Walters: Governor-elect Becerra must quickly confront state budget mess Newsom left behind

The most fundamental — and arguably most important — duty of a California governor is managing the state budget.

Xavier Becerra, the former attorney general who won the governorship Tuesday, must submit a new budget to the Legislature just days after his inauguration in January. Outgoing Gov. Gavin Newsom is leaving him with a fiscal mess.

Newsom, who will likely launch a presidential campaign, insisted in June that the 2026-27 budget he signed was not only balanced but would remain so during his predecessor’s first year.

Not by a long shot.

During Newsom’s second term, he and the Legislature routinely enacted general fund budgets that spent billions of dollars more than the state’s tax system was producing, covering the gaps with accounting gimmicks, by draining emergency reserves and incurring on- and off-the-books loans.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

A chart in the back pages of the 2026-27 budget reveals that during Newsom’s eight years of managing the budget, the state took in $1.4 trillion in general fund revenue but spent $1.7 trillion, averaging $37 billion in overspending each year. Among other things, the spending spree increased the state’s payroll by 100,000 positions.

Newsom leaves the state with what Gabe Petek, the Legislature’s budget analyst, describes as a $29 billion “wall of debt” that must eventually be repaid, echoing a term that former Gov. Jerry Brown coined in 2010.

Becerra faces a stark choice.

He could continue the deficit spending, running up even more debt — the governmental equivalent of a family maxing out its credit cards to finance its lifestyle. Or he could do what Brown did when he began his second governorship and faced a $35 billion “a wall of debt” from the effects of the Great Recession.

After his 2010 election, Brown engaged in a very public discussion about what it would take to balance the budget and whittle down its debts. He settled on a mixture of spending reductions and temporary sales and income tax increases, plus creating “rainy day” reserves to cushion future revenue drops.

During Brown’s governorship, general fund income and outgo closely matched, the aforementioned chart confirms. He bequeathed a healthy budget to Newsom.

It would take political courage for Becerra to adopt the face-the-music attitude that Brown displayed in 2011. Politically, the easier path would be to emulate Newsom, who was content to overspend revenues while shunning any major tax increases to cover the gaps.

Becerra has been very reluctant to reveal any policy intentions, but in an interview late last month, he indicated that he may be willing to increase taxes — unlike Newsom.

Becerra told Ashley Zavala, of Sacramento’s KCRA-TV, that he’s interested in raising taxes on high-income Californians, taxing employers whose low-paid workers qualify for Medi-Cal health benefits, closing corporate tax loopholes and adopting a mileage-based tax on electric cars.

Click here to read the full article at CalMatters

 

Californians voted to spend $1 billion on K-12 arts. Why are schools returning the money?

Three years after voters passed an ambitious arts education funding measure, California’s K-12 schools were supposed to be awash in dance, music, theater and fine arts. But some schools are returning their arts money to the state, saying the rules on how to spend it are too vague and they can’t find enough arts teachers.

“The sad thing is, this means that thousands of kids aren’t getting art,” said Austin Beutner, the former superintendent of Los Angeles Unified who wrote Proposition 28. “We thought Prop. 28 was clear.”

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

Prop. 28, which voters overwhelmingly approved in 2022, sets aside about $1 billion a year for the arts in California public schools. Schools with more low-income students get more money, but otherwise funding is based on enrollment. Los Angeles Unified, with about 400,000 students, got about $72 million last year, while Death Valley Unified, with 21 students, got about $2,000.

Schools must spend at least 80% of their money on additional arts staff, with the rest going to art supplies and other arts expenses. Whatever they don’t spend, they’re required to return to the state after three years. The first three-year period just ended, and the California Department of Education hasn’t yet announced how much money schools returned. The state redistributes the unspent money to individual schools that are using their Prop. 28 money correctly, based on their annual spending reports.

State data compiled by Create CA, an arts nonprofit that supported Prop. 28, shows dozens, if not hundreds of schools that spent no money. Among them are charter schools, small schools, and mid-sized schools in every corner of the state.

At the other end of the spectrum, many districts have gone on spending sprees, hiring teachers and expanding programs at all schools. Bakersfield City Schools, for example, doubled the size of its folklorico and mariachi dance programs, bought thousands of musical instruments and paired local artists with classroom teachers.

