^[PDF] Fish and Wildlife Agency Structures and Best Practices: A Study of Florida, Texas, Washington, and New York

Florida dedicates 65 percent of its real estate transfer tax to conservation purposes. That tax raises roughly $600 million annually on average. Texas dedicates all receipts from sales taxes on sporting goods to conservation, which averages approximately $100 million per year.
https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/resources/2011/Fish_and_Wildlife_Agency_Structures_and_Best_Practices_91411.pdf

^[PDF] Funding Timber Harvest Regulation

Most of the revenues are allocated to the counties where the timber was harvested.  Property Tax Break. When timberlands are zoned as Timberland Protection Zones (TPZs), the assessed value of the land for property tax purposes is based on its value for the cultivation of timber, not its “highest and best” use.
https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/resources/2011/Funding_Timber_Harvest_Regulation_92711.pdf

^[PDF] Implementing the 2014 Water Bond

Since bonds will be repaid with state tax revenues, funds should be directed to projects that provide benefi ts to the state as a whole, not private benefi ciaries. We recommend the Legislature clarify the defi nition of state-level public benefi ts for certain categories of benefi ts, specifi cally water supply and greenhouse gas reduction benefi ts.  Require Robust Cost-Effectiveness Criteria for Project Selection.
https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/resources/2015/Implementing-2014-Water-Bond-031815.pdf

^[PDF] Implementing the 2014 Water Bond

Since these bonds will be repaid with state tax revenues, funds should be directed to projects that provide benefi ts to the state as a whole. Also, projects that have clear private benefi ciaries who can pay for the projects should not be prioritized for bond funds.  Generating More Benefi ts Than Would Otherwise Occur.
https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/resources/2015/Implementing-Water-Bond-021015.pdf

^[PDF] Major Water-Related Proposals In the Governor’s 2015-16 Budget

Since bonds will be repaid with state tax revenues, funds should be directed to projects that provide benefits to the state as a whole, not private beneficiaries. We recommend the Legislature specify what portion and type of activities should be considered as providing state-level public benefits. „ Require Robust Cost-Effectiveness Criteria for Project Selection.
https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/resources/2015/Major-Water-Related-Proposals-021215.pdf

^[PDF] 2003 Realignment Of Health Programs

LAO 60 YEARS OF SERVICE L E G I S L A T I V E A N A L Y S T ’ S O F F I C E March 5, 2003 Overarching Considerations Relating to Realignment Realigning Some State-County Programs Makes Sense Programs, Not Taxes, Should Be the Focus of Realignment Realignment Plans Are Not Easily Changed Counties Will Need Control Over Realigned Programs Roughly
https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/socservices/2003/Presentation_for_Health.pdf

^[PDF] CalWORKs Program Overview Hearing

In a lower cost county, the grant is $689. The amount of the grant decreases as income increases. " In order to provide an incentive for CalWORKs recipients to work, current law disregards (does not count) the first $225 in earned income and 50 percent of each additional dollar earned when determining a familiy’s grant amount.
https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/socservices/2005/CalWORKs_program_030905.pdf

^[PDF] Children's Services and Foster Care Overview

LAO 60 YEARS OF SERVICE 6L E G I S L A T I V E A N A L Y S T ’ S O F F I C E March 16, 2005 Overall Funding for Children’s Services (2005-06, In Thousands) Total Federal State County CWS $999,290 $458,793 $357,736 $134,201 Foster Care 1,629,452 477,744 460,683 691,025 Kin-Gap 97,889 58,961 19,464 19,464 Totals $2,726,631 $995,498 $837,883 $844,690
https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/socservices/2005/Childrens_Services_031605.pdf

^[PDF] Federal_State_Welfare_Reform_Overview_030607.pdf

Permits counties to provide eligible appli- cant families with up to three months of aid payments in the form of a lump sum, for purposes of providing temporary assistance so that the family does not enter the program.
https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/socservices/2007/Federal_State_Welfare_Reform_Overview_030607.pdf

^[PDF] Impact of Proposed Reduction to Child Welfare Services (CWS) (Revised - April 2008)

After further discussion of our analysis with the Department of Social Services (DSS) and the County Welfare Directors Associ- ation, we have revised our methodology to (1) correct a technical error with regard to infl ationary adjustments, and (2) recognize a portion of county overmatch funds.
https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/socservices/2008/CWS_04_21_08.pdf