Use either the form or links on the side to filter the list of publications. Browse other LAO products using the links at the bottom of the sidebar.
1,025 Publications Found
July 7, 2011 - Beginning in 2008, the Unemployment Insurance (UI) funds of many states, including California’s, were under stress and soon became insolvent. Many states sought loans from the federal government. As of June 2011, California’s outstanding federal loan totaled over $10 billion. Three federal proposals have recently been introduced to address the insolvency issue. All three would improve the solvency of California’s UI fund and two would likely eliminate California’s UI fund deficit by 2016. Regardless of whether Congress acts, we recommend that the Legislature ensure implementation of a long–term solvency plan by 2014. If federal reforms are enacted, it is likely that no additional action by the Legislature will be necessary. However, if no federal reforms are enacted, it will be critically important for the Legislature to adopt its own long–term solvency plan. We recommend that the Legislature consider an approach which includes both increased employer contributions and decreased benefits for UI claimants.
June 2, 2011 - Pursuant to Chapter 1124, Statutes of 2002 (AB 3000, Committee on Budget).
May 10, 2011 - In 2010-11, several County Offices of Education (COEs) reported difficulties balancing their court school budgets. Partly due to the concerns they raised, the Supplemental Report of the 2010-11 Budget Act directed our office to (1) assess whether county court schools have access to an appropriate array of categorical funds and (2) compare court school funding with funding rates for other alternative programs. Our review indicates that COEs, which allot funding to county court schools, generally have access to an appropriate array of categorical funds. Although access to categorical funds does not appear to be a problem, we did identify local cost pressures that could explain why some COEs are having difficulty balancing their court school budgets. While the state’s options for affecting these local decisions are limited, the state could take actions to reduce cost pressures on court schools. We also recommend the state standardize per-pupil funding rates across its alternative education funding system, which could also help COEs manage their court school budgets.
May 10, 2011 - In November 2008, voters approved Proposition 1A, which allows the state to sell $9 billion in general obligation bonds to partially fund the development and construction of the high-speed rail system. In addition, the state has received roughly $3 billion from the federal government for its construction. We describe a number of problems that pose threats to the high-speed rail project’s successful development as envisioned by Proposition 1A and make several recommendations. We recommend that the Legislature direct the High Speed Rail Authority (HSRA) to renegotiate the terms of the federal funding awarded to the state by the Federal Rail Administration. We also recommend that the Legislature pass legislation this session that shifts the responsibility for the day-to-day and strategic development of the project from HSRA to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).
May 2, 2011 - In this report, we investigate the competing claims made in support and opposition of combining smaller school districts into larger districts. We find some small districts’ spending patterns and student performance differ slightly from larger districts, but very small districts have notable and troubling differences. We also find that substantial funding advantages and certain disincentives keep small districts from opting for consolidation. Our analysis suggests the state should not pursue a one-size-fits all approach for district configuration or require all small school districts to consolidate, but it does suggest the state should remove existing disincentives. To increase efficiencies and accountability, we also recommend the state increase the minimum size for districts to at least 100 students.
March 15, 2011 - Chapter 283, Statutes of 2009 (AB 1295, Fuller), requires our office to report by March 15, 2011 on the progress of the California Community Colleges (CCC) and California State University (CSU) in developing nursing education pathways in time for the 2012 13 academic year. We find that CCC and CSU are generally on track to implement the requirements of AB 1295, though further work is needed. Our report offers some specific suggestions for systemwide changes intended to promote seamless transfer of nursing students from CCC to CSU.
February 14, 2011 - In this report we review how the Master Plan envisioned the California State University (CSU) as part of the state’s higher education system, and assess how the university has carried out its role in the face of changing enrollment demand and funding limitations. We conclude that CSU’s regional role is an important component of the state’s higher education system, and recommend that the Legislature take steps to protect that focus in the face of enrollment pressures and efforts by some campuses to become more selective. Specifically, we recommend that the Legislature (1) formalize a regional education role for CSU in statute, (2) codify its expectations for CSU’s eligibility pool, and (3) direct CSU to adjust its enrollment policies accordingly.
February 8, 2011 - California’s expansive use of redevelopment has engendered significant controversy. Program advocates contend that it is a much needed tool to promote economic development in blighted areas. Program critics counter that it diverts property tax revenues from core government services and increases state education costs. The Governor’s budget includes a plan for dissolving redevelopment agencies and distributing their funds (above the amounts necessary to pay outstanding debt) to other local agencies. We find that the administration’s proposal has merit, but suggest recognizing all the redevelopment revenues as property taxes.
