2009 Initiative Analysis: Human Trafficking (version 2)

This is because state and county governments would be responsible for supervising additional offenders subject to these provisions. However, given that, as of December 2009, only six individuals were reportedly being held in state prison for human trafficking, any increase in costs resulting from this measure is likely to be minimal compared to the overall cost of the state and county correctional systems.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2009/090850.aspx

The 2012-13 Budget: Oversight and Accountability at State Hospitals

IST Treatment in County Jail. The Governor ’s budget includes a decrease of $3 million General Fund resulting from treating defendants found to be IST in county jails, rather than state hospitals, when medically appropriate.
https://lao.ca.gov/analysis/2012/health/oversight-accountability-state-hospitals-030112.aspx

^[PDF] Firearms and ammunition.

Individuals who do not comply would be guilty of an infraction (punishable by a fine) or misdemeanor (punishable by a fine and/or imprisonment in county jail). Other Provisions Reporting Requirements.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2015/150582.pdf

The 2010-11 Budget: Automated Speed Enforcement Merits Authorization

Under the Governor’s proposal, drivers caught for speeding by an ASE system would, depending upon their speed, pay either a greater or a lesser fine than if caught for the same violation by a county sheriff or city policy officer.
https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2010/crim/auto_speed/auto_speed_012710.aspx

Juvenile Crime in California--Introduction

Based On: Research in Orange and Los Angeles Counties. Longitudinal study. Details: In Orange County, between 8 and 12 percent of offenders account for 60 percent of juvenile and subsequent adult crime.
https://lao.ca.gov/1995/050195_juv_crime/kkpart1.aspx

^[PDF] The Fiscal Implications of AB 1844 (Fletcher), as Amended on April 28, 2010

In addition, counties could face relatively mi- nor increases in costs for county jail operations and probation supervision. Several factors complicated our efforts to estimate the fiscal impact of AB 1844.
https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2010/crim/ab1844/ab1844_letter_051210.pdf

^[PDF] Supplemental Report Language Agenda 1992-93 Budget Conference Committee

San Mateo County CCD, Skyline College: Learning Resources Center. The amount of $485,000 is provided for preliminary plans ($195,000) and working drawings ($290,000) for a 36,644 asf learning resource center.
https://lao.ca.gov/1992/reports/srl_agenda_0092.pdf

^[PDF] California Taxpayer Protection Act of 2012

These savings would be partially offset by increased state and county costs for children who shifted into state- and county-supported Foster Care or into county-run general assistance programs. The provisions changing the processes for applying for public benefits could reduce state and local costs.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2011/110438.pdf

2011 Initiative Analysis: California Taxpayer Protection Act of 2012

These savings would be partially offset by increased state and county costs for children who shifted into state- and county-supported Foster Care or into county-run general assistance programs. The provisions changing the processes for applying for public benefits could reduce state and local costs.
https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2011/110438.aspx

LAO 2004 Budget Analysis: Child Care

LAO 2004 Budget Analysis: Child Care a   Current income eligibility is the same as the high cost county figures. b   High cost counties: Marin, San Francisco, and Santa Clara. c   Medium cost counties: Alameda, Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Monterey, Napa, Orange, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz, Solano, Sonoma, and Ventura. d   Lower cost counties: All other counties.
https://lao.ca.gov/analysis_2004/education/ed_14_childcare_anl04.htm