HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD STANDING COMMITTEES - 05202024 - Legislation Cte Agenda PktMonday, May 20, 2024
1:00 PM
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
2255 Contra Costa Blvd., Suite 202, Pleasant Hill
3361 Walnut Boulevard, Suite 140, Brentwood, CA 94513
AGENDA
Legislation Committee
Supervisor Diane Burgis, Chair
Supervisor Ken Carlson, Vice Chair
https://cccounty-us.zoom .us/j/82970370770
Call In: 1-888 278 0254, Access code: 219464
1
Legislation Committee AGENDA May 20, 2024
The public may attend this meeting in person at either above location . The public may also
attend this meeting remotely via Zoom or call-in.
Agenda Items: Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference of the
Committee.
1.Introductions
2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this agenda (speakers
may be limited to two (2) minutes).
3.RECEIVE and APPROVE the Meeting Minutes for the April 16, 2024 meeting of
the Legislation Committee, with any necessary corrections .
24-1457
Draft Meeting Minutes 04.16.24Attachments:
4.RECEIVE a report on federal matters of interest to the County and provide
direction and/or input as needed.
24-1453
Attachment A: Federal UpdateAttachments:
5.CONSIDER the matter of Unfunded and Restricted Funding of
Agriculture/Weights & Measures Departments and provide direction and /or input
as needed.
24-1454
Attachment AAttachments:
6.CONSIDER the recommendation to oppose the "Taxpayer Protection and
Government Accountability Act” (Initiative #1935), a measure that would revise
the California Constitution to restrict the ability of the state, counties, other local
agencies, and the electorate to approve or collect taxes, fees, and other revenues .
24-1455
Attachment A: TPA Initiative Toolkit from CSACAttachments:
Page 1 of 2
2
Legislation Committee AGENDA May 20, 2024
7.RECEIVE a report on the FY 24-25 State Budget and the 2024 Bills of Interest to
the County and provide direction and/or input, as needed.
24-1456
Attachment A: State Budget and Bills of Interest Update
Attachment B: FACT-SHEET_-May-Revise-2024_05.10.2024
Attachment C: CSAC Budget Action Bulletin
Attachment D: Bills of Interest 05.20.24
Attachments:
8.The next meeting is currently scheduled for July 22, 2024 at 1:00 p.m.
9.Adjourn
General Information
This meeting provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend a the
meetings. Contact the staff person listed below at least 72 hours before the meeting. Any disclosable public
records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the County to a majority
of members of the Committee less than 96 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 1025
Escobar St., 4th Floor, Martinez, during normal business hours. Staff reports related to items on the agenda are
also accessible on line at www.co.contra-costa.ca.us.
HOW TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT:
Persons who wish to address the Committee during public comment on matters within the jurisdiction of the
Committee that are not on the agenda, or who wish to comment with respect to an item on the agenda, may
comment in person, via Zoom, or via call-in. Those participating in person should offer comments when invited
by the Committee Chair. Those participating via Zoom should indicate they wish to speak by using the “raise
your hand” feature in the Zoom app. Those calling in should indicate they wish to speak by pushing *9 on their
phones.
Public comments generally will be limited to two (2) minutes per speaker. In the interest of facilitating the
business of the Board Committee, the total amount of time that a member of the public may use in addressing the
Board Committee on all agenda items is 10 minutes. Your patience is appreciated.
Public comments may also be submitted to Committee staff before the meeting by email or by voicemail.
Comments submitted by email or voicemail will be included in the record of the meeting but will not be read or
played aloud during the meeting.
For Additional Information Contact:
Lara DeLaney, staff to Committee, at (925) 655-2057 or lara.delaney@cao.cccounty.us
Page 2 of 2
3
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Staff Report
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553
File #:24-1457 Agenda Date:5/20/2024 Agenda #:3.
LEGISLATION COMMITTEE
Meeting Date: May 20, 2024
Subject:Meeting Minutes for the Legislation Committee Meeting of 4/16/24
Submitted For: Legislation Committee
Department: County Administrator’s Office
Referral No: 2024-01
Referral Name: Meeting Minutes
Presenter: L. DeLaney
Contact: (925) 655-2057
Referral History:
County Ordinance requires that each County body keep a record of its meetings. Though the record need not be
verbatim, it must accurately reflect the agenda and the decisions made in the meeting.
Referral Update:
Attached for the Committee’s consideration is the draft Meeting Minutes for the April 16, 2024 Legislation
Committee meeting.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
RECEIVE and APPROVE the Meeting Minutes for the April 16, 2024 Legislation Committee meeting.
Fiscal Impact (if any): None.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 5/15/2024Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™4
Meeting Minutes - Draft
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Legislation
Committee
Supervisor Diane Burgis, Chair
Supervisor Ken Carlson, Vice Chair
https://cccounty-us.zoom.us/j/82970370770
Call In: 1-888 278 0254, Access code: 219464
10:00 AM2255 Contra Costa Blvd., Suite 202, Pleasant
Hill | 3361 Walnut Boulevard, Suite 140,
Brentwood, CA 94513|
Tuesday, April 16, 2024
1.Introductions
Vice Chair Carlson convened the meeting at 10:01 a.m. from his office. Chair Burgis was in
attendance from her office but having computer issues; these issues resolved after Public Comment,
and she was able to resume chairing the meeting . No members of the public joined the meeting from
either Supervisor's office.
Also in attendance were:
Lara DeLaney, staff to the Committee
J. Dante
Kurt Henke, AP Triton
Mark Hartwig
Colleen Awad, District IV Senior District Representative
Esa Ehmen-Krause, Chief Probation Officer
Jim Davenport, Thorn Run Partners
Paul Schlesinger, Thorn Run Partners
Marshall Bennett, Director of Emergency Medical Services
Dr. William Walker
Lewis Broschard, Fire Chief CCCFPD
Timothy Ewell, Chief Assistant County Administrator
Michelle Rubalcava, Nielsen Merksamer
Kiki Farris, County Probation Department
Shoshana Wechsler
Monica Nino, County Administrator
Will Nelson, Department of Conservation & Development
John Kopchik, DCD Director
Tom Geiger, County Counsel
Jody London, County Sustainability Coordinator
Geoff Neill, Nielsen Merksamer
Maureen Toms, Department of Conservation & Development
chold
Page 1 of 5
5
Legislation Committee Meeting Minutes - Draft April 16, 2024
Diane Burgis and Ken CarlsonPresent:
2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this agenda (speakers
may be limited to two (2) minutes).
No public comment was received.
3.RECEIVE and APPROVE the Meeting Minutes for the March 25, 2024
meeting of the Legislation Committee, with any necessary corrections .
24-1111
Attachments:Meeting Minutes Draft 03.25.24
The Minutes for the March 25, 2024 meeting were approved as presented.
This Consent Item was approved.
4.RECEIVE a report on federal matters of interest to the County and provide
direction and/or input as needed.
24-1112
Attachments:Attachment A: Federal Update
The County's federal lobbyists, Paul Schlesinger and Jim Davenport, provided an update
to the staff report. They discussed the political challenges in the House of
Representatives for Speaker Johnson, with members of his own party expressing an
intent to oust him from the leadership position.