Long Beach Unified has also doubled down on the arts. Its high school course catalog offers dozens of arts classes, including classics like marching band and painting as well as more obscure classes like improvisational dance, steel drums, stage technology, chamber orchestra and photography.

Too few teachers, too much confusion

But other districts, particularly smaller and rural districts, have hit some snags. Even though the state allows districts to pool their Prop. 28 money to share a teacher, the law doesn’t provide explicit language about it. Regardless, schools say there are not enough art teachers to hire. According to a recent Stanford Research Institute study, California needs at least 5,000 new arts teachers to meet the demand. Rural areas in general have a harder time hiring teachers, particularly those with specialized training.

Click here to read the full article in CalMatters

Democrats want California voters to give them more flexibility over spending

  • Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative Democrats are pushing a constitutional amendment to allow them to expand state savings and provide more flexibility over spending.
  • The plan would exempt deposits into rainy day account from the state spending limit and double the amount of money that they can tuck away into savings.
  • If approved Thursday, the measure will appear on the November ballot.

Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democratic leaders of the California Legislature plan to approve a proposed constitutional amendment this week that would ask voters to give them more flexibility over state spending and allow them to save money that could otherwise go back to taxpayers.

The proposal seeks to exempt deposits into state savings accounts from a spending limit that voters adopted through a series of ballot measures dating back to the late 1970s and to increase the share of tax revenue that can be put into the rainy day fund.

“Putting money aside to protect ourselves from future uncertainties isn’t just good government; it’s common sense,” Newsom said in a statement. “California is strong and resilient, but we’re not immune to economic headwinds. At a time when our essential services are under pressure, we have a responsibility to safeguard the programs and investments that Californians rely on.”

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

Assembly Constitutional Amendment 20, which Democrats are calling the “Save for California’s Future Act,” could receive push back from taxpayer advocates.

Under an existing state appropriations restraint, also known as the Gann limit, lawmakers cannot spend more than an amount determined by a formula that takes into consideration annual tax proceeds and changes to the population and cost of living. Tax revenue above the limit must be divided between schools and refunds to taxpayers.

With few exceptions, the limit applies to most appropriations of tax revenue, including money that lawmakers tuck away into the rainy day fund and other reserves. California voters have also capped the amount of money lawmakers can set aside in the rainy day fund to 10% of general fund proceeds in a given year.

Since taking office, Newsom has argued that it doesn’t make sense for savings to count as spending under state law.

State budget revenue is subject to dramatic swings from year to year based on stock market activity. The law, Newsom has said, prevents the state from saving more money in good years to stave off cuts to programs in bad years.

Click here to read the full article in the LA Times

Walters: Newsom’s unbalanced budget faces strong pushback for spending cuts. Will lawmakers back him?

Gavin Newsom is trying to finish his governorship on a high note, claiming he has written “a balanced budget structurally for 18 months” that would give his successor some breathing room.

The word “structurally” is the key feature Newsom is touting because for the past four years, after he and the Legislature raised spending on an erroneously expansive revenue projection, budgets have spent a total of $125 billion more than the state’s real revenues, according to the Legislature’s budget analyst, Gabe Petek.

It is what budget junkies term a “structural deficit,” meaning spending commitments are more than the revenue system can cover. Newsom is now claiming that with a recent surge in revenues and some belt-tightening, his 2026-27 budget is now structurally sound.

However, the numbers he presents say otherwise.

His $349.4 billion budget projects that the state will take in $226.5 billion in general fund tax revenues during the fiscal year that begins July 1 but would spend $246.6 billion, a $20 billion gap that’s somewhat smaller than those of recent years but still a structural deficit.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

A short-term revenue spike, some spending reductions, some borrowing and the usual mix of other “solutions” would cover the shortfall, but even so, the budget acknowledges that long-term deficits still loom, although perhaps smaller than previous estimates.

Petek says the budget still leaves the state “ill-prepared” for even a small hiccup in revenues.

Newsom is obviously proud of what he has wrought, saying “We’re cutting deficits but not cutting corners.” However, as the June 15 constitutional deadline for passing a budget looms, he and legislators are facing widespread resistance to the budget’s reductions, particularly in education and health and welfare services for the poor and disabled, and to an unwillingness to cover additional cuts in federal aid for those programs.