Note: In a letter dated February 16th, 2011 we responded to questions regarding our analysis of the California Redevelopment Association’s study of the economic effects of redevelopment included in this report.February 7, 2011 - Since 2007-08, state support for K-12 education has dropped notably, though this reduction has been partly offset by one-time federal aid and state K-12 payment deferrals. Per-pupil programmatic funding was down 3.7 percent in 2009-10 and 5 percent in 2010-11. To help school districts manage this reduction, the state temporarily removed the strings associated with roughly 40 categorical programs and eliminated various other requirements. We surveyed school districts to gather information regarding how they were being affected by recent federal and state actions. Most importantly, the survey responses show that many districts: (1) have reserved some federal Ed Jobs for 2011–12; (2) would find an additional deferral in 2011–12 more difficult to accommodate; (3) have benefited notably from existing flexibility provisions and desire additional flexibility; and (4) already have increased class sizes notably, instituted furlough days, laid off some teachers, and shortened the school year. Given these survey findings, we identify several ways the Legislature could provide school districts with more flexibility in the short term. We also provide the Legislature with a relatively simple approach for making more lasting improvements to California’s K–12 finance system.
February 1, 2011 - Total expenditures for the regional center system that provides services for persons with developmental disabilities more than doubled between 1999-00 and 2009-10, leading to a series of actions by the Legislature to slow down the growth in the program. In this report, we describe and assess proposals in the Governor’s 2011-12 budget plan to achieve further cost containment in programs administered by the Department of Developmental Services, including community services. We recommend approval of the Governor’s budget proposals to (1) extend the 4.25 percent provider payment reduction and the commensurate reduction to regional center (RC) operations, and (2) obtain additional federal funds for services provided through the developmental centers and the RCs. We also recommend the Legislature either expand the existing Family Cost Participation Program or implement means testing to determine who is eligible to receive these state services.These changes, we would acknowledge, represent a significant departure from the policies originally adopted in the Lanterman Act but would help ensure the long-term sustainability of the program for those consumers with the greatest financial need for its services.
January 31, 2011 - For four of its budget proposals, the administration uses a new approach for accruing (attributing) revenues to each fiscal year. In the administration's budget figures, this approach increases revenues available for the 2011-12 budget process by over $700 million and decreases the 2011-12 minimum funding guarantee for schools and community colleges by $1.5 billion below what it would have been otherwise. We find that the administration's new accrual approach—while imperfectly executed in its forecast—has some merit. It would move state budget accounting closer—in some respects—to generally accepted accounting principles. We fault the administration for not describing the new approach and its implications more clearly in its public budget documents and recommend that the Legislature take steps to require more transparency in the future.
January 27, 2011 - The Governor proposes to increase California Community College (CCC) fees from $26 per unit to $36 per unit beginning on July 2011. We believe that a fee increase should be an important component of the state’s budget strategy for CCC, as it would leverage more federal funds (in the form of federal tax credits) to mitigate programmatic impacts on CCC instruction and services, while having no negative effect on financially needy students (who do not pay fees). While the Governor is on the right track, the Legislature might consider going even further in the budget year to tap additional federal dollars in support of the CCC system. In future years, we recommend the Legislature ensure that CCC fee levels are pegged to the maximum amount covered by federal tax credits.
January 25, 2011 - Recently, the Legislature enacted a package of changes known as the “fuel tax swap” to achieve General Fund relief. However, the passage of ballot measures in November 2010 potentially undoes portions of the tax swap package. In response to these ballot measures, the Governor’s January 2011-12 budget proposes statutory changes to recapture the use of transportation funds to help balance the state’s budget. In this brief we describe and evaluate these recent changes and the Governor’s proposal. We also provide additional options that the Legislature may wish to consider that offer more solutions to achieve General Fund relief.
January 25, 2011 - In this brief, we (1) provide an overview of the Governor’s budget proposals for the judicial branch and (2) recommend specific actions to achieve savings, while at the same time minimizing the impacts on access to the courts. Some of our cost-saving recommendations include changes in court reporting practices, utilizing competitive bidding for court security, contracting out for court interpreter services, and offsetting General Fund costs with other fund sources in the judicial branch.
January 24, 2011 - Over the last several years, the state has deferred payments to school districts as a way to achieve significant Proposition 98 savings. Relying on deferrals has allowed the state to achieve significant one-time savings while simultaneously allowing school districts to continue operating a larger program by borrowing or using cash reserves. As the magnitude and length of payment deferrals have increased, however, school districts have found fronting the cash required to continue operating at a higher programmatic level increasingly difficult. As part of his 2011-12 budget plan, the Governor continues to rely heavily on payment deferrals. His one major budget proposal for K-12 education is a $2.1 billion deferral. In this report, we track the state's increased use of deferrals, discuss the advantages and disadvantages of deferrals, and highlight several other major factors the Legislature should consider as it decides whether to approve additional K-12 deferrals.