Regarding appropriations for FY '25, no guidance had been issued as yet on
"Community Project Funding" (formerly known as "earmarks"), but Jim reported it
should be a similar process to last year, with minor tweaks. He anticipated that
Congressman DeSaulnier's portal for applications would soon be open . He noted that he
and Abigail Fateman, from the Department of Conservation and Development, were just
in Congressman DeSaulnier's office in Washington, advocating for the Knightsen
Wetland Restoration project and discussing the Harmful Algal Blooms Demonstration
project as well.
Chair Burgis provided input on the Harmful Algal Blooms money, noting that project
partnering has made it difficult to utilize the funding . She expressed an interest in
pursuing funding to address the situation in the Delta through other means than
through an Army Corps of Engineers project.
Further discussion about the Delta ensued, with Jim discussing a letter the delegation
had sent to the Corps to request all possible steps to consider the environmental
consequences of the Governor's proposed Delta Conveyance Project; a response should
be expected soon. Vice Chair Carlson indicated a meeting had also been held with
Region 9 of the EPA the prior week regarding the Conveyance project . Chair Burgis
expressed appreciation for the advocacy efforts. No public comments were made.
This Consent Item was received.
Page 2 of 5
6
Legislation Committee Meeting Minutes - Draft April 16, 2024
5.CONSIDER recommending a position of "Oppose" to the Board of
Supervisors on SB 1057 (Menjivar) Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council, a
bill that proposes to make considerable changes to the local planning body
and associated process for the deployment of Juvenile Justice Crime
Prevention Act (JJCPA) funds, as recommended by the Chief Probation
Officer.
24-1113
Attachments:Attachment A: SB 1057 analysis and CPOC Oppose Letter
Chief Probation Officer Ehmen-Krause addressed the Committee about her concerns
with SB 1057, noting its similarity to previous bills . She noted the significant disruption
and destabilization to the system that the bill would create . Chair Burgis inquired about
the motivation behind the bills, which was explained as long-standing issues with Los
Angeles County's Probation department. Vice Chair Carlson supported the
recommendation to oppose the bill, and Chair Burgis concurred. No public comments
were made.
Recommend a position of "Oppose" to the Board.
6.CONSIDER a position recommendation to the Board of Supervisors on AB
2973 (Hart) Emergency Services, a bill that purportedly intends to clarify the
statutory responsibilities of counties, boards of supervisors, and local
emergency medical service agencies regarding EMS and ambulance services
and reaffirm the authority of the boards of supervisors in EMS and
ambulance service provision decisions.
24-1114
Attachments:Attachment A-- AB 2973 (Hart) Bill Text as Amended 04.02.24
Attachment B-- AB 2973 Committee Analysis Asm Emergency Mgmt
04.08.24
Attachment C--Fact Sheet AB 2973 (Hart) EMS Coordination 4.2
Attachment D-- Oppose and Concern Position Letters
Attachment E-- Prior CCC position letters on related bills
Attachment F--AB 2973 Support Letters
The County's EMS Director, Marshall Bennett, provided his assessment of the bill, AB
2973, which he suggested would lead to Emergency Medical System fragmentation,
degradation of medical control, and ultimately would not serve the public and would
erode county anti-trust protections. Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Chief,
Lewis Broschard, noted that amendments to the bill were made in the Assembly just the
previous day that may address Marshall's comments. He added that the Emergency
Medical System is a complex system and that the bill, as currently amended, seeks to give
boards of supervisors multiple options, which he then discussed . He noted that the
author has accepted multiple amendments, and he then advocated for a support position
on the bill.
Additional speakers included Mark Hartwig, the Fire Chief of Santa Barbara County
and Kurt Henke of AP Triton, who each provided their assessment of the bill and its
impacts. Chair Burgis requested the input of Chief Assistant County Administrator, Tim
Ewell, who provided a historical perspective of the County's engagement on these issues
and noted the County's own public process was anticipated this fall . Chair Burgis
Page 3 of 5
7
Legislation Committee Meeting Minutes - Draft April 16, 2024
requested County Counsel, Tom Geiger, to weigh in. Tom indicated that he had not seen
the most recent set of amendments to the bill, but regardless, it would not change how
Contra Costa does things. He also stated that ambulance procurement without a
competitive process would remove county anti-trust protection . Chief Broschard provided
additional comments about the most substantive amendment to the bill that removed
EMS Plan sign-off by the Board. Marshall responded that there would still be impacts
that would render the system unmanageable, degrade medical control, and expose the
County to anti-trust liability. Dr. William Walker provided comments about the County
Health Executives Association of California's (CHEAC) recent discussion of the bill and
a recommendation to "Watch with concerns," which he noted was similar to the Urban
Counties of California (UCC) position. Mr. Henke added that he believed the concerns
could be addressed in the bill and would give the County more options .
The Committee expressed concerns with the dynamics of how the bill was developing .
They noted that they had not seen CSAC's opinion on the bill as yet and wanted to wait
until that opinion was shared. Because there was no urgency for a County position on
the bill, the Committee directed staff to continue to watch the bill and bring it back at a
subsequent meeting. (Note, the bill was subsequently pulled from hearing by the author
and is not moving forward.)
Watch the bill.
7.CONSIDER recommending a position of "Oppose" to the Board of
Supervisors on AB 2557 (Ortega) and AB 2489 (Ward), bills that would
limit the capacity of local agencies to use contractors to provide local
services.
24-1115
Attachments:Attachment A: AB 2557 and AB 2489 Bill Text
The Committee supported a position of "Oppose" on the bills, AB 2557 and AB 2489,
which was consistent with the adopted State Legislative Platform and prior Board of
Supervisors advocacy on related bills .
Find an Oppose position consistent with the Platform.
8.CONSIDER finding consistent with the adopted 2023-24 State Legislative
Platform or recommending a position of "Support" to the Board of
Supervisors on AB 3233 (Addis) Oil and gas: operations: restrictions: local
authority, a bill that authorizes a local entity, by ordinance, to limit or
prohibit oil and gas operations or development in its jurisdiction,
notwithstanding any other law or any notice of intention, supplemental
notice, well stimulation permit, or similar authorization issued by the State
Oil and Gas supervisor or district deputy.
24-1116
Attachments:Attachment A: AB 3233 Bill Text
Staff provided a brief summary of the bill, AB 3233. Public comment was provided by
Shoshana Wechsler who noted that the cities of Antioch and Brentwood had recently
passed related ordinances to limit oil and gas operations and wanted it entered into the
record that this bill clarifies and reaffirms existing rights . She noted that CSAC had
joined an Amicus brief in December 2022 which supported Monterey County in its effort
Page 4 of 5
8
Legislation Committee Meeting Minutes - Draft April 16, 2024
to defend its drilling ordinance. The Director of the Department of Conservation and
Development, John Kopchik, indicated that the intent of the bill is clearly to give
authority to counties and cities, if they wish to use it, to enact policies, and this was a
principle that our County has supported. Vice Chair Carlson inquired about the kinds of
gas operations that could be included; Mr. Kopchik noted it was comprehensive. No
further public comments were offered. The Committee found the bill consistent with the
adopted State Legislative Platform.
Find the bill consistent with the Platform.
9.RECEIVE a report on the FY 24-25 State Budget and the 2024 Bills of
Interest to the County and provide direction and/or input as needed.