Click here to read the full article in CalMatters

California lawmakers ignore most state audit warnings, costing billions

For more than a decade, the California State Auditor has issued warnings to lawmakers about government waste, fraud, cost overruns, and broken oversight systems across state government. Again and again, audits called for changes in state law meant to fix those problems.

In many cases, those fixes did not happen.

CBS News California Investigates recently exposed how lawmakers ignored years of warnings from the California State Auditor about hidden traffic violation fees.

That raised a broader question: What other audit warnings have lawmakers been ignoring, and at what cost?

An exclusive CBS News California analysis of state audit recommendations dating back to 2015 found lawmakers failed to enact three out of every four recommendations that required legislative action. 

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

The unresolved warnings span some of California’s most expensive and urgent problems, including unemployment fraud, homelessness spending oversight, public safety funding accountability, wildfire risk, and drinking water safety, just to name a few.

These are audits the Legislature asked for. Audits Californians paid for. Audits with recommendations that remain unresolved, while California continues to lose money to potential waste and fraud. 

California’s Unfinished Business

CBS News California analyzed state audit recommendations dating back to 2015 and found the following.

  • California lawmakers failed to act on three out of every four state audit recommendations
  • There are more than 300 outstanding recommendations to the legislature
  • The outstanding recommendations impacted more than 100 different issues and agencies
  • Two out of three state audits include recommendations on which the auditor notes that lawmakers have taken “no action”
    at all. 

CBS News California Investigates is now building a publicly searchable “Audit Accountability Tracker” to help viewers and voters track what lawmakers have not done and what that inaction costs Californians. 

Click here to read the full article in CBS News

Newsom faces another multibillion-dollar budget shortfall in his last year as California governor

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office said the state faces a $2.9 billion budget deficit this year, an amount significantly lower than what legislative budget analysts projected.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

The deficit, though small, could still require cuts and means the Democratic governor doesn’t have money to advance new programs during his last year in office.

It’s the fourth year in a row that the nation’s most populous state faces a multibillion-dollar budget deficit. This year’s shortfall comes despite growing revenues fueled by stock market gains and investments in artificial intelligence.

Newsom’s office outlined a behemoth $349 billion budget, though his proposal for how to spend all of that money is far from final. Lawmakers and the Democratic governor will spend the next several months fighting and negotiating over priorities — and cuts. Last year Democrats had to roll back their ambitious program to provide free health care to immigrants without legal status in the face of a $12 billion deficit.

“This budget really is about an eye towards ensuring that we have a sustainable fiscal plan going forward,” Finance Director Joe Stephenshaw said during a Friday briefing.

This year, they will also face a $1.4 billion loss in federal funding after new federal policy changes to health care and food assistance programs for low-income people. Lawmakers have said repeatedly California is in no position to backfill that money. The budget doesn’t fully address the federal funding loss.

Newsom will try to safeguard some of the progressive policies that have defined his tenure as he considers a presidential run. But lawmakers have to consider the looming structural deficit that could climb to $22 billion the following year. Newsom can’t seek a third term and will leave office in January.

Click here to read the full article at AP News

Gavin Newsom confronts $18B budget disaster he helped create

California Gov. Gavin Newsom is waking up to an $18 billion budget hangover — and fixing it won’t be pretty.

After years of surpluses, the Golden State is facing staggering deficits that could balloon to $35 billion in the coming years, according to the state’s Legislative Analyst, after a yearslong spending spree combined with federal funding cuts and a struggling economy. 

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

Only four years ago, California was flush with cash — with a jaw-dropping surplus of $100 billion, thanks to a rollicking stock market and Covid-era cash infusions from the federal government.

Since then, revenues — driven by capital gains taxes on the rich — shrunk as the economy took a nosedive.

California’s unemployment rate was the highest in the nation as of September, as everyday residents feel the pinch, from high prices on food, housing and gasoline driven by a mix of federal and state policies.

The Trump administration and Republicans in Congress have pushed through sweeping cuts to everything, from transportation dollars and health care funding to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance (SNAP). Just this week, Trump froze billions in child care and social services funding over claims of fraud — potentially further draining California’s piggy bank.

Thanks to extensive earmarks in areas like education, homelessness and housing, much of the state’s dwindling cash is spoken for, explained Lanhee Chen, Stanford University public policy expert. But that hasn’t restrained Newsom and Democrats from an “insatiable appetite for spending,” he said.

