Use either the form or links on the side to filter the list of publications. Browse other LAO products using the links at the bottom of the sidebar.
4,786 Publications Found
September 11, 2006 - Presented to Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee Hon. Martha Escutia, Chair Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee Hon. Mike Machado, Chair Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee Hon. Lloyd Levine, Chair Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee Hon. Johan Klehs, Chair Assembly Natural Resources Hon. Loni Hancock, Chair
August 28, 2006 - We provide a fiscal analysis of the proposed MOU with Bargaining Unit 18 (psychiatric technicians). The administration's cost estimates are generally reasonable. We estimate that total compensation costs (including benefits) for Unit 18 rank and file would total about $435 million (up 3 percent from the prior fiscal year) in 2006-07 and $460 million (up 6 percent) in 2007-08 under the proposed MOU. Our analysis also discusses the bargaining unit's high vacancy rates. In part because of the vacancy rates, departments often mandate that employees work overtime because state institutions require extra hours of work in order to meet institutional licensing and certification requirements.
August 25, 2006 - We provide a fiscal analysis of the proposed MOU with Bargaining Unit 10, which includes state scientific personnel. The administration's estimate of the MOU's costs in 2006 is reasonable, but the estimate for 2007-08 likely overstates costs by around $2 million ($500,000 General Fund) due to a high estimate of inflation. Under the proposed MOU, we estimate that total compensation costs (including benefits) for Unit 10 rank and file would total about $235 million (up 8 percent) in 2006-07 and over $240 million (up 3 percent) in 2007-08. About two-thirds of the increased costs over the term of the agreement result from the proposed MOU. The remainder largely results from additional hiring authorized by the Legislature in the budget.
August 25, 2006 - We provide a fiscal analysis of the proposed MOU with Bargaining Unit 7, which includes certain state public safety personnel. The administration's estimates of costs are reasonable, but we forecast a lower inflation rate than DPA assumes in estimating costs of 2007-08 pay increases. In some agencies, costs to substantially reduce currently high vacancy rates could exceed DPA's estimates. Under the proposed MOU, we estimate that total compensation costs (including benefits) for Unit 7 rank and file would total about $515 million (up 11 percent from the prior fiscal year) in 2006-07 and $540 million (up 5 percent) in 2007-08. About 55 percent of the increased costs over the term of the agreement result from the proposed MOU. The remainder results from additional hiring authorized by the Legislature in the budget or state health contributions required under the current MOU.
August 18, 2006 - Presented to Special Session Committee on Correctional Policy and Fiscal Issues
August 18, 2006 - We provide a fiscal analysis of the proposed MOU with Bargaining Unit 5, which includes CHP officers. The administration's estimate of additional 2006-07 costs is reasonable. We estimate, however, that the annual fiscal impact after 2006-07 will be substantially more than shown in administration estimates because its projections assume (1) relatively low growth in the statutory pay formula for CHP officers, (2) no increases in state health premium costs after 2007-08, and (3) no change in required employer retirement contribution rates. By 2010-11, annual state costs could be $100 million higher than suggested in the administration estimate. In addition, various factors including pay and benefits for CHP and funding demands in the Department of Motor Vehicles are likely to put stress on the financial condition of the state Motor Vehicle Account, which funds Unit 5 personnel costs.
August 16, 2006 - Presented to Select Committee on Prison Population Management and Capacity
August 15, 2006 - Presented to Select Committee on Prison Population Management and Capacity
August 8, 2006 - Presented to Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Water Hon. Sheila James Kuehl, Chair and Assembly Committee on Water, Parks and Wildlife Hon. Lois Wolk, Chair
August 7, 2006 - Presented to Senate Select Committee on California's Master Plan for Education, Informational Hearing on Charter Schools.
August 4, 2006 - We provide a fiscal analysis of proposed MOUs with Units 16 (physicians, dentists, and podiatrists) and 19 (health and social service professionals). The administration's estimate of costs resulting from the MOUs in 2006-07 is reasonable, but the estimate for 2007-08 is likely too high by $6 million due to a high estimate of inflation. We estimate that total compensation costs would rise to about $579 million in 2006-07 for a cost increase of over 10 percent. More than 40 percent of this increase results from factors other than the MOUs, such as court-ordered pay increases. In 2007-08, we estimate that costs would increase an additional 6 percent to about $610 million. In addition to these costs, we expect that future court orders related to correctional and mental health programs will increase pay for some members of these units by an unknown amount.
July 28, 2006 - We provide a fiscal analysis of proposed MOUs with Bargaining Units 12 (craft and maintenance workers) and 13 (stationary engineers). We believe that the Department of Personnel Administration's (DPA) estimate of costs resulting from the MOUs in 2006 is reasonable, but that the estimate for 2007-08 is likely too high by around $7 million due primarily to a high estimate of inflation. We estimate that total compensation costs (including benefits) for Unit 12 and 13 rank-and-file employees would rise to about $740 million in 2006-07 under the proposed MOUs for a cost increase of almost 7 percent. In 2007-08, we estimate that costs would increase to over $760 million, or more than 3 percent above 2006-07.
July 25, 2006 - Our analyses of measures included in the November 7, 2006 special election. (Note that until August 15, 2006 there may be court ordered changes to these analyses and other portions of the voter information guide. See the Secretary of State's web site for the public display of the full voter information guide.)
July 13, 2006 - A series of figures showing public retirement systems' funding status, absolute costs and costs as a percentage of General Fund expenditures over time. Presented to Governmental Affairs Committee, United Chambers of Commerce of the San Fernando Valley.
July 7, 2006 - On June 27, 2006, the Legislature passed the 2006-07 Budget Bill along with implementing legislation which authorizes total spending of $127.9 billion, of which $101.3 billion is from the General Fund and $26.6 billion is from special funds. The 2006-07 budget reflects a sharply improving fiscal picture, brought about by continued stronger-than-expected growth in General Fund revenues. Spending under the plan increases by over 9 percent between 2005-06 and 2006-07, reflecting significant program augmentations, budgetary debt prepayments, and rising caseloads and costs in state programs. Based on our current projections of revenues and expenditures under the 2006-07 Budget Act policies, the state would continue to face operating shortfalls in the range of $4.5 billion to $5 billion in 2007-08 and 2008-09.