11.07.2015 Views

Chapter 1 General Government - The California Performance Review

Chapter 1 General Government - The California Performance Review

Chapter 1 General Government - The California Performance Review

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>The</strong> <strong>California</strong> <strong>Performance</strong> <strong>Review</strong>Federal Revenue(dollars in thousands)Fiscal Year Revenues Costs Net Savings (Costs) Change in PYs2004–05 $0 $0 $0 02005–06 $1,300,000 $0 $1,300,000 02006–07 $1,950,000 $0 $1,950,000 02007–08 $2,350,000 $0 $2,350,000 02008–09 $2,600,000 $0 $2,600,000 0Note: <strong>The</strong> dollars and PYs for each year in the above chart reflect the total change for that year from2003–04 expenditures, revenues and PYs.Endnotes1<strong>California</strong> State Auditor, Bureau of State Audits, “Federal Funds: <strong>The</strong> State of <strong>California</strong> Takes Advantage of AvailableFederal Grants, but Budget Constraints and Other Issues Keep It From Maximizing This Resource,” Report Number2002-123.2 (Sacramento, <strong>California</strong>, August 2003), p. 1.2Public Policy Institute of <strong>California</strong>, “Factors Determining <strong>California</strong>’s Share of Federal Formula Grants, SecondEdition,” by Tim Ransdell (San Francisco, <strong>California</strong>, February 2004), p. 40.3<strong>California</strong> State Auditor, Bureau of State Audits, “Federal Funds: <strong>The</strong> State of <strong>California</strong> Takes Advantage of AvailableFederal Grants, but Budget Constraints and Other Issues Keep It From Maximizing This Resource,” p. 1.4E-mail from Greg Riggs, assistant secretary Labor and Workforce Development Agency (May 6, 2004). Provided copiesof Internal White-Paper-Federal Funding Information and Trends Impacting <strong>California</strong>, February 2004.5<strong>The</strong> <strong>California</strong> Institute for Federal Policy Research, “<strong>California</strong> Institute Special Report: <strong>California</strong>’s Balance ofPayments with the Federal Treasury, Fiscal Years 1981–2002,” (Washington, D.C.), p. 1.6<strong>The</strong> <strong>California</strong> Institute for Federal Policy Research, “<strong>California</strong> Institute Special Report: <strong>California</strong>’s Balance ofPayments with the Federal Treasury, Fiscal Years 1981–2002,” p. 2.7U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein, “Citing Lack of Funding for <strong>California</strong>, Senator Feinstein Seeks Changes in HomelandSecurity Funding,” Washington, D.C., July 25, 2003. (Press release.) Funding for the Homeland Security grant wasdone in March of 2003.8Public Law 107-296, “Homeland Security Act of 2002,” November 25, 2002.9Public Law 107-56, “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept andObstruct Terrorism (USA Patriot) Act of 2001,” October 26, 2001.10Public Policy Institute of <strong>California</strong>, “Federal Formula Grants and <strong>California</strong>, Homeland Security,” by Tim Ransdell(San Francisco, <strong>California</strong>, January 2004), p. 2.11Interview with Tim Ransdell, author, <strong>California</strong> Public Policy Institute (April 8, 2004). Mr. Ransdell stated that theHomeland Security grant caught <strong>California</strong> off guard because the impact was not analyzed until after the appropriation.A <strong>Government</strong> for the People for a Change 41

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!