Click here to read the full article at the NY Post

California lawmakers return to Capitol facing budget deficit, affordability pressures

Year 2 of the two-year legislative session will begin Monday

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) — The year 2026 is sure to bring another round of big political battles and shifts in leadership ahead of what’s expected to be a hotly contested midterm election season.

Needless to say, it’s going to be a busy year.

That’s right. We’ll have several competitive and already expensive races throughout California that will impact not only the future of our state, but the balance of power in Congress.

Next week, Gov. Gavin Newsom will give his final state of the state address for his last year in this office.

And for the first time since the pandemic, the two-term Democrat will give his speech during a joint session of the California legislature at the capitol.

Newsom’s lame duck year isn’t expected to be easy, with California’s budget deficit projected to reach nearly $18 billion.

With the governor’s term ending, so begins the crowded race to replace him.

More than a dozen candidates are vying to be California’s chief executive.

MORE: Court battle begins over California’s new congressional map designed to favor Democrats

“This race has just gotten so slight and so big. It’s really anybody’s race,” said Justin Berton, political consultant.

In a contest that, so far, has been slow to pick up momentum.

“Most polling shows, even the top, you know, polling candidates are only getting 12, 13, 14% of the electorate. There’s as much as 44, 45% of the electorate undecided,” said political consultant Jim Ross.

Click here to read the full article at ABC 7 News

California’s budget outlook is grim. Here’s what you need to know

In summary How did we get here? Where do we go from here? Spend one minute to catch up on everything you need to know about California’s budget health this year.

Welcome to CalMatters, the only nonprofit newsroom devoted solely to covering issues that affect all Californians. Sign up for WhatMatters to receive the latest news and commentary on the most important issues in the Golden State.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

Gov. Gavin Newsom opened this year with a rosy forecast: Buoyed by $17 billion more in revenue than previously planned, the state would have a modest surplus of $363 million for fiscal year 2025-26, he told reporters in January.

But life turns on a dime.

The January wildfires that ripped through Los Angeles forced the state to spend billions in disaster aid and delay tax filings for LA residents. The cost of Medi-Cal, the state-run health insurance program for low-income residents, ballooned to $6 billion more than anticipated. President Donald Trump’s on-again-off-again tariff policies rocked the stock market, which California heavily relies on for tax revenue. And the state lodged a flurry of lawsuits against the Trump administration over its threat to withhold federal funding for food assistance, disaster recovery and other grants.

By May, Newsom no longer predicted a modest surplus, but a $12 billion deficit. 

To plug the hole, Newsom initially proposed drastic cuts to Medi-Cal. But the final budget he negotiated with state lawmakers depended largely on internal borrowing, dipping into the state’s reserves and freezing Medi-Cal enrollment for undocumented immigrants to avoid deep cuts to other social services.

While Democratic leaders largely blamed the Trump administration for California’s budget problem, the volatility of state revenues is not new. California highly depends on taxing the income and capital gains of high earners, whose fortune is often at the mercy of the stock market. In 2022, the state saw a nearly $100 billion surplus, followed by a projected $56 billion deficit over the next two years.

2026 outlook

The deficit is projected to reach nearly $18 billion next year, mostly because the state is expected to spend so much money that it would offset, if not eclipse, the strong tax revenues driven by an AI boom, said the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office in its fiscal outlook last month.

If the estimate holds, it’ll be the fourth year in a row in Newsom’s tenure that California faces a deficit despite revenue growth.

Worse yet, the structural deficit could reach $35 billion annually by fiscal year 2027-28, the LAO said. 

California is facing $6 billion in extra spending next year, including at least $1.3 billion because the state must now pay more to cover Medi-Cal benefits under Trump’s budget bill. The state also stands to lose more housing and homelessness funding from the federal government.

How can legislators fix it? The options are stretching thin, as the state already took one-time measures to balance the books. The LAO notes that solving an ongoing structural budget problem requires either finding more sustainable revenue streams, or making serious cuts, or both.

Click here to read the full article in CalMatters

Failed State California: $18 Billion Deficit, High-Risk State Agencies, Record Out-Migration

California has the highest unemployment rate the nation’s highest among the 50 states

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

“The Legislature has needed to address budget problems for three years in a row,” the California Legislative Analyst warned in their November report on California’s fiscal outlook.