24-1117
Attachments:Attachment A
Attachment B: CSAC 2024 Legislative Priorities
Attachment C: Bills of Interest
The County's state lobbyist, Geoff Neill, provided an update on the State Budget and the
"Early Actions" taken by the Legislature to address the budget deficit, which amount to
$17.3 billion. He also noted that other one-time funds may be pulled back by the state,
and the funding for the Bay Point Library was a critical concern . CAO Nino expressed
additional concerns over the Public Defender's grant funding . Chair Burgis suggested
that affected departments and advocates for the services may need to assist with flagging
these concerns. No public comments were offered.
This Consent Item was received.
10.The next meeting is currently scheduled for Monday, May 20, 2024 at 1:00 p.m.
11.Adjourn
Chair Burgis adjourned the meeting at 11:20 a.m.
Page 5 of 5
9
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Staff Report
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553
File #:24-1453 Agenda Date:5/20/2024 Agenda #:4.
LEGISLATION COMMITTEE
Meeting Date: May 20, 2024
Subject:Federal Legislation of Interest to Contra Costa County
Submitted For: Legislation Committee
Department: County Administrator’s Office
Referral No:2024-04
Referral Name: Federal Update
Presenter: P. Schlesinger and J. Davenport, Thorn Run Partners
Contact: L. DeLaney, 925-655-2057
Referral History:
The Legislation Committee of the Board regularly receives reports on federal legislation and budget matters of
interest to the County and provides direction and/or input to staff and the County’s lobbyists, as necessary.
Referral Update:
See Attachment A.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
RECEIVE the report and provide direction/input as needed.
Fiscal Impact (if any): None.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 5/15/2024Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™10
1
The TRP Tip Sheet May 15, 2024
CAPITOL HILL UPDATE
— TODAY IN CONGRESS. Both chambers will resume legislative business today. On the House side, lawmakers will take up a rule that will govern debate on a series of policing-focused bills, as well as legislation that would block the withholding of aid to Israel. Lawmakers will also hold final up-or-down votes on a series of suspension bills that were debated yesterday, including a bill to reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Meanwhile, the Senate will gavel in to resume consideration of pending Biden administration nominees, starting with Courtney O'Donnell's nomination to be United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Senators are also slated to vote on a Republican-led measure that would nullify a Treasury Department rule granting flexibility on pandemic-era aid for states and municipalities.
NEW TODAY...
— BIPARTISAN SENATE GROUP UNVEILS AI 'ROADMAP.' A bipartisan group of senators unveiled a "roadmap" for artificial intelligence (AI) that summarizes key findings from the Senate's AI insight forums last year, and identifies key policy topics that merit bipartisan consideration in the 118th Congress and beyond. Policy priorities highlighted in the roadmap include:
•Increasing funding for AI innovation to advance U.S. leadership in AI, maintain ourglobal competitiveness, and perform cutting-edge AI research and development.
•Ensuring enforcement of existing laws for AI, including ways to address any gapsor unintended harmful bias; prioritizing the development of standards for testingto understand potential AI harms; and developing use case-specific requirementsfor AI transparency and explainability.
•Encouraging a conscientious consideration of the impact AI will have on the U.S.workforce, including the potential for job displacement and the need to upskill andretrain workers.
•Bolstering national security by leading globally in the adoption of emergingtechnologies and addressing national security threats, risks, and opportunities forAI.
•Addressing challenges posed by deepfakes related to election content andnonconsensual intimate images, as well as examining the impacts of AI onprofessional content creators and the journalism industry.
Attachment A
11
2
• Identifying ways to ensure higher education institutions and companies of all sizes can compete in AI innovation, including through reviewing federal statutes and regulations that might affect innovation and fully funding the National AI Research Resource (NAIRR).
• Establishing a strong comprehensive federal data privacy framework.
• Mitigating the threat of potential long-term risk scenarios.
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS... — TRP TRACKERS: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. We have recently updated a pair of TRP products that provide an overview of key AI-related activities in Washington.
• Click to view TRP's comprehensive AI tracker that covers key activities in the Legislative and Executive Branch.
• Click to view TRP's AI "Shot Clock," which overviews the timeline of federal agency actions mandated under the administration's AI executive order.
— WHITE HOUSE ANNOUNCES CHINA TARIFF HIKES. The Biden administration announced an increase in tariffs of Chinese products across various strategic sectors, including medical products, steel and aluminum, semiconductors, electric vehicles (EV), batteries, critical minerals, solar cells, and ship-to-shore cranes.
• Medical Products. Tariff rates on syringes and needles will increase from 0 percent to 50 percent in 2024. For certain personal protective equipment (PPE) — including certain respirators and face masks — the tariff rates will increase from 0–7.5 percent to 25 percent in 2024. Tariffs on rubber medical and surgical gloves will increase from 7.5 percent to 25 percent in 2026.
• Semiconductors. The tariff rate on semiconductors will increase from 25 percent to 50 percent by 2025.
• Batteries & Critical Minerals. The tariff rate on lithium-ion EV batteries will increase from 7.5 percent to 25 percent in 2024, while the tariff rate on lithium-ion non-EV batteries will increase from 7.5 percent to 25 percent in 2026. The tariff rate on battery parts will increase from 7.5 percent to 25 percent in 2024.
• Steel & Aluminum. The tariff rate on certain steel and aluminum products under Section 301 will increase from 0–7.5 percent to 25 percent in 2024.
• Solar Cells. The tariff rate on solar cells will increase from 25 percent to 50 percent in 2024.
• Ship-to-Shore Cranes. The tariff rate on ship-to-shore cranes will increase from 0 percent to 25 percent in 2024.
— HOUSE EYES PASSAGE OF FAA REAUTHORIZATION, E&C SUSPENSION BILLS. Congress returned to action on May 14 as the House looks to send a long-term reauthorization of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to the president's desk. The FAA Reauthorization Act came up for consideration under suspension of the rules, and it is expected to pass the House with strong bipartisan support. Additionally, House lawmakers will take up several suspension bills out of the Energy and Commerce (E&C) Committee, including a measure that would require event ticket sellers and resellers to disclose the total price of tickets and provide refunds for canceled or postponed events. The House will also take up legislation to mandate "do not flush"
Attachment A
12
3
labels and symbols on packages of non-flushable, disposable wipes. Other notable bills up for consideration would:
• Establish a Commerce Department program to promote U.S. supply chain resilience and develop best practices for domestic manufacturers to reduce supply chain disruptions (H.R. 6571);
• Create a pilot program to explore the use of artificial intelligence (AI) at the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) (H.R. 4814);
• Reauthorize the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) (H.R. 4510);
• Assign the Commerce Department to be the principal adviser to the president on the deployment and use of blockchain or other “distributed ledger technology” (H.R. 6572); and
• Expand the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Program to support law enforcement recruitment activities (S. 546).
CSAC Federal Update – FAA Update, Farm Bill Proposals, Affordable
Connectivity Program, and More
May 9, 2024
Major FAA Rewrite Remains in Holding Pattern
Ahead of a Friday deadline, the Senate this week continued to work through legislation
(H.R. 3935) that would reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the
National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) for the next five years. As one of the few
remaining must-pass measures this year, the package has become a magnet for dozens of
unrelated policy riders. Despite a recent bipartisan, bicameral deal, lawmakers have been
unable to work out an agreement on amendments that would allow the measure to move
forward.
