July 14, 2016 - EdBudget Tables (July 2016)
May 15, 2017 - In this brief, we analyze the Governor’s May Revision education proposals. First, we review changes in the overall Proposition 98 funding level. Subsequently, we describe and assess the Governor’s major proposals for K‑12 education, child care and preschool, the California Community Colleges, the California State University, the University of California, and student financial aid.
5/16/17: Correction to LAO CalWORKs Stage 2 cost estimates.
January 13, 2017 - On January 10, 2017, the Governor presented his Proposition 98 budget package to the Legislature. In this post, we provide an overview and initial assessment of the package.
January 11, 2016 - This publication is our office’s initial response to the 2016-17 Governor’s Budget proposal. Estimates of state personal income taxes and required school funding are up significantly. In allocating discretionary resources in the 2016-17 budget, the Governor prioritizes growing state budget reserves. Specifically, he increases total reserves to more than $10 billion and also allocates a sizable portion of discretionary resources to one-time infrastructure spending. We encourage the Legislature, as it crafts this year’s budget in line with its own priorities, to begin with a robust target for reserves for the end of 2016-17 and to concentrate spending on one-time purposes. This would still leave some funds available for targeted ongoing commitments—particularly if the Legislature extends the managed care organization (MCO) tax. Such a measured approach would better position the state for any near-term economic downturn.
May 16, 2016 - In this brief, we analyze the Governor’s Proposition 98 May Revision budget package. In the first section, we focus on changes in the overall Proposition 98 funding level under the May Revision compared to the Governor’s January budget. In the next three sections, we describe and assess the major changes in specific Proposition 98 proposals for K-12 education, early education, and the California Community Colleges (CCC), respectively.
March 16, 2017 - In this report, we analyze the Governor’s child care and preschool proposals. The report has six main sections. In the first section, we provide background on child care and preschool programs in California. In the second section, we provide an overview of the Governor’s child care and preschool proposals. In the third section, we analyze the Governor’s preschool proposals and make associated recommendations. In the following two sections, we provide in‑depth analyses of (1) the state’s various quality improvement activities and (2) Alternative Payment agencies, which administer certain child care programs. The final section consists of a summary of the recommendations we make throughout the report.
May 18, 2015 - In this brief, we analyze the Governor’s Proposition 98 May Revision budget package for schools and the California Community Colleges (CCC). In the first section, we focus on the overall Proposition 98 funding level under the May Revision and the reasons it is higher than the Governor’s January budget. We then explain how our office’s higher revenue estimates would affect available Proposition 98 funding and recommend how the Legislature might budget accordingly. In the next two sections, we describe and assess the Governor’s major Proposition 98 May Revision proposals. The Appendix to the brief contains 16 figures that have detailed education budget data. Our February analysis contains additional information about Proposition 98 and calculations of the minimum guarantee.
February 9, 2017 - An analysis of the Governor’s overall 2017-18 Proposition 98 budget package as well as his specific spending proposals for K‑12 education, including a summary of our recommendations.
April 4, 2017 - Presented to: Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
April 6, 2017 - Presented to Senate Budget and Fiscal Review—Subcommittee No. 1 on Education and Senate Budget and Fiscal Review—Subcommittee No. 3 on Health and Human Services
February 28, 2017 - Presented to: Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
May 18, 2015 - Presented to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
March 7, 2017 - Presented to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
April 20, 2017 - Presented to Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 on Education
November 16, 2016 - Under our current projections, assuming no changes in existing state and federal policies, we estimate the state will end the 2017-18 fiscal year with $11.5 billion in total reserves. This includes $8.7 billion in required reserves, which must be deposited into the rainy day fund, and $2.8 billion in discretionary reserves, which the Legislature can appropriate for any purpose. These reserve levels reflect the continued progress California has made in improving its budget situation. Our estimates include the effects of statewide ballot measures that were approved on November 8. The condition of the state budget depends on many volatile and unpredictable factors. This uncertainty is present in the near term and becomes greater in each subsequent year. We discuss two illustrative economic scenarios for the fiscal years after 2017-18. Under a mild recession scenario, the state would have enough reserves to cover its operating deficits through 2020-21. This means, under our assumptions, the state could weather a mild recession without cutting spending or raising taxes. However, this conclusion assumes that the state does not make any changes to its current policies and programs in any year during the outlook. This outlook also assumes no changes in federal policy, even though the recent election results suggest some such changes are now likely. State or federal policy changes could have a significant impact on the state's bottom line.
January 13, 2017 - This publication is our office’s initial response to the Governor's 2017-18 budget proposal. The administration's estimates anticipate slow growth in the personal income tax (PIT), the state’s dominant revenue source. The Governor’s estimate of PIT growth in 2017-18 is probably too low. As a result, by the May Revision, the state could have more General Fund revenue than the Governor now projects, but much of that revenue would be required to go to schools and Proposition 2 reserves and debt payments. Facing uncertainties we have long discussed about the economy and new uncertainties about changes to federal policy, the Legislature may want to set a target for total state reserves at—or preferably above—the level the Governor now proposes.