State Budget

|

LAO publishes budget review

The Legislative Analyst’s Office released a summary of budget developments up through the passage of the 2010-11 budget last month. It is not, however, a projection of what is to come. That analysis is likely to be coming later this month. Nonetheless, for those interested in the details, the summary is available at http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2010/bud/spend_plan/spend_plan_110510.pdf The report takes note of the fact that the earlier legislation in which the state claimed no responsibility for the UC pension has been removed. (The UCLA Faculty Assn. proudly notes its part in getting that accomplished. See earlier posts for info on the role played…

Government by (Hot) Checks and (Im)Balances: California’s State Budget from the May 2009 Voter Rejection to the October 2010 Budget Deal

The sad tale of the California state budget over the past year and a half – as told by yours truly – is available at http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/documents/areas/fac/hrob/mitchell_2011budgetchapter.pdf At over 60 pages, it may be more than you want to know. This item is a forthcoming chapter in California Policy Options 2011, an annual volume of the UCLA School of Public Affairs. The volume will appear in paper format in late December or early January. It will be webified towards the end of winter quarter. Earlier volumes – including chapters on the state budget – can be found at http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/x2195.xml (Scroll down…

California Spends About $7 Per $1000 of Personal Income on Public Higher Ed

The image above is not too clear. I have put a black rectangle above the bar for California to help identify it. The chart shows – by state – spending in 2009-10 on public higher education per $1000 of personal income. For California, the figure (which includes community colleges) is around $7, somewhat above the U.S. average of $6.60. The data include federal stimulus funds for that fiscal year. You can get a clearer image by going to the source document. The chart is from a College Board report entitled “Trends in College Pricing 2010” (page 19) available at http://trends.collegeboard.org/downloads/College_Pricing_2010.pdf…

| | |

Prop 26 and Its Potential Effect on UC

Proposition 26 on the November ballot would require a 2/3 vote in the legislature for state imposition of various “fees.” It applies a similar restriction to local fees. A 2/3 vote of the electorate would apply to such fees at the local level. At the moment, there is a distinction made between a “tax” (which is subject to a 2/3 vote) and a fee. During budget crises, governments in California have tended to raise fees, which escape the 2/3 requirement, since tax raising is more difficult. Essentially, Prop 26 tightens up the definition of fee, putting more of them under…

| | | |

What the Latest PPIC Poll Tells Us

The Public Policy Institute of California has released its latest poll data. Jerry Brown seems to be pulling ahead of Meg Whitman. The poll covers the period including the last debate and “whore-gate.” (If you don’t know what that is, it apparently doesn’t matter to voters so forget it.) As far as UC goes, Whitman favors defined contribution pensions for new hires of public employees, but it appears the Regents will select a defined benefit option. Would she insist on DC for UC? As noted in earlier posts, regardless of who wins, there could be a ballot initiative mandating DC….

| | |

Good News/Bad News on UC Budget

The Sacramento Bee reports good news/bad news on the UC budget. Although the article doesn’t say so, part of the funding for UC (and CSU) for this fiscal year is coming from federal stimulus monies which disappear next year. After massive cuts, higher ed funding rises in new California budget (excerpt) Oct. 20, 2010, Laurel Rosenhall A wave of mass student protests, a new lobbying strategy by university leaders, and the governor’s desire to leave a positive legacy in education during his final year in office led to a remarkable turnaround for California’s public colleges in the budget he signed…

| | | | |

Spillovers to UC from the SEIU Deal with the Governor?

Are there any spillover effects for UC from the deal between SEIU Local 1000 and the governor as part of the budget enactment? There had been prior deals with some other state unions but Local 1000 was the biggie. The contract has yet to be ratified by union members. Directly, the contract has no effect on UC employees since none are covered by the agreement. Other unions represent UC employees. But indirectly there might be some effects, either positive or negative. Let’s look at the terms as described by the union on its website – actual contract language is not…

|

Cash Management

With a budget now enacted, the state controller is authorized to make payments that have been held up. The problem is that the budget enactment did not create more cash. Indeed, not having a budget conserved cash precisely because payments were not being made. Excerpts from the website of controller John Chiang: How bad is the State’s cash flow? Unfortunately, the more than three-month long stalemate over a spending plan resulted in the State being unable to make more than $8.3 billion in payments to small businesses, community clinics, and local governments since July 1. After accounting for September’s cash…

| | |

Chop, Chop: The Budget With the Governor’s Line-Item Vetoes (Including a UC Pension-Related Veto)

The previous post on this blog gave the LAO’s description of the newly-passed state budget. It provided reserve at the end of the current fiscal year that I described as within the range of white noise. The governor has now exercised his line-item vetoes, raising the reserve projected for June 30, 2011 to $1.3 with roughly a billion dollars in vetoes. So for the current year, revenue and transfers remain as in the previous post at $94.2 billion. But expenditures drop by a billion to $86.5 billion, leading to an operating surplus of $7.7 billion. The governor’s budget document is…

LAO’s Initial Explanation of Budget Deal

The Legislative Analyst’s Office has provided a description (not really an evaluation – that will come later) of the budget deal that passed the legislature earlier today. In summary, LAO estimates the General Fund to have been left with a negative reserve of -$6.3 billion at the end of the last fiscal year, i.e., on June 30, 2010. It also estimates that the negative reserve was the result of prior sins because the budget (with all the accounting tricks, etc.) for 2009-10 was roughly balanced (revenue = expenditure). The new budget assumes “revenues and transfers” of $94.2 billion and expenditures…