26 Governor’s budget to improve DFA’s cybersecurity defenses.

New Resources Will Not Address Some of the Shortfalls Identified in Recent Assessments. While the proposal would result in the State Library acquiring newer protective software services, it would not address the CDT finding that the State Library lacks certain written risk assessment policies and procedures. The State Library notes that given the small size of its security team, it will prioritize upgrading its cybersecurity defense systems in the short run. It notes that putting up an upgraded firewall will be the most effective action that can be immediately taken to prevent cyberattacks. Once those actions have occurred, the State Library plans to return to updating its written risk assessment policies and procedures.

Recommendation

Recommend Approval. We recommend the Legislature approve this proposal. Funding this project now could help prevent cybersecurity breaches and potentially avoid larger expenses in the future if the Library were to experience a cyberattack.

Witkin State Law Library

In this section, we provide background on the Witkin State Law Library (Witkin Law Library or law library) and its funding. We then describe the Governor’s proposal to reinstate a certain fee that supports the law library. Next, we assess that proposal and offer associated recommendations.

Background

Witkin Law Library Provides Research Services. The State Library operates the Witkin Law Library. The law library offers a range of resources, including primary and secondary materials on American law, federal and state appellate court decisions, session laws, codes and statutes, federal agency rulings, and attorney general opinions. The law library staff assist both state agencies and the public with research. Based on self-reported data from 2023-24, roughly half of the library’s users were from state agencies while the other half of users were from the general public. The Department of Justice, among state agencies, made the most frequent use of the law library’s resources. Besides managing research inquiries, staff are also tasked with curating law library collections and other duties.

Staffing and Operating Costs Have Grown Over Time. The law library’s staff has grown over time, increasing from seven positions in 2017-18 to ten positions in 2024-25. Its operating costs have grown from approximately $630,000 in 2017-18 to an estimated $1.3 million in 2024-25. As discussed in more detail below, the law library receives support from both a special fund and the state General Fund.

Portion of Appellate Filing Fee Revenue Historically Has Been Allocated to Witkin Law Library. Certain filing fees must be paid for civil appellate cases. The state sets each of the fee rates in statute. It periodically adjusts the rates, typically in response to rising court costs. In 2024, the state charged a $605 filing fee to seek an appeal or writ from a Court of Appeal and a $540 filing fee to seek a writ from the Supreme Court. A certain amount of each of these fees historically has been allocated specifically to the Witkin Law Library to help support its operating costs. In 2024, $65 of the civil appellate filing fees was directed for the support of the law library.

Fee Revenue for Law Library Historically Has Been Deposited Into Special Fund Account. The Witkin Law Library’s share of the civil appellate filing fees is deposited into a state special fund called the California State Law Library Special Account. The state established this special fund account in 1992—the same time it first allocated an amount of the civil appellate filing fees to the law library (originally $50). Since creation of the special fund account, the Legislature has reauthorized the associated appellate filing fee rate six times, with the most recent reauthorization occurring in 2019. One of those reauthorizations (in 1999) raised the fee allocated to the law library from $50 to $65. The special fund account and the requirement for allocating $65 of the designated appellate filing fees to the law library sunset at the end of 2024.

Proposal

Governor Proposes Reestablishing Fee Set Aside for the Law Library and Special Fund Account. The administration proposes trailer bill language that would reestablish the statutory requirement to allocate $65 of designated civil appellate filing fees to the law library, while also reauthorizing the California State Law Library Special Account. The proposed trailer bill language retroactively reestablishes the special fund as of January 1, 2025, so there would be no lapse in deposits. (The state has continued to collect civil appellate filing fees.) In a change from historic practice, the proposed trailer bill language has no sunset date for the $65 fee and the special fund account.

Assessment

State Has No Clear Policy for How to Fund the Witkin Law Library. State law declares that it is in the best interest of the public and the state for public libraries to exist and receive “adequate financial support from government at all levels.” State law does not provide a clear definition of what constitutes adequate financial support. In the case of the Witkin Law Library, the civil appellate filling fee revenue is intended to provide some financial support. Since at least the early 2000s, state General Fund support also has been used to support the Witkin Law Library. The state has yet to establish a policy designating what share of support is to come from the special fund versus the General Fund. In setting such a policy, the state could consider various factors, including the types of users making requests, the types of requests received, the complexity of received requests, and the frequency of requests from the same users.