As action in the Senate has temporarily stalled, the House on May 8 approved a one-week
extension. However, absent a unanimous consent agreement, the upper chamber may not
be able to pass the short-term extension or the longer-term overhaul before the agency’s
authority expires on May 10. In the meantime, House leaders are urging their Senate
colleagues to limit any unrelated provisions or risk more delays in the lower chamber.
Of particular interest to California counties, H.R. 3935 would increase funding for the
Airport Improvement Program (AIP), which provides federal support for local airport
construction and safety-related projects. The AIP is currently funded at $3.35 billion; the
bicameral agreement would boost funding to $4 billion annually.
In an effort to address the nation’s pilot shortage, the legislation includes a number of
provisions that would boost the supply of certified airline pilots. For example, the
bipartisan agreement would establish a competitive grant program within the U.S.
Attachment A
13
4
Department of Transportation to enable flight training schools to recruit and train military
veterans to become commercial pilots and certified flight instructors.
The package also includes a number of provisions aimed at providing various consumer
protections, including language that would create a first-ever Office of Aviation Consumer
Protection, as well as provisions that would provide clear standards in law for refunds
when an airline cancels or significantly delays a flight.
A section-by-section summary of the FAA agreement can be found here.
House, Senate Ag Leaders Release Competing Farm Bill Proposals
Last week, House and Senate committee leaders released competing proposals to
reauthorize the Farm Bill. For his part, House Agriculture Committee Chair GT Thompson
(R-PA) unveiled a five-page summary document with a broad overview of key policy
objectives. Draft text of the bill is expected to be available soon, as Thompson is planning
to consider the legislation in committee ahead of the Memorial Day recess. Across Capitol
Hill, Senate Agriculture Committee Chair Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) posted a much more
extensive outline of her proposal. While the release of the two blueprints represents the
most significant action on Farm Bill reauthorization this Congress, both proposals include
provisions that are framed as non-starters for the opposing party.
In terms of the policy, Democrats and Republicans both emphasize the need to bolster
conservation programs, but they differ in how to achieve that goal. Republicans are aiming
to use Inflation.Reduction.Act (IRA) funds for an expanded range of conservation practices.
However, Democrats are opposed to any reprogramming of IRA funds, unless it directly
addresses climate change. In addition, Democrats will push back against any reforms that
would reduce benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
While Chairman Thompson has insisted he doesn’t intend to cut SNAP, he does want to
reverse Biden-era reforms that have increased food aid. The Senate package would leave
nutrition funding untouched. Democrats and Republicans also agree on the need to
reduce wildfire risk and improve forest health. For example, both parties want to increase
the size and scope of the Good Neighbor Authority, which lets federal managers contract
with local governments to thin publicly owned forests.
The latest extension of the Farm Bill expires on September 30.
Senators Urge Affordable Connectivity Program Providers to Continue Supporting
Households for an Additional Month
Senators Ed Markey (D-MA) and Laphonza Butler (D-CA) – along with a handful of other
Senate Democrats – sent a letter to the two largest trade associations representing the
wireless/broadband industry urging their member companies to ensure that subscribers to
the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) continue to receive the full $30 benefit in May. It
should be noted that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently announced
Attachment A
14
5
that it will only be able to provide ACP subscribers with a $14 benefit in May, rather than the
full $30. As Congress works on an extension of ACP funding, the letter urges providers to
cover the $16 shortfall. A copy of the letter can be viewed here.
Biden Administration Announces that DACA Recipients Will Be Eligible for Obamacare
On May 8, the Department of Health and Human Services published a final rule that will
open up Affordable.Care.Act coverage to roughly 100,000 Deferred Action for Childhood
Arrivals (DACA) recipients who came to the United States as children but do not qualify for
government health insurance because they lack legal status. Pursuant to the rule, DACA
recipients would qualify for marketplace subsidies if they meet the income guidelines and
are not covered by an employer’s plan. The new rule will become effective on November 1,
2024, the beginning of the annual open enrollment period.
HUD Announces FY 2024 State and Local Formula Grants and Voucher Reforms
Earlier this week, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced
$5.5 billion in funding that will go to 1,200 communities. The funding will go through a
number of formula grant programs, including the Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) program, the HOME Investment Partnerships Program, the Housing Opportunities
for Persons With HIV/AIDS (HOPWA) program, Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG), and the
Housing Trust Fund. These grants support a wide range of community needs, including
providing flexible resources to build homes, support renters and homeowners, and provide
assistance to persons experiencing homelessness and those living with HIV/AIDS. The
allocations for each state and locality are available here.
In addition to the grant announcement, HUD recently released a final rule making reforms
to the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) tenant-based program and the Project-Based
Voucher (PBV) program. According to the department, the reforms are intended to grow the
supply of affordable housing. Among other things, the proposal would allow PBV
assistance to be paired with manufactured housing; establish local project-specific waiting
lists to help families move into units more quickly; codify important tenant protections for
families in the areas of inspections and property and contract dispositions; and, ensure
families are able to find units in the local rental markets by providing PHAs additional
flexibilities to increase rents.
Attachment A
15
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Staff Report
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553
File #:24-1454 Agenda Date:5/20/2024 Agenda #:5.
LEGISLATION COMMITTEE
Meeting Date: May 20, 2024
Subject:Unfunded and Restricted Funding of Agriculture/Weights & Measures Departments
Submitted For: Matt Slattengren
Department: Agriculture
Referral No:
Referral Name:
Presenter:
Contact:
Referral History:
As part of the adoption/approval for the Device Registration Fee Ordinance at the March 26, 2024, Board of
Supervisors meeting, Supervisor Burgis requested a referral to the Legislation Committee to discuss and/or
consider a report on the issue of unfunded mandates by the State as it relates to the device registration fees
associated with the Agriculture/Weights & Measures departments.
The fiscal impact of the item noted: “Collection of the fees will allow the Department to continue to run this
mandated consumer protection program and get closer to meeting the mandated number of inspections per year.
The County charges less than the cost of each inspection of each device type because the maximum fees that
can be collected are established by state law. Currently the Department collects about $800,000 in fees per year
and spends about $1.7 million a year on the program. The increased device fees are estimated to increase the
annual collection by $170,000.”
Referral Update:
See Attachment A.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
CONSIDER providing direction on the pursuit of a legislative or budgetary remedy to the matter of unfunded
Fiscal Impact (if any): This item relates to the restrictions in state law regarding fees for County Agricultural
Commissioner activities. There is a substantial fiscal impact to the County from this matter.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 5/15/2024Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™16
Unfunded and Restricted Funding of Agriculture/Weights & Measures
Departments
Problem Statement: State law restricts the ability of local County Agricultural Commissioners
from charging fees at the amount necessary to recover actual costs of service.
Solution Options: Seek changes in State law. Seek Mandate Reimbursement.
Background
Government Code section 54985 gives boards of supervisors the ability to charge fees at the
amount necessary to recover their costs to enforce any regulation for which the fees are charged.
