To browse all LAO publications, visit our Publications page.
November 20, 2014 - Presented to: California Association of School Business Officials
November 19, 2014 - The 20th annual edition of the LAO's Fiscal Outlook—a look at possible state revenue and spending trends over the next five years—reflects anticipated progress in building budget reserves under the recently approved Proposition 2. Specifically, absent new budget commitments, we estimate the state would end 2015-16 with $4.2 billion in total reserves, $2 billion of which would result from Proposition 2's new reserve rules. A $4 billion reserve would mark significant progress for the state, but maintaining such a reserve in 2015-16 would mean little or no new spending commitments outside of Proposition 98, the funding formula for schools and community colleges. Our higher General Fund revenue estimates translate to $6.4 billion available in 2015-16 for the state's Proposition 98 priorities. The report also discusses choices facing the state in implementing Proposition 2, such as choices about which budgetary and retirement debts to repay with dedicated Proposition 2 funds over the next 15 years.
August 28, 2014 - The core responsibility of the California Department of Education (CDE) is to administer federal and state education programs. Our review found the department currently is adequately positioned to fulfill this core mission. We also found, however, that the scope of CDE’s responsibilities—and the associated need for staff and funding—change frequently based on shifting state and federal policies. In order to maintain the department's capacity to meet its responsibilities, we recommend the Legislature ensure that additional responsibilities placed on CDE in the future are paired with additional resources. Similarly, should the Legislature notably reduce CDE’s responsibilities, we recommend it make a conforming reduction to associated CDE positions and funding. We also believe CDE could find ways to make its existing services more valuable to districts and integrate state and federal accountability activities. Finally, we recommend that the Legislature repeal some CDE reporting requirements that provide limited value.
June 4, 2014 - Presented to: Budget Conference Committee
June 4, 2014 - Presented to: Budget Conference Committee
May 15, 2014 - Presented to: Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
May 8, 2014 - Presented to: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 on Education Finance
May 1, 2014 - Presented to: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 on Education
April 29, 2014 - Presented to Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 on Education
April 29, 2014 - Presented to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
April 23, 2014 - Presented to: Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
April 22, 2014 - Presented to: Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
April 11, 2014 - Due to a combination of poor budgeting practices and competing funding priorities, all of the state's education segments currently have a backlog of deferred maintenance projects. The Governor’s budget includes a package of proposals to begin addressing this backlog. While we commend the administration for highlighting deferred maintenance as a problem, we have concerns with the Governor's specific proposals and recommend the Legislature consider various alternatives. Looking beyond 2014-15, we believe the state should have a long-term strategy for properly maintaining education facilities. While a one-size-fits-all response very likely is not appropriate for such a diverse array of education segments, segment-specific plans likely could be very helpful. To this end, we recommend the Legislature require the education segments to develop plans that detail how much they set aside annually for scheduled maintenance, how they plan to eliminate their existing deferred maintenance backlogs over the next several years, and how they plan to avoid creating new backlogs thereafter. (In contrast to the other segments, we believe the state should not impose additional maintenance requirements on elementary and secondary schools at this time. The different approach for schools acknowledges the state’s recent decision to shift fiscal decision making and accountability for many aspects of schools’ operations—including maintenance—to the local level.)
April 7, 2014 - To be presented to: Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
April 3, 2014 - Presented to: California Association of Chief Business Officers