February 13, 2019 - In this analysis, we assess the Governor’s 2019‑20 budget proposals for the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA). Specifically, we review and make recommendations regarding the Governor’s proposals (1) for increased funding for Consumer Affairs administration workload and (2) associated with the department’s updated business modernization plan for information technology (IT) projects at Release 3 boards and bureaus.
August 14, 2019 - Assembly Accountability and Administrative Review Committee and Assembly Business and Professions Committee
June 8, 2017 - Presented to: Budget Conference Committee
February 6, 2018 - The Governor’s budget proposes to reduce 11 positions and $1.3 million annually (Real Estate Fund) for the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) beginning in 2018‑19 to reflect the transfer of the Bureau of Real Estate (CalBRE) out of DCA. We recommend the Legislature require that DCA report at spring budget hearings on the reasons for the difference between the charges that have been paid by CalBRE for DCA services ($5.7 million in 2017‑18) and the much smaller proposed reduction to DCA’s budget. We further recommend that the Legislature require DCA to begin tracking and reporting information on the use of DCA services by boards and bureaus to better assess whether there are widespread differences between the charges paid by entities and the services they are receiving.
February 24, 2023 - In this post, we assess and make recommendations on the Governor’s budget proposal to permanently fund the operations of the Organizational Improvement Office (OIO) in the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA).
October 7, 2020 - The 2020-21 Budget: California Spending Plan — Other Provisions.
February 25, 2016 - In this post, we provide recommendations on the following Department of Consumer Affairs budget proposals for 2016-17: (1) Acupuncture Board—Curriculum Review and Licensing and (2) Department of Justice Staffing.
February 14, 2017 - Voters legalized the use of medical cannabis in California in 1996, and the Legislature approved the Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MCRSA) in 2015. In November of 2016, voters approved Proposition 64, which legalized and created a regulatory framework for the nonmedical use of cannabis. In the coming year, the Legislature will face key choices about whether it wants to make statutory changes to bring the regulatory frameworks of MCRSA and Proposition 64 into greater alignment. Additionally, the Legislature will need to determine the staff and other resources to provide to the various agencies charged with regulating and taxing the cannabis industry. We recommend the Legislature (1) work with the administration to enact legislation to align the regulation of medical and nonmedical cannabis to the maximum extent possible, (2) make its decisions on the extent to which it wants to align the regulatory structures for medical and nonmedical cannabis before making its decisions on the Governor’s requested funding and related positions, and (3) take a more incremental approach to budgeting for departments that are requesting resources in 2017-18.