However, Section 54985(c)(4) includes a specific exemption for all County Agricultural
Commissioners (CACs) from this section, prohibiting them from charging any fee or changing
any fee unless it is explicitly in regulation.
Additionally, Section 54985(c)(5) exempts any fees from being charged pursuant to Article 2.1
(commencing with Section12240) of Chapter 2 of Division 5 of the Business and Professions
Code (BPC), which prohibits any Weights & Measures Departments (W&MD) from charging or
changing any fees that are not in regulation. This limitation cripples Agriculture/Weights &
Measures Departments across the state in their ability to obtain funding to cover their costs.
Furthermore, the state Department of Measurement Standards (DMS) had nearly all its funding
cut around 10 years ago, which means there was no state funding for the counties who were
doing the work and no state support for many of these programs. Since then, county W&MDs
have been collecting a fee for DMS to keep it operational.
CACs receive funding from the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) for
many of their programs, but in most cases not enough to cover the costs, plus we cannot charge
any additional fees. One good example of this is our Nursery inspection program. We should be
spending more time in this program due to pest pressure which impacts other programs, but the
funding and resources are not available. We spend about $45,000 a year on this program and
receive an annual contract from the State of about $2,403.
California Code of Regulations section 3162 establishes a rating system for agricultural pests.
Pests given an “A” rating under this system are considered highly detrimental to agriculture or
the environment and CACs are mandated to eradicate them. We get funding and support from
CDFA for specific insect pests, but if any other A-rated insects, weeds, or plant diseases are
found, CACs need to fund the effort themselves.
For example, we have recently detected several infestations of A-rated Mexican Pokeweed in
Contra Costa County and have had to eradicate these infestations with no outside financial
support. In the past, we have had to eradicate several infestations of A-rated Japanese Dodder
with no outside financial support.
Attachment A
17
According to the BPC, W&MDs are required to inspect all devices used commercially in the
county annually but are only allowed to charge the maximum amount set in regulation. This
means we spend over $1.7 million and take in about $800,000 in fees and contracts. Since the
fees must be set by state regulation, we must work with lobbyists for different groups who may
oppose the fees. These inspections not only protect the public from overcharges, but also protect
businesses from others using unfair practices to get ahead in their industry. In FY 2019/2020,
county W&MDs spent $51.3 million statewide and received $32.9 million in fees, contracts, and
other revenue.
Given the great difference in operating costs between counties, it is very challenging to set a
statewide regulation that allows for each CAC to recoup its costs to operate mandated programs.
Attachment A
18
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Staff Report
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553
File #:24-1455 Agenda Date:5/20/2024 Agenda #:6.
LEGISLATION COMMITTEE
Meeting Date: May 20, 2024
Subject:The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act
Submitted For: Legislation Committee
Department: County Administrator’s Office
Referral No:
Referral Name: TPA
Presenter: Geoff Neill & Michelle Rubalcava, Nielsen Merksamer
Contact: L. DeLaney, 925-655-2057
Referral History:
In March 2022, the CSAC Board of Directors voted to oppose Initiative #1935, titled the “Taxpayer Protection
and Government Accountability Act,” because it would restrict the ability of the state, counties, other local
agencies, and the electorate to approve or collect taxes, fees, and other revenues, and endanger local initiatives
that have already been approved by voters.
CSAC has developed a set of resources to help educate counties about the measure. These resources include a
template resolution, an opposition letter, and an informational item, which are attached. Counties can use these
materials to consider adopting a formal opposition position on the measure.
Referral Update:
See Attachment A.
On May 8, the California Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case Legislature of the State of California
v. Weber (S281977). The case is a pre-election challenge to a proposed constitutional initiative (the Taxpayer
Protection and Government Accountability Act, or “TPA”) that is scheduled to be presented to the voters this
November.
The TPA would make various changes to the procedures for imposing state and local taxes and fees that would
generally make it more difficult to impose those exactions. Of particular interest in the litigation are provisions
in TPA that require all state taxes adopted by the Legislature to be approved by the statewide electorate prior to
imposition; and a requirement that all local taxes adopted since Jan. 1, 2022 must conform with TPA within one
year of TPA’s adoption or they become null and void.
The Legislature and the Governor filed a direct petition in the California Supreme Court, alleging that the
initiative amounts to a revision of the Constitution that is beyond the scope of the People’s initiative power.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 5/15/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™19
File #:24-1455 Agenda Date:5/20/2024 Agenda #:6.
(Article XVIII of the Calif. Constitution permits the voters to “amend” but not “revise” the Constitution.) The
government officials asked the Court to declare the measure unconstitutional and to order that it be withheld
from the ballot this November.
In particular, oral argument focused on the appropriateness of pre-election, versus post-election, review;
whether or not the Court could sever any invalid provisions as opposed to invalidating the entire measure; and
whether or not requiring statewide voter approval of all state taxes would be a revision.
The case was ordered submitted at the end of argument, and a decision is due within 90 days. Given the
deadline for measures to qualify for the ballot is June 27, the State Petitioners have requested expedited
consideration of the case. Conventional wisdom is probably that a decision will be rendered on or before the
June 27 date.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
CONSIDER recommending to the Board of Supervisors an Oppose position on Initiative #1935 on the June 4,
2024 agenda.
Fiscal Impact (if any):Initiative #1935, referred to as the “Taxpayer Protection and Government
Accountability Act,” would severely restrict the ability of local governments to obtain the revenue needed to
deliver core public services and local priorities. Initiative #1935 would impose new standards retroactively on
existing laws and measures, endangering upwards of $300 million in revenue already approved by county
voters and upwards of $2 billion total for local governments.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 5/15/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™20
Memo: Ballot Initiative #1935, “Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act,”
(TPA Initiative)
County Educational Toolkit
Background
The “Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act,” referred to as “Initiative
#1935,” or the “TPA,” would revise the California Constitution to restrict the ability of the
state, counties, other local agencies, and the electorate to approve or collect taxes, fees, and
other revenues. Collectively, the impacts of the measure would impair essential government
functions.
The measure would require voter approval of all state taxes, redefining many existing
administrative fees as taxes that require voter approval and requiring voters to approve any
changes to state taxes imposed by the California Legislature. It would further restrict local fee
authority by limiting fee amounts to the “minimum amount necessary” to provide government
services, and would require voter approval for local measures such as franchise fees. Its
provisions would make it easier to challenge local revenue measures by increasing the burden
of proof on local agencies while disallowing an agency’s characterization of a measure from
being considered in court.
The measure would prohibit county charter amendments that provide for any revenue from
being submitted to the electorate. It would also disallow local agencies from placing advisory
measures on the same ballot as any general revenue measure and would raise the threshold
for voter approval of local revenue measures proposed by initiative to two-thirds.
The proposed constitutional initiative is sponsored by the California Business Roundtable, an
association composed of executives for the largest corporations in California. However, the
measure has been funded primarily by a small few of those member corporations and, in
February 2024, several of the association’s members placed an advertisement requesting the
sponsors to remove the measure from the ballot.
The California Attorney General has titled the measure: “LIMITS ABILITY OF VOTERS AND
STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO RAISE REVENUES FOR GOVERNMENT SERVICES.
INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.”
