August 9, 2012 - Department of Parks and Recreation: Current Funding Issues
February 16, 1999 - Analysis of the 1999-00 Budget Bill, Resources Chapter
March 3, 2016 - Presented to: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 2 on Resources, Environmental Protection, Energy, and Transportation
March 2, 2012 - The 2012-13 Governor’s Budget includes proposals to address some of the funding challenges currently faced by parks, including the continuation of the plan to close up to 70 state parks by July 2012. However, the Legislature and stakeholders have expressed interest in identifying alternative ways to prevent park closures and, more importantly, help ensure that the park system is adequately maintained and operated in the future. In this report, we evaluate various options that could be adopted to reduce costs or increase revenue for the state park system. Based on this analysis, we recommend specific steps to help maintain the park system, such as transferring the ownership of some state parks to local governments, eliminating the use of peace officers for certain park tasks, allowing private companies to operate some state parks, and increasing park user fees.
February 21, 2014 - In this report, we analyze the Governor's 2014-15 budget for the state's resources and environmental protection programs. We review and make recommendations on a number of major policy proposals, including a review of the administration's recently released Water Action Plan as well as the proposal to reduce or eliminate several programs currently funded by the Beverage Container Recycling Fund (commonly referred to as the "bottle bill"). We find that these policy proposals are generally reasonable approaches, though we identify trade-offs in the proposals and offer recommendations for legislative consideration. The report also identifies several issues included in the Governor's budget that merit additional legislative oversight. This includes the proposal to provide the Department of Parks and Recreation and the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection with a total of $43 million from the General Fund to address deferred maintenance backlogs. While we find that it makes fiscal sense to address deferred maintenance, there is uncertainty about what factors have contributed to the large backlogs, as well as how the state can best address maintenance needs on an ongoing basis.
February 21, 2001 - Analysis of the 2001-02 Budget Bill, Resources Chapter
March 9, 2016 - Presented to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 3 on Resources and Transportation
February 19, 2013 - In this report, we review the Governor’s 2013-14 budget proposals for various resources and environmental protection departments and programs, including the Department of Water Resources, Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Department of Parks and Recreation, California Energy Commission, and the Air Resources Board. We identify concerns with several of the proposals and make recommendations for legislative consideration. In some cases, we identify proposals that we think should be rejected or modified. In particular, we point out several budget proposals that would impact state expenditures in future years. We also note that the proposed budget includes several proposals to use certain revenues for different activities that may not be legally allowable given the revenue source. In addition, we identify several issues in the report that we believe merit greater legislative oversight, including a new surcharge on investor-owned utility electricity bills that the California Public Utilities Commission has been collecting since January 2012 without legislative authorization.
May 15, 2018 - The Governor’s May Revision includes $1.06 billion from the General Fund for deferred maintenance projects at various state departments. We recommend that the Legislature (1) adopt budget trailer legislation to create a separate account to fund one-time deferred maintenance projects in the future and (2) deposit into this account the amount of General Fund revenues it decides is consistent with its overall General Fund priorities—an amount that could be higher or lower than that proposed by the Governor. The Legislature could separately appropriate funds in 2018 19 for any projects it felt were well justified. We further recommend that the Legislature seek information from the administration regarding causes of deferred maintenance at individual departments, as well as longer-term plans to prevent deferred maintenance from continuing to accumulate.
February 18, 1997 - Analysis of the 1997-98 Budget Bill, Resources Chapter