Back to the Report

More publications like . . .

The Administration’s Sacramento Office Building Construction Strategy: Ensuring Robust Oversight


Post

The 2018-19 Budget: The May Revision—State Project Infrastructure Fund

May 14, 2018 - The Governor’s May Revision proposes to deposit an additional $630 million General Fund into the continuously appropriated State Project Infrastructure Fund (SPIF). This funding is anticipated to fund the renovation of the Bateson, Unruh, and Resources Buildings, as well as the demolition of the State Printing Plant. We find that if these projects are a legislative priority for General Fund resources, it is reasonable to set aside funding for them. However, we continue to have serious concerns with the SPIF, which we find limits legislative oversight. Accordingly, we recommend modifying the SPIF so that it is no longer continuously appropriated.

Post

The 2017-18 Budget: Department of General Services

February 3, 2017 - This analysis includes reviews of the following budget proposals for DGS in the Governor’s 2017-18 budget plan:

  • State Project Infrastructure Funding in 2017-18
  • Sacramento Region: State Printing Plant Demolition Preliminary Plans
  • Zero Emission Vehicle Project
  • Model Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance (AB 2515)
  • Building Standards Commission, Exterior Elevated Elements (SB 465)

Report

The 2016-17 Budget: The Governor's State Office Building Proposal

February 9, 2016 - The Governor’s budget for 2016–17 proposes one–time funding of $1.5 billion from the General Fund to be deposited into a new State Office Infrastructure Fund. Under the proposal, monies in this fund would be continuously appropriated for the replacement and renovation of state office buildings in the Sacramento area. We find the Governor’s focus on state office buildings makes sense given the age and condition of the facilities prioritized by the Governor. However, we identify several issues that merit legislative consideration.

Post

The 2018-19 Budget: Department of General Services

February 20, 2018 - This analysis includes reviews of the following 2018‑19 budget proposals for DGS: (1) the construction of three state office buildings in the Sacramento area—Richards Boulevard, Bateson, and Unruh projects; and (2) Zero-Emission Vehicles.

Report

The 2020-21 Budget: Department of General Services

February 12, 2020 - In this analysis, we assess the Governor’s 2020‑21 budget proposals for the Department of General Services (DGS). Specifically, we review and make recommendations regarding the Governor’s proposals for (1) additional staff for Contracted Fiscal Services (CFS) workload, including the establishment of a new strike team to assist departments performing accounting activities with the Financial Information System for California (FI$Cal); (2) renovating the Resources, Bateson, and Unruh buildings, and (3) funding elevator and fire system‑related deferred maintenance projects.

Post

The 2020-21 Spending Plan — Other Provisions

October 7, 2020 - The 2020-21 Budget: California Spending Plan — Other Provisions.

Handout

[PDF] Overview of 2020-21 May Revision State Administration Proposals

May 21, 2020 - Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 4 on State Administration

Report

[PDF] Analysis of the 2001-02 Budget Bill, Capital Outlay Chapter

February 21, 2001 - Analysis of the 2001-02 Budget Bill, Capital Outlay Chapter

Post

The 2018-19 Budget: California Alternative Energy and Advanced Transportation Financing Authority (CAEATFA)

February 15, 2018 - In this analysis, we recommend one modification to the Governor's proposed 2018-19 budget for the California Alternative Energy and Advanced Transportation Authority: modify the one-time $8.2 million appropriation in 2018-19 by instead providing specific reimbursement authority over a three-year period, plus budget bill language giving the Department of Finance authority to increase spending authority with 30-day notification to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee.

Report

The 2013-14 Budget: Governor's Criminal Justice Proposals

February 15, 2013 - The Governor’s 2013-14 budget for criminal justice programs is relatively flat. It contains few major proposals for the judiciary or corrections compared with recent years when the state budget included significant budget cuts to programs, as well as major policy changes. In total, the Governor's budget provides $13.2 billion for criminal justice programs in 2013-14. This is an increase of about 2 percent over estimated current-year expenditures. In this report, we review the Governor’s 2013-14 budget proposals for criminal justice programs, including the judicial branch, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Board of State and Community Corrections, and the Department of Justice. 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, resulting in several million dollars of General Fund savings. We also identify several issues that we think would benefit from additional legislative oversight. These include (1) how trial courts will implement budget reductions in coming years, particularly in the absence of reserves beginning in 2014-15, (2) the new staffing methodology being implemented by the federal court-appointed Receiver currently managing the state’s inmate medical system, and (3) efforts by the Board of State and Community Corrections to meet its statutory mission to assist local agencies improve criminal justice outcomes through technical assistance and data collection.

Post

The 2023-24 Budget: May Revision Proposals Related to the California Model and San Quentin State Prison

May 19, 2023 - In this post, we analyze the Governor’s May Revision proposals for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to undertake capital outlay projects at San Quentin State Prison (SQ) as a part of a broader effort to develop a more rehabilitative and health-focused model for California prisons, known as the “California Model.” Specifically, we describe the Governor’s proposals, discuss several concerns with the proposals, and provide recommendations to the Legislature.