And the really bad news: California has an $18 billion budget deficit, $5 billion higher than expected, according to a November report from the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

“The California State Auditor published a scalding report Friday that is an unvarnished indictment of Governor Gavin Newsom and his administration,” the Globe reported Monday following the Auditor’s new report. “The report should have everyone living in California horrified.”

“The Auditor’s report finds Gavin Newsom while in his final year as governor, has upended the state’s financial structure, compromised public safety, and left the state’s infrastructure in far worse condition.”

So, California has many “High-Risk” state agencies and an $18 Billion budget deficit… the makings of an unstable failed state.

Our own report in August, “How To Kill A State In 5 Easy Steps – Gavin Newsom’s California,” appears to be on target. Sadly. No one is celebrating California’s demise except maybe China and Venezuela.

Between the State Auditor’s scathing report and the Legislative Analyst’s gloomy update and forecast, it’s wake-up time for the state’s elected lawmakers – many will still be in office long after Gavin Newsom’s presidential campaign.

2026‑27 Budget Problem Now Larger Than Anticipated, Legislative Analyst Gabriel Petek reported:

“Under our revenue and spending estimates, the Legislature faces an almost $18 billion budget problem in 2026‑27. This is about $5 billion larger than the budget problem anticipated by the administration in June, despite improvements in revenue. This is because constitutional spending requirements under Proposition 98 (1988) and Proposition 2 (2014) almost entirely offset revenue gains. Moreover, we estimate costs in other programs to be about $6 billion higher than anticipated.”

“Starting in 2027‑28, we estimate structural deficits to grow to about $35 billion annually due to spending growth continuing to outstrip revenue growth.” Ouch. That’s going to leave a mark. 

“Budget Position Is Weak. We advise the Legislature to address the budget problem through a combination of ongoing solutions—namely, achievable spending reductions and/or revenue increases. There are three reasons these actions are now critical. First, the budget problem is now larger than anticipated, despite improvements in revenue, and the structural deficits are significant and growing. Second, while our revenue estimates hedge against a market downturn, they do not reflect the revenue declines the state would experience in a recession. Third, the state has used most of its budget resiliency tools to address prior deficits. If our estimates hold, the Legislature will face a fourth consecutive year of budget problems—all during a period of overall revenue growth. As it stands—with larger forecasted deficits and many fewer tools available to address them—California’s budget is undeniably less prepared for downturns.”

California’s budget problem is now significantly larger than anticipated – and the state is undeniably less prepared for downturns.

Another notable area is constitutional budget requirements, like education spending.

“Revenue Improvement Almost Entirely Offset by Constitutional Requirements. Across 2024‑25 to 2026‑27, our revenue estimates are up $11 billion compared to the budget act. These revenue improvements do not, on net, improve the budget’s bottom line, however. This is because of the requirements of Proposition 98 (1988), which governs school and community college funding, and Proposition 2 (2014), which specifies reserve deposits and debt payments… Together, due to higher revenue estimates, these requirements increase by over $10 billion—representing nearly all of the revenue gain.”

The Legislative Analyst also warns that the Trump Administration’s One Big Beautiful Bill, H.R. 1, will cost the state about $5 million more at the current rate of Medi-Cal spending.

“In total, we estimate H.R. 1 will increase state costs by about $5 billion by 2029‑30. Specifically, we estimate Medi‑Cal costs will increase on net by $3 billion and CalFresh costs will increase by almost $2 billion.”

As we reported Monday, the State Auditor concurs, and explains why:

“The California Department of Social Services met our criteria to be designated as a high-risk agency, and we are adding it to the high-risk list. Because of recent changes to federal law, the State will soon be required to pay a portion of its CalFresh benefits. This cost, which could be as much as $2.5 billion in federal fiscal year 2028, is based on California’s payment error rate, which measures the accuracy of the State’s eligibility and benefit determinations.”

California will likely need to spend about $2.5 billion annually to maintain CalFresh benefits. In July 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act became federal law and made changes to SNAP that will increase states’ share of SNAP costs in two ways.

The Legislative Analyst warns that Structural Deficits Now Moving in the Wrong Direction. This means that the state is spending more than it brings in through taxes. Gird your loins. 

The Legislative Analyst has several warnings:

Click here to read the full article in the California Globe