The official summary is as follows:
“For new or increased state taxes currently enacted by two-thirds vote of Legislature,
also requires statewide election and majority voter approval. Limits voters’ ability to
Attachment A
21
pass voter-proposed local special taxes by raising vote requirement to two-thirds.
Eliminates voters’ ability to advise how to spend revenues from proposed general tax on
the same ballot as the proposed tax. Expands definition of “taxes” to include certain
regulatory fees, broadening application of tax approval requirements. Requires
Legislature or local governing body set certain other fees. Summary of estimate by
Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local
governments: Lower annual state and local revenues, potentially substantially lower,
depending on future actions of the Legislature, local governing bodies, voters, and the
courts.”
The measure would apply retroactively to any local measure or state law passed since January 1,
2022, allowing only a twelve-month period for the state or local governments to re-ratify the
measures.
CSAC Efforts Related to the Measure
The CSAC Board of Directors voted to oppose the measure in March 2022.
In September 2023, Governor Gavin Newsom petitioned the California Supreme Court to review the
measure, asserting that it would be a revision of the California Constitution, rather than an
amendment, and therefore would require a constitutional convention to make the changes sought by
the measure’s sponsors. The Governor also asserted the measure would impair essential government
functions.
In January 2024, CSAC, as part of a coalition of local government entities and associations, filed an
amicus brief in support of the Governor and Legislature in their petition to the California Supreme
Court to deem the California Business Roundtable’s ballot measure as a constitutional revision that
would impair essential government functions, and therefore ineligible for the November 2024 ballot.
Analysis
Under current law, local revenue authority is limited by both statute and several voter-approved
constitutional provisions, including those added by Proposition 13 (1978), Proposition 218 (1996), and
Proposition 26 (2010). Due to these restrictions, counties have become more dependent on state and
federal funding. These restrictions, combined with other factors, cause the taxes counties rely on for
general revenues not to keep pace with population and economic growth.
Changes under Ballot Initiative
The purpose of the ballot measure is to make it more difficult for counties, cities, schools, special
districts, and the state to raise revenue by any means. It places new and increased restrictions on
every manner of revenue measure and narrows exceptions to its most onerous requirements. Its
provisions are so broad that while the proponents cite specific examples they are targeting for
change, the measure would no doubt have many unintended consequences.
Attachment A
22
The effect will be to increase county costs, reduce tax and fee revenue for counties, subject de
rigueur charges such as franchise fees to voter approval requirements, and open more government
actions to legal challenges while simultaneously making those challenges more difficult to defend
against. Further, as is the case with many ballot measures, it would write into the California
Constitution contradictory and confusing language that cannot be changed or clarified without
another future ballot measure that receives voter approval.
The fundamental provision of the proposed initiative would be to designate every levy, charge, or
exaction of any kind imposed by the state or a local agency as either a tax or an “exempt charge.”
Every revenue measure not defined as an exempt charge would be subject to voter approval
requirements, some of which the initiative newly imposes or increases.
The list of exempt charges includes charges for the actual cost of a government service (such as
utilities), charges for the regulatory costs of issuing licenses and performing related inspections and
audits, charges for the lease or sale of government property, fines and penalties to punish violations
of law, charges for tourism promotion, health care charges to increase Medi-Cal reimbursement
rates, and, for local agencies, charges imposed as a condition of property development.
As proposed, every state and local revenue measure not defined as an exempt charge would need to
be submitted to the voters for approval. Those measures would be required to include in both the
title and summary and the ballot label the type and amount or rate of the tax, the duration of the tax,
and the use of the revenue derived from the tax. In the case of local general taxes, the phrase “for
general government use” would be required and it would be prohibited to include an advisory
measure on the same ballot to determine how the electorate would like to see those revenues used.
Local voter initiatives that impose special taxes are currently subject to lower voting thresholds than
those initiated by county and city governing boards. This measure would increase those thresholds
from a majority vote to two-thirds.
This initiative would retroactively cancel other revenue measures passed by voters or approved
between January 1, 2022, and the time this initiative goes into effect, if they do not comply with this
measure’s provisions, even if they complied with all laws in effect at the time they passed. The
proposed initiative would give those cancelled revenue measures twelve months to re-comply.
However, local tax measures can only be put to voters at regular elections where governing board
members can also be elected, unless the governing board unanimously calls a special election, and no
regular elections would take place in the twelve months after the initiative would take effect.
The initiative reduces counties’ home rule authority by prohibiting certain types of amendments to
county charters from even appearing before the voters. Whether they are proposed by the Board of
Supervisors or by voters themselves, any charter amendment that provides for the imposition,
extension, or increase of a tax, fee, charge, or exaction of any kind whatsoever would be prohibited.
Attachment A
23
One provision of the measure allows fines and penalties to be imposed by the judicial branch of
government or imposed by a local administrative enforcement agency to punish violations of law,
without voter approval. However, another section of the measure says that, notwithstanding any
other provision of the Constitution, only the governing body of a local government acting by
ordinance, or an elector exercising the initiative power, can impose any kind of charge without voter
approval. The measure specifically prohibits any tax or fee regulating or related to vehicle miles
traveled imposed as a condition of property development or occupancy.
For most local fees, the measure would prohibit them from exceeding the “actual cost” and defines
actual cost to “the minimum amount necessary,” exposing counties to litigation and judicial second
guessing about whether the county could have chosen a lower level of service or whether it could
have achieved the result at a lower cost by other means.
The proposed measure would increase the burden of proof on local agencies to prove that a revenue
measure is not subject to voter approval requirements—and that the amount of the charge is
reasonable and does not exceed the “actual cost,” or “minimum amount necessary”—from a
preponderance of evidence to clear and convincing evidence. Furthermore, the measure prohibits a
court from considering how a local agency describes, or characterizes, a revenue measure in making
its determination, whereas the use of the funds would be required to be a factor in that
determination.
To give an example of a normal county process that would be impacted by the proposed measure,
consider a county’s sale of a parcel of land, which falls directly under one of the categories of exempt
charge, the one defined in proposed subparagraph (3) of paragraph (j) of Article XIII C Section 1, “a
reasonable charge for…the purchase...of local government property.” To impose an exempt charge
under the terms of the initiative, the governing body may be required to pass an ordinance specifying
the amount of the exempt charge, in this case, the amount charged to purchase the property.
If anyone sued the county contesting whether the sale was an exempt charge or should instead have
been treated as a tax, under the terms of the proposed initiative the court would be explicitly
disallowed from factoring in the county’s description of the charge “as being paid in exchange for
a[n]…asset.”
Instead, the court would be required to consider as a factor “the use of revenue derived from
the…charge.” So while board members might think the county could use the proceeds from the sale
of property for general purposes, in order to show by clear and convincing evidence that the charge
was not a tax, it would need to prove to the court both that the amount of the charge was reasonable
and “that the amount charged does not exceed the actual cost of providing the…product to the
payor,” with the “actual cost” defined as “the minimum amount necessary to reimburse the
government for the cost of providing the…product to the payor…where the amount charged is not
used by the government for any purpose other than reimbursing that cost.” So, in selling, renting, or
Attachment A
24
leasing property, a county would be limited to the county’s cost of providing the parcel to the buyer,
instead of selling at market rate or
to the person offering the highest amount.
