February 13, 2024 - Presented to: Senate Environmental Quality Committee Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 2 on Resources, Environmental Protection and Energy
August 23, 2017 - Presented to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 3 on Resources and Transportation
August 24, 2017 - Presented to Senate Budget and Fiscal Review, Subcommittee No. 2
May 10, 2017 - Presented to: Senate Environmental Quality Committee
February 24, 2014 - In order to minimize the negative economic impact of cap-and-trade, it is important that auction revenues be invested in a way that maximizes GHG emission reductions for a given level of spending. In reviewing the Governor's proposed expenditure plan, we find that there is significant uncertainty regarding the degree to which each investment proposed for funding will achieve GHG reductions. This uncertainty is the result of several factors, including there being only limited data and analysis provided by the administration, as well as the fact that the level of emission reductions achieved would depend on the specific projects funded by departments. Given these concerns, we recommend that the Legislature direct ARB to develop metrics for departments to use in order to prospectively evaluate the potential GHG emission benefits of proposed projects, as well as direct the board to establish a set of guidelines for how departments should incorporate these metrics into their decision making processes.
April 5, 2022 - This report contains four primary sections: (1) a description of the five key climate hazards affecting California, (2) the major ways those hazards impact sectors across the state, (3) significant existing state‑level efforts underway to address climate change impacts, and (4) key issues for the Legislature to consider in response to these impacts. This is one of a series of reports summarizing how climate change will impact different sectors across California.
April 4, 2018 - This report consists of five sections. First, we review the importance of and benefits provided by California’s forests. Second, we provide information regarding how forests are managed in California, including ownership, state and federal policies and programs, and funding. Third, we review the current conditions of forests and watersheds across the state, including the concerning implications and recent consequences of those conditions, as well as the actions that would be needed to make improvements. Fourth, in the findings section, we highlight shortcomings in how the state manages its forests and watersheds. Fifth, we offer recommendations for actions the Legislature could take to improve forest and watershed management in California.
May 13, 2021 - For the second consecutive year, the state is experiencing extremely low rates of precipitation. As we prepare for what could be an extended period of dry conditions, it is helpful to review how the state responded to the last major drought. Such information can inform—and thereby potentially improve—the state’s current and ongoing response to developing conditions. In this report, we summarize the major activities, spending, and policy actions undertaken by the state to respond to the severe drought that occurred from 2012 through 2016. We also describe current conditions, and highlight some key lessons the Legislature can learn from previous efforts to help guide its response to the emerging drought.
April 14, 2010 - The state's major climate change legislation—commonly referred to as "AB 32"—is approaching a crossroads in its implementation. The state's AB 32 activities, currently carried out mainly by the Air Resources Board (ARB) but also by eleven other state agencies, will be shifting from the development of plans and regulations to program implementation and enforcement. Legislative oversight of the overall size and components of the AB 32 program budget is very important, particularly given this upcoming shift in the program's focus. In this budget-focused brief, we provide details of the Governor's AB 32 budget proposal and ARB's plan to pay for most of the AB 32 program administrative activities from a new fee. We also offer recommendations to ensure that (1) sufficient resources are devoted to economic analysis of AB 32 measures and (2) future AB 32 expenditures and fees are justified and set at appropriate levels.
February 22, 2016 - Presented to Assembly Committee on Transportation and Senate Transportation and Housing Committee
December 4, 2014 - With a state as big, as populous, and as complex as California, it would be impossible to quickly summarize how its economy or state budget works. The purpose of Cal Facts is more modest. By providing various "snapshot" pieces of information, we hope to provide the reader with a broad overview of public finance and program trends in the state. Cal Facts consists of a series of charts and tables which address questions frequently asked of our office.
January 5, 2021 - This report is intended to provide guidance for the Legislature on how to evaluate the merits of state-funded green stimulus proposals. When reviewing such proposals, the Legislature faces two basic questions to evaluate whether they are worth pursuing: (1) what effects is the proposal likely to have on certain short-term economic conditions, such as employment and economic output; and (2) what short- and long-term environmental benefits could the proposal achieve?
February 23, 2006 - The budget proposes $7.2 million across several departments to implement the first steps in the Governor’s Climate Change Initiative—a series of strategies designed to reduce the state’s emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG). We recommend that the Legislature provide statutory direction for a state climate change policy that addresses a number of issues, including GHG emission reduction targets, the appropriate mix of regulatory and voluntary strategies, and lead agency designation.
October 18, 2021 - The 2021‑22 budget package provides a total of $21.7 billion from various fund sources—the General Fund, bond funds, and various special funds—for programs administered by the California Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Agencies. This is a net increase of $4.8 billion (22 percent) compared to 2020‑21 estimated expenditures.
Correction 10/22/21: Funding amount for CDFW has been corrected.
June 14, 2017 - Presented to Joint Committee on Climate Change Policies
December 15, 2021 - Chapter 135 of 2017 (AB 398, E. Garcia) requires our office to annually report on the economic impacts and benefits of California’s statutory greenhouse gas emission targets. This report provides our assessment of the effects of major programs in the agricultural sector that are aimed at reducing emissions and sequestering carbon, as well as identifies key issues for the Legislature to consider as it makes future policy and budget decisions.
February 14, 2019 - In this report, we assess several of the Governor’s budget proposals in the natural resources and environmental protection areas. Based on our review, we recommend various changes, as well as additional legislative oversight. We provide a complete listing of our recommendations at the end of this report.
February 5, 2016 - Despite welcome storms early this winter, statewide drought conditions appear far from over. This report (1) describes the current drought and its impacts across the state, (2) summarizes the state's drought response appropriations and activities thus far, (3) assesses the Governor's drought-related budget proposals for 2016-17, and (4) recommends steps the Legislature can take to address drought both in the coming year and the future.