Special Fund Revenue Is Supporting Declining Share of Law Library’s Operating Costs. While the fee revenue the law library has received has been roughly flat for many years, the law library’s operating costs have increased. From 2017-18 through 2023-24, the law library’s special fund revenue has averaged approximately $305,000 annually. Over the same period, its operating costs have grown by 80 percent. The State Library redirects some of its unrestricted General Fund state operations monies to support the law library. In 2023-24, the State Library also requested, and the Legislature approved, a targeted ongoing General Fund augmentation of $462,000 to cover the costs of two existing permanent positions that had been special fund-supported and two new permanent positions. As a result, a shrinking portion of special fund revenue has been covering law library’s operating costs, while the General Fund portion has grown. In 2017-18, special fund revenue covered 43 percent of the Witkin Law Library’s total expenditures, while General Fund support covered 57 percent. By 2023-24, special funds covered an estimated 13 percent of costs, while General Fund support covered 87 percent.

Increasing the Witkin Law Library’s Portion of Appellate Fee Revenue Has Trade-Offs. Absent an increase in special fund fee revenue, the law library will become increasingly reliant on General Fund support to cover operating cost increases. One way to increase special fund revenues is to increase the portion of the appellate filing fees that are directed to the Witkin Law Library. Because the Witkin Law Library would receive a greater share of the existing fees, the judicial branch would receive less revenue to support its operations. To avoid reducing funding for the judicial branch, the Legislature could increase the total appellate filing fees charged. For example, the law library previously received $65 of a $605 filing fee to seek an appeal from a Court of Appeal. If the law library fee was increased to $85, similarly increasing the total filing fee to $625 would avoid impacts on the judicial branch. This change, however, would increase the cost to litigants, which, in turn, could impact the number of filings that are ultimately made.

Other Revenue Options Could Be Explored. To the extent the Legislature is not interested in increasing the portion of the appellate filing fees that are directed to the Witkin Law Library, it could explore other revenue options. Specific options could depend on various factors, such as the types or breadth of services provided by the law library as well as specifically who seeks law library services. One alternative revenue option, for example, could be directing a share of trial court civil fees to the law library. This could be reasonable if law library services are provided for both trial court and appellate cases. Another revenue option could be to have law library users partially support its operations. For example, the law library could charge state department users an annual service fee based on their usage of law library services, or it could assess specific charges for certain types of requests. Certain types of user fees could be reasonable if certain individuals or groups (such as lawyers or governmental entities) are making regular and significant use of the law library’s services. A third option could be to increase the State Bar fee to include a special charge to help support the law library. This could merit consideration if lawyers represent a significant portion of law library users or if all lawyers have the ability to make use of its services. One main difficulty in assessing these revenue options now is the law library currently does not track the number of lawyers it serves.

Recommendations

Add a Sunset Date to Maintain Legislative Oversight. We recommend the Legislature modify the trailer bill language to include a sunset date. Since the establishment of the special fund, a sunset date has been included in all previous reauthorizations. Adding a sunset date would provide the Legislature the opportunity to reevaluate the fee structure and make modifications. Historically, the state has set a sunset date of January 1, five years after the account is reauthorized. The Legislature could consider a shorter, one-year sunset date if it wanted to direct the affected groups to reexamine the fee structure and report back, as discussed below.

Direct State Library to Identify Revenue Options. We recommend the Legislature direct the State Library to submit a report identifying potential revenue options by January 1, 2026. We recommend the report identify options that would generate sufficient revenue to cover the law library’s total operating expenditures. We recommend requiring that an option be included that replaces all state General Fund, along with other options that provide varying levels of state support. For each identified revenue option, we recommend the Legislature require key information, including an explanation of why the option was determined to be reasonable, its benefits, and its drawbacks, along with any other information essential for evaluating its relative merits. In identifying possible revenue options, the law library might want to examine the types of users making requests, the complexity of the requests it receives, and the frequency of requests from the same users. This information could help the law library and ensure any identified fee structures align fees with those who use and benefit from its services. We recommend the Legislature direct the State Library to develop its report in consultation with the judicial branch and other relevant stakeholders. The development and submission of this report would help the Legislature evaluate various options for increasing special fund revenues that could be used to support the Witkin Law Library’s ongoing operating costs, which is consistent with how the library was originally supported. Such an approach could also free up General Fund for other state priorities.