At the state level, the measure would require all state taxes to receive voter approval, in addition to
the current requirement for two-thirds approval of both houses of the Legislature, effectively
revoking the Legislature’s powers to levy new or increased taxes. Any increase or imposition of any
non-tax charge, however minor, would require approval of the Legislature if it results in any taxpayer
paying a higher amount. This requirement would apply to everything from bar exam fees to State Fair
ticket prices to any charge for a map, shirt, or deck of cards for sale at a state park. And due to the
restrictions on the use of revenue from exempt charges, revenue from map, shirt, and playing card
sales at state parks could not be used to support the maintenance of the park, but only to reimburse
the minimum amount necessary to provide that map, sticker, or deck of cards to the purchaser.
On the whole, the measure will limit local revenue, imperil existing revenue and laws, subject local
governments to the risk of litigation, and limit the ability of governments to defend themselves in
court.
What Can Counties Do?
CSAC encourages counties to consider taking an official position in opposition to Initiative #1935.
While Boards of Supervisors can take official positions on ballot initiatives, county supervisors and
county employees cannot use public resources to engage in advocacy related to ballot campaigns.
Counties can, however, educate their constituents about the impacts propositions would have on the
county and their community, despite whether they have taken a position on a ballot initiative. In fact,
counties are well-positioned to provide information on the impacts of ballot measures in their local
communities.
The line between education and advocacy can be difficult to differentiate at times, so CSAC staff
encourages counties refer to helpful resources such as the Institute for Local Government’s papers
and primers on ballot measure activities. Staff also highly recommends, especially when there is any
doubt about a particular activity or communication, to consult with county counsel.
Attachments
1) Full text of Ballot Initiative
2) Title and Summary
3) Fiscal Impact Estimate Report
CSAC Staff Contact
For additional information, please contact Eric Lawyer, Legislative Advocate, California State
Association of Counties (elawyer@counties.org or (916) 767-9403).
Attachment A
25
DATE
ADDRESSEES (Addressed to Assembly Member(s) and Senator(s) representing the county)
RE: Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act (Initiative #1935) – Notice of Opposition
Dear Assembly Member(s) and Senator(s),
On behalf of the COUNTY Board of Supervisors, I write to express our opposition to Initiative #1935, titled the
“Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act” by its sponsors, which would revise the California
Constitution to restrict the ability of the state, local governments, and the electorate to approve or collect taxes,
fees, and other revenues and harm the ability for local governments to deliver vital public services.
The measure would revise and recast the California Constitution by requiring voter approval of all state taxes,
restrict local fee authority by limiting it to the “minimum amount necessary” to provide a service, and invite
litigation due to the many unclear and conflicting provisions included in the measure, while also restricting the
ability of local governments from defending themselves by disallowing an agency’s characterization of a
measure from being considered in court.
While the measure is long, complicated, and includes several unclear or conflicting provisions, at its core the
measure seeks to accomplish three objectives: raise vote requirements and other criteria for approval of taxes,
redefine many fees and charges as taxes, and limit fees to only the “minimum amount necessary,” to provide a
service.
First, Initiative #1935 would impose several strict approval requirements for state and local taxes, including
those sought by both governing bodies and the electorate. The measure limits proposed tax increases to be
placed before voters only during a regularly scheduled election, unless a legislative body unanimously agrees to
hold a special emergency election. The measure would also eliminate the ability of local governments to include
advisory questions on the same ballot as general tax measures; disallow the consideration of any charter
amendment by voters which provides for the imposition, extension, or increase of a tax; and require special
taxes proposed by citizens initiative to receive approval by two-thirds of voters.
Second, the measure would make sweeping changes to the definition of government fees, which are already
held to a standard to not exceed the reasonable costs of providing a service. Local fee revenue is used to fund
essential services, including fire, police, public works, and parks and recreation. Initiative #1935 would redefine
many existing fees as taxes, requiring voter approval for many charges that are imposed for the benefit granted
to even a single payer, but not granted to those not charged.
Finally, the measure would impose a new standard on fees, limiting them to only the “minimum amount
necessary,” to provide a service. This provision would invite extreme legal scrutiny of regular government
decisions, costing governments and their taxpayers significant legal fees and endangering longstanding sources
of revenue for counties and all levels of government. In addition to revising the legal definition of a fee, the
measure would also restrict the ability of local governments to make their case in courts by subjecting
governments to the heightened “clear and convincing” evidence standard and prohibiting courts from
considering how a local agency characterizes a revenue measure.
The measure would apply its new standards retroactively, subjecting over 100 local measures approved by
voters since January 1, 2022, to legal peril, requiring voters to ratify those measure again within twelve months,
during a timeframe in which a special election must be called to even consider those measures. For COUNTY,
this means SPECIFIC COUNTY MEASURE IMPERILED, which would raise $AMOUNT annually for PURPOSE.
Attachment A
26
On the whole, Initiative #1935 would impair essential functions of all levels of government. While the measure
will undoubtedly threaten the ability of local governments to raise revenue, the true dangers of this measure are
reflected in the services funded by those revenue: law enforcement, fire protection, parks and recreation, health
care services, addressing the homelessness crisis, emergency response, and all the services that support our
communities.
For these reasons, the COUNTY Board of Supervisors opposes Initiative #1935, referred to as the “Taxpayer
Protection and Government Accountability Act.” Should you have any questions or concerns regarding our
position, please contact CONTACT INFO.
Sincerely,
Attachment A
27
Sample Resolution to Oppose Initiative #1935
WHEREAS, counties deliver core public services including health care, homeless services, foster
care, emergency response, fire protection, and law enforcement; and
WHEREAS, counties rely on limited sources of revenue to support those services, which have
been restricted by passage of voter-approved constitutional amendments and state laws over
the past several decades; and
WHEREAS, Initiative #1935, referred to as the “Taxpayer Protection and Government
Accountability Act,” would severely restrict the ability of local governments to obtain the
revenue needed to deliver core public services and local priorities; and
WHEREAS, Initiative #1935 would likely subject county governments to expensive litigation and
restrict the ability of local governments to defend themselves; and
WHEREAS, Initiative #1935 would restrict the ability of counties to seek the opinions of their
voters by eliminating the ability for local governments to place advisory measures on the same
ballot as general tax provisions; and
WHEREAS, Initiative #1935 would prohibit county charter amendments that provide for any
revenue from being submitted to the electorate; and
WHEREAS, Initiative #1935 would impose new standards retroactively on existing laws and
measures, endangering upwards of $300 million in revenue already approved by county voters
and upwards of $2 billion total for local governments; and
WHEREAS, Initiative #1935 would specifically endanger county measure X [name], which would
raise [amount] annually to [purpose]; and
WHEREAS, by making the changes described above, Initiative #1935 would impair essential
government functions; and
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the County of [NAME] hereby opposes Initiative #1935,
known as the “Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act,”; and
THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County of [NAME] can be listed as a member of
the No on Initiative #1935 coalition, a diverse coalition of local governments, public safety
organizations, business, labor, and other organizations throughout the state.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day _____ of _____, 2024.
Attachment A
28
March 19, 2024
Assembly Democrats
California State Assembly
State Capitol, CA 95814
RE: OPPOSE THE TAXPAYER DECEPTION ACT (INITIATIVE 1935)
- PLEASE ADD YOUR NAME TODAY
Dear Assembly Democrats:
California’s educators, healthcare workers, firefighters, construction trades, community
empowerment organizations and local governments respectfully request you endorse a
NO vote on the so-called “Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act.”
