Views
4 years ago

Fiscal Realities: Budget Tradeoffs in California Government

Fiscal Realities: Budget Tradeoffs in California Government

Fiscal Realities: Budget Tradeoffs in California

Public Policy Institute of California Fiscal Realities: Budget Tradeoffs in California Government • • • Tracy M. Gordon Jaime Calleja Alderete Patrick J. Murphy Jon Sonstelie Ping Zhang

  • Page 2 and 3: Fiscal Realities: Budget Tradeoffs
  • Page 4 and 5: Foreword Issues of state and local
  • Page 6 and 7: Summary California’s recent fisca
  • Page 8 and 9: tax for 32 percent of tax revenues
  • Page 10 and 11: 2005). Although the link between re
  • Page 12 and 13: The largest of California’s socia
  • Page 14 and 15: programs administered by local publ
  • Page 16 and 17: Contents Foreword..................
  • Page 18: Parks and Recreation...............
  • Page 21 and 22: 6.2. Own Public Hospital Expenditur
  • Page 24 and 25: Tables 2.1. State and Local Governm
  • Page 26 and 27: 6.11. Medicaid-to-Medicare Fee Inde
  • Page 28 and 29: 9.9. Components of Police Protectio
  • Page 30 and 31: Acknowledgments This report reflect
  • Page 32 and 33: Acronyms AC Transit ACF AFDC AHRQ A
  • Page 34: TANF TTI UC Temporary Assistance fo
  • Page 37 and 38: ecommendations from nearly a dozen
  • Page 40 and 41: 2. Analytical Tools This chapter re
  • Page 42 and 43: Comparative Approach These figures
  • Page 44 and 45: than programs. In what the Census B
  • Page 46 and 47: Caseload Population = Participants
  • Page 48 and 49: In this report, we use labor market
  • Page 50 and 51: Table 2.4 Average Wages, by State a
  • Page 52:

    A Note on Budget Concepts Discussio

  • Page 55 and 56:

    dividends or interest payments. As

  • Page 57 and 58:

    General Revenues Total revenues inc

  • Page 59 and 60:

    evenues (31%), and New York receive

  • Page 61 and 62:

    Most states rely on a “three-legg

  • Page 63 and 64:

    of New York. For example, Illinois

  • Page 65 and 66:

    The more items that are exempt from

  • Page 67 and 68:

    Table 3.7 Local Revenues per $1,000

  • Page 70 and 71:

    4. Elementary and Secondary Educati

  • Page 72 and 73:

    those in another. As a consequence,

  • Page 74 and 75:

    Current Expenditures California’s

  • Page 76 and 77:

    NEA definition excludes some of tho

  • Page 78 and 79:

    of 9 percent. Among our comparison

  • Page 80 and 81:

    fact, California’s real expenditu

  • Page 82 and 83:

    atio of staff to students in Califo

  • Page 84 and 85:

    Table 4.9 Average Public School Sal

  • Page 86 and 87:

    250 200 California U.S.-California

  • Page 88 and 89:

    55, which authorized $21 billion fo

  • Page 90 and 91:

    Table 4.12 NAEP Scores for Students

  • Page 92 and 93:

    5. Higher Education Higher educatio

  • Page 94 and 95:

    Within these categories, the Census

  • Page 96 and 97:

    300 250 Expenditures (2002 $) 200 1

  • Page 98 and 99:

    (FTES) to compare the level of reso

  • Page 100 and 101:

    this variation. In 2002, CPEC repor

  • Page 102 and 103:

    Higher education institutions withi

  • Page 104 and 105:

    Revenues and expenditures per FTES

  • Page 106 and 107:

    Table 5.7 Wages for Full- and Part-

  • Page 108 and 109:

    equivalent students in Florida, how

  • Page 110 and 111:

    testing does not even exist. Output

  • Page 112 and 113:

    Table 5.12 Estimated Degrees Confer

  • Page 114 and 115:

    6. Health Services Health services

  • Page 116 and 117:

    The fourth expenditure function, ot

  • Page 118 and 119:

    designed to study individual progra

  • Page 120 and 121:

    Compared to the average for all oth

  • Page 122 and 123:

    In general, financial eligibility c

  • Page 124 and 125:

    Table 6.5 Components of Medicaid Re

  • Page 126 and 127:

    Table 6.7 Components of Medicaid an

  • Page 128 and 129:

    Medi-Cal recipients were enrolled i

  • Page 130 and 131:

    geographic differences in the cost

  • Page 132 and 133:

    The ratio of government subsidies t

  • Page 134 and 135:

    the nonelderly population compared

  • Page 136 and 137:

    esponded similarly in the Orange Co

  • Page 138 and 139:

    7. Social Services In 2002, Califor

  • Page 140 and 141:

    The U.S. Census Bureau classifies s

  • Page 142 and 143:

    experienced a similar switch in the

  • Page 144 and 145:

    in 2002 (Table 7.2). Compared to ot

  • Page 146 and 147:

    For these reasons, it is useful to

  • Page 148 and 149:

    Table 7.5 Welfare Child Care Expend

  • Page 150 and 151:

    substance abuse, and a variety of o

  • Page 152 and 153:

    care expenditures per child were wi

  • Page 154 and 155:

    Table 7.10 Components of Expenditur

  • Page 156 and 157:

    total supplementation to federal ai

  • Page 158 and 159:

    identical pool of potential eligibl

  • Page 160 and 161:

    8. Transportation In 2002, transpor

  • Page 162 and 163:

    airline companies leasing space at

  • Page 164 and 165:

    percent of this total was the reven

  • Page 166 and 167:

