Does Budget Forum Portend Tax Hikes?

DEC. 9, 2010


In what appeared to be an event designed to prepare California for tax increases, Governor-elect Jerry Brown held a well-attended budget forum on Wednesday to discuss California’s precarious state budget and extraordinary deficit.

The charts and graphs handed out to participants were full of fascinating information, but the presentation left many asking if the budget information was complete.

One graph was titled, “Where Do State General Fund Dollars Go?” It depicted massive state budget expenditures — 30 percent allocated to kindergarten through 12th grade, with another 10.6 percent going to higher education. But strangely, the Health and Human Services agency was broken out separately, with 22 percent going to health and 10.8 percent to Human Services, totaling 33.1 percent.

The biggest shocker was how frequently “billions” was used in the state’s general fund expenditures: CalWORKS, $3 billion; state employee payroll, $9.2 billion (with 67 percent in corrections); and Medi-Cal, $17.6 billion.

The “General Fund Revenues vs. Expenditures” graph showed a steeply increasing expenditure line, even when state revenues were not. And while state revenues have dropped dramatically since fiscal year 2007-08, the expenditures have not dropped commensurately.

Even more more dramatic was Brown’s financial outlook presentation. Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor warned that because of the severe job losses during this recession, it will take eight years for the employment picture to recover to the level prior to the recession, more than three years ago.California’s unemployment rate is currently 12.4 percent, much higher than the rest of the nation, which just reached 9.8 percent.

There were plenty of comments from the audience, made up of legislators and local elected government officials. John Tavaglione, president of the California State Association of Counties, noted that counties have been making severe cuts, and any discussion about shifting services from the state to local governments will need to include local government officials as well as the funding to go with services. “We need to be at the table,” he said.

Brown assured Tavaglione that county officials would be involved in state discussions of “realignment.”

Democrats, in surprising moments of frankness, spoke about “revenue solutions”  — tax increases. Assembly Speaker John Perez, D-Los Angeles, brought up an old proposal for implementing an oil severance tax, stating that nearly every other state has one, and that such a tax could generate more than $1 billion for the state. “All solutions are valid for vetting,” he said.

Challenging the all-Democratic panel, Assembly Minority Leader Connie Conway, R-Tulare, said that taxes were not part of the budget solution. “I’m so glad we are not talking about raising taxes as a solution,” Conway said, mocking the use of the word “revenue.” Conway told Brown that over-regulations are a burden to California businesses, and suggested that legislators “do everything we can to help the economy recover.”

Brown immediately moved on to a question from another audience member without commenting on Conway’s suggestion.

One Sonoma County Supervisor was critical of the high cost of the administration of state agencies, and said that the Department of Child Services agency spends $700 million in administrative costs.

Brown talked briefly about the vehicle licensing fee as a revenue source. He said heo was critical when it was cut but spending was not commensurately cut.

Assemblyman Sandre Swanson, D-Alameda, said legislators should “go to the people of California and have them involved in the solution,” after questioning how the state would pay for deficit spending.

Senator Sam Blakeslee, R-San Luis Obispo, said he was concerned with California’s losing position in comparison to other states when trying to attract business, and was growing weary of the “lip service” given to bringing jobs back to California. Blakeslee said reducing regulations was the way to help businesses recover and bring jobs back to California.

A few new Assembly members offered comments. Roger Dickinson, D-Sacramento, suggested performance-based budgeting.

Assembly member Shannon Grove, R-Bakersfield, said her own business, an employment labor and staffing agency, had lost 400 employees after mere discussions of an oil severance tax. “We need to create revenue with job creation, and not taxation,” she said.

Assemblywoman Jean Fuller, R-Bakersfield, said she wanted to see specifics including actual numbers for costs per student in the state, as well as the costs of residents’ taxes, state employees pay and the like.

“We educate, medicate and incarcerate,” said Assemblywoman Mariko Yamada, D-Davis. “People don’t care what level of government you are from, they just want their services met.”

Then there was Assemblywoman Diane Harkey, R-Dana Point, who seemed skeptical of the whole forum. She said it was “enlightening to see the charts and graphs, but after two years of doing nothing but moving money around, the credibility of this house and governor has been diminished.”


Write a comment
  1. John
    John 9 December, 2010, 15:40

    The legislators in Sacramento (including most of the GOP) are a disgrace. This is what happens place when politicians gain too much power. Most of them are like children, who having acted badly, point fingers at each other and behave as if they are innocent bystanders. The structural deficit is so enormous that there is no will to make such large cuts, and the public will not tolerate additional taxes. The only thing that will get the attention of these arrogant people is the bond market, and when the markets no longer lend to the State (& that day will come), they will go begging to DC. And DC will loan money to CA and other states, but with the condition that they spend within their means. That’s the end game, and I will relish watching the faces of these cowards and their union cohorts as they see their piggy bank go up in smoke. Unfortunately, there will be a lot of innocent folks who get hurt in the process, but again that’s the price we pay for giving these egoists too much power.

    Reply this comment
  2. RW Dougherty
    RW Dougherty 9 December, 2010, 15:57

    Shove all the service back down to the local level and let them go to the voters ask the simple question, do you want to keep the service or raise taxes?

    By the way, Sonoma County supervisors make nearly $150K a year, health/dental/and vision benefits that range from $7K – $13K a year AND a 3%@60 retirement plan that is paid entirely by the county. No contribution by the supervisor. I don’t even know if the position is full or part-time. Talking about the high cost of administration. Voters better wake up and pay attention to what’s been going on in local government.

    Reply this comment
  3. DavidfromLosGatos
    DavidfromLosGatos 9 December, 2010, 18:16

    “And DC will loan money to CA and other states, but with the condition that they spend within their means. That’s the end game….”

    Would be nice, but I doubt it.

    First, who is “DC” to lecture anyone on keeping their spending within their means? Talk about “do what I say and not what I do.”

    More to the point, California is not alone. Lots of states are broke, and have promised all manner of future medical and retirement benefits they have no possible way to pay. Everyone will have their hands out to the lender of last resort. There will be no accountability for anyone.

    Furthermore, DC would merely be “loaning” us the money that they took from us under threat of prison (ask Mr. Snipes). Such a deal. Or, maybe by that time they will just overtly print the money, and not make any pretense that it will be paid back.

    Reply this comment
  4. Scott
    Scott 10 December, 2010, 09:09

    The Dept of Social Services could save billions by eliminating CalWORKS with federal TANF only. Almost all TANF funding is a block grant from the feds. CalWORKs is the state-administered program that exists alongside TANF. The problem is that the CalWORKs regulations permit individuals to stay on STATE-funded welfare after they have exhausted their five years of TANF eligibility. Individuals can claim “domestic violence” without any proof whatsoever, and then stay on state-funded welfare essentially forever. When an individual finally uses up all TANF and CalWORKs eligibility, the children in the family stay on state-funded welfare until they are 18. THIS is why welfare in CA is so expensive.

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Related Articles

CA small biz hit with health care hikes

It wasn’t supposed to be like this. Proposition 45 on the Nov. 4 ballot would have given the California insurance

Democratic U.S. Senate candidate picks up another Republican endorsement

In her gambit to ride largely Latino and Republican support to the U.S. Senate, Democratic Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez picked up

CA struggles to curb heroin spike

As loosening marijuana regulation and enforcement upends the drug culture in California, heroin use has become an increasing problem in