    Table 8.4 Expenditures on Mass Tran

  • Page 168 and 169:

    the nation. In the 1990s, however,

  • Page 170 and 171:

    In the case of both rail and nonrai

  • Page 172 and 173:

    Table 8.10 Mass Transit Salary Adju

  • Page 174 and 175:

    250 200 Expenditures (2002 $) 150 1

  • Page 176 and 177:

    Table 8.14 Freeways and Other Princ

  • Page 178 and 179:

    Table 8.16 Traffic on Freeways and

  • Page 180 and 181:

    Table 8.19 Components of Current Hi

  • Page 182 and 183:

    which congestion starts to occur. A

  • Page 184:

    60 50 • • San Jose Los Angeles

  • Page 187 and 188:

    vehicle registration, and consumer

  • Page 189 and 190:

    Table 9.2 Corrections Expenditures

  • Page 191 and 192:

    Table 9.3 Components of Corrections

  • Page 193 and 194:

    Table 9.4 Components of Corrections

  • Page 195 and 196:

    Table 9.6 Average Occupancy of Corr

  • Page 197 and 198:

    Expenditures Population = Crimes P

  • Page 199 and 200:

    0.070 0.065 California U.S.-Califor

  • Page 201 and 202:

    Table 9.12 Components of Fire Prote

  • Page 203 and 204:

    Table 9.14 Protective Inspection an

  • Page 205 and 206:

    explained by the need to compensate

  • Page 207 and 208:

    electric utilities did not differ m

  • Page 209 and 210:

    Table 10.1 Environment and Housing

  • Page 211 and 212:

    As with all functional categories d

  • Page 213 and 214:

    share of all households receiving h

  • Page 215 and 216:

    Table 10.7 Statewide Average Fair M

  • Page 217 and 218:

    Table 10.9 Natural Resources Expend

  • Page 219 and 220:

    100 90 80 Expenditures (2002 $) 70

  • Page 221 and 222:

    100 90 80 Expenditures (2002 $) 70

  • Page 223 and 224:

    Table 10.15 State and National Park

  • Page 226 and 227:

    11. Governmental Administration The

  • Page 228 and 229:

    included in central staff services,

  • Page 230 and 231:

    250 200 Expenditures (2002 $) 150 1

  • Page 232 and 233:

    Applying this equation, in 2002, pa

  • Page 234 and 235:

    California in 2002, 97 percent of t

  • Page 236:

    Table 11.7 Average Payroll for Judi

  • Page 239 and 240:

    than Republicans to be in favor of

  • Page 241 and 242:

    The latter responses suggest an und

  • Page 243 and 244:

    useful to explore these gaps furthe

  • Page 245 and 246:

    Roughly half of all corrections exp

  • Page 247 and 248:

    California. For example, enrollment

  • Page 249 and 250:

    For both Medi-Cal and CalWORKs, the

  • Page 251 and 252:

    An unpopular area of public spendin

  • Page 253 and 254:

    or the national average excluding C

  • Page 255 and 256:

    premium required at comparable skil

  • Page 257 and 258:

    Payroll Public employment and payro

  • Page 259 and 260:

    Salaries and Benefits of Public Sch

  • Page 261 and 262:

    Medicaid data analysis tool from th

  • Page 263 and 264:

    TANF, CCDF, and SSBG Caseload and F

  • Page 265 and 266:

    Population Density of Urbanized Are

  • Page 267 and 268:

    huduser.org/datasets/fmr.html. Data

  • Page 269 and 270:

    Table A.1 Urban Areas in Texas Tran

  • Page 271 and 272:

    Baldassare, Mark, PPIC Statewide Su

  • Page 273 and 274:

    Legislative Analyst’s Office, Rev

  • Page 275 and 276:

    Sexton, Terri A., and Steven M. She

  • Page 277 and 278:

    PATRICK J. MURPHY Patrick J. Murphy

Fiscal Realities: Budget Tradeoffs in California Government
Richland County Government Annual Budget Fiscal Year 2009 / 2010
Budget and Fiscal Plan - Budget - Government of British Columbia
Service Plan for Fiscal Years - Budget - Government of British ...
2013-2014 Recommended Budget - Volusia County Government
Fiscal Year 2011 - 2012 Budget - Cabarrus County
Fiscal Year 2010 Operating Budget - Septa
Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Document - Suwanee, Georgia
Adopted Operating Budget Fiscal Year 2010/2011 - Moreno Valley
fiscal survey of states - National Association of State Budget Officers
Fiscal Year 2007 Budget Narrative - City of West Palm Beach
Adopted Budget Fiscal Year 2012-2013 - County of Sonoma
Annual Budget for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2013 - Oakton ...
Town of Ocean City Adopted Budget Fiscal Year 2010-2011
Service Plan for Fiscal Years 2011/12 - Budget - Government of ...
Fiscal Year 2011-2012 Recomended Budget - Sonoma County
Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2011-2012 - City of Berkley
Fiscal Year 2013 Recommended Budget Book - Lake County
Texas Cover.pub - State Budget Crisis Task Force
FY2014 Recommended Budget - Wake County Government
Fiscal Realities - Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy ...
Perceptions of Local Fiscal Stress During a State Budget Crisis
New Fiscal Realities Challenge Local Governments New Fiscal ...
Annual Operating Budget Fiscal Year 2008-2009 - South Plains ...
Annual Operating Budget Fiscal Year 2007-2008 - South Plains ...
Annual Operating Budget Fiscal Year 2006-2007 - South Plains ...
Economic and Fiscal Outlook - Budget 2013
State Budget. State and Local Government ... - State of California
the Fiscal Year 2014 Budget Summary