This initiative, which is eligible to appear before the voters in November, is a dangerous
and existential threat to California.
The more aptly named Taxpayer Deception Act is sponsored by the California Business
Roundtable, the California Business Properties Association and the Howard Jarvis
Attachment A
29
Taxpayers Association and funded by billion-dollar real estate interests Kilroy Realty,
Douglas Emmett Properties, Blackstone, Hudson Pacific and Shorenstein. Deceitfully
veiled as “reform,” these corporations want to prevent any future effort to ensure they
pay their fair share.
The Taxpayer Deception Act is not only an unconstitutional revision that fundamentally
alters the structure of our government, but erodes the very foundations of our
democracy and prevents the delivery of essential services.
The ballot measure eliminates the Legislature’s taxing authority and ability to effectively
balance the budget. It would cut billions of dollars in existing funding and threaten
education, homelessness services and all general fund programs.The measure would
also overturn recent legislative wins, including new laws funding gun violence
prevention, mental health, paid family leave and disability insurance, and
environmental programs.
Posing the greatest threat to voters’ rights in recent history, the ballot measure is
retroactive to January 1, 2022, invalidating more than 100 local ballot measures already
approved by voters just because the funders don’t want to pay a transfer tax contained
in one local measure. The Taxpayer Deception Act also empowers just one-third of
voters to block local funding measures placed on the ballot by voters over the will of the
majority.
California’s continued success as the 5
th largest economy in the world, its reputation as
the nation’s hub for innovation, and the quality of life and wellbeing of its 40 million
residents depends on the ability of state and local governments to provide important
public services. The Taxpayer Deception Act would reverse decades of progress
achieved through a time-honored and battle-tested democratic process.
We urge you to add your name today at TaxpayerDeceptionAct.com.
Join the growing coalition of elected officials, organizations and
leaders who strongly oppose this reckless initiative.
Thank you,
AAPIs For Civic Empowerment
Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE) Action
ACLU of Southern California
AFSCME California
Asian Pacific Environmental Network Action
California Black Power Network
Attachment A
30
California Association of Counties (CSAC)
California Association of Special Districts
California Calls
Catalyst California
California Carpenters
California Faculty Association
California Federation of Teachers
California Labor Federation
California Professional Firefighters
California School Employees Association
California Teachers Association
Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA)
Grace - End Child Poverty in California
Housing California
League of California Cities
NextGen California
Northern California Regional Council of Carpenters
OC Action
PICO California
PolicyLink
Power California Action
San Diego Organizing Project
SEIU California
Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters
State Building & Construction Trades Council Of California
Paid for by Alliance for a Better California, sponsored by Working Families and Labor Organizations
Committee’s Top Funders:
Northern California Regional Council of Carpenters
Service Employees International Union Local 1000
SEIU California State Council
Attachment A
31
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Staff Report
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553
File #:24-1456 Agenda Date:5/20/2024 Agenda #:7.
LEGISLATION COMMITTEE
Meeting Date: May 20, 2024
Subject:FY 24-25 State Budget and State Bills of Interest
Submitted For: Legislation Committee
Department: County Administrator’s Office
Referral No: 2024-03
Referral Name: State Budget and Bills of Interest
Presenter: Geoff Neill and Michelle Rubalcava, Nielsen Merksamer
Contact: L. DeLaney, 925-655-2057
Referral History:
The Legislation Committee regularly receives reports on the State Budget and bills of interest to the County,
providing direction and/or input as necessary.
Referral Update:
See Attachments A, B, and C.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
RECEIVE the report and provide direction and/or input to County staff and the County lobbyists.
Fiscal Impact (if any): There may be a significant fiscal impact to the County from the adoption of the state’s
FY 24-25 budget.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 5/15/2024Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™32
FY 24 -25 State Budget Update
On Friday, May 10, Governor Newsom released a high-level summary of his May Revision
budget proposal. More details followed this week. The Governor now pegs the budget deficit at
$27.6 billion, after accounting for the early action budget solutions ($17.3 billion) and further
revenue erosion ($7.0 billion).
In addition to the budget year deficit, the Governor estimates the following fiscal year deficit
(2025-26) at $28.4 billion, and since a number of the 2024-25 deficit solutions are one-time in
nature, he is also proposing one-time and ongoing budget solutions for FY 2025-26.
The Governor did not retract any of his January proposals but, rather, added proposals for more
cuts, fund shifts, use of reserves, revenue, and borrowing. Only a few proposals were detailed.
By category, he is proposing the following additional solutions:
2024-25
-$4.2 billion of reserves
-$3.0 billion of “efficiencies” (across-the-board cuts of 7.95% and eliminating vacant
positions)
-$15.2 billion of reductions ($12.7 billion one-time, $2.5 billion ongoing)
-$14.8 billion of shifts (to cap and trade and other funds) and pauses to planned
expansions (like child care slots)
-$7.4 billion of revenues and borrowing
2025-26 (many are a continuation of 2024-25 solutions)
-$8.9 billion of reserves
-$3.6 billion of efficiencies
-$11.0 billion of reductions
--$2.5 billion of shifts and pauses to planned expansions
-$7.4 billion of revenues and borrowing
The Governor also raised the idea of reforming Prop. 2 to provide additional reserves for this
year’s revenue declines and talked about speeding up the changes to the homeowners’ insurance
market.
For more details, see the following resources:
-Governor’s fact sheet: Attachment B
-CSAC’s Budget Action Bulletin: Attachment C
-Watch Governor’s 2-hour press conference:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1IHB4c6Bgo
-Official summary: https://ebudget.ca.gov/FullBudgetSummary.pdf
-Full detail: https://ebudget.ca.gov/
Attachment A
33
State Bills of Interest
The bills that Contra Costa County are actively tracking are included in Attachment D.
The County’s lobbyists will provide an update of the fate of bills on the Suspense File that were
considered by the Appropriations Committees. The Appropriations Committees have until May
17 to pass bills, and the Legislature has one week after that to pass bills out of their house of
origin.
Two bills were significantly amended recently to deal with housing elements and RHNA:
- AB 3093 (Ward) – This bill, which is sponsored by the Governor, would require cities
and counties to include planning for acutely low-income and extremely low-income households
in their housing elements, among other things.
- AB 2675 (Low) – This bill would allow the voluntary transfer of RHNA allocations, also
allowing payments between the transferring jurisdictions.
Signatures Submitted for Criminal Justice Initiative
The coalition working to qualify an initiative to increase penalties for certain retail theft and drug
crimes announced on April 18 that they have submitted more than enough signatures. As
summarized by the AP: “The ballot measure would create harsher penalties for repeat shoplifters
and fentanyl dealers. Shoplifters would be charged with a felony, regardless of the amount stolen,
if they have at least two prior theft convictions. It also would create a new drug court treatment
program for those with multiple drug possession convictions, among other things.” As with the
anti-tax initiative, assuming enough signatures are verified, the initiative would be eligible for
the November ballot unless withdrawn or replaced.
Attachment A
34
GOVERNOR NEWSOM’S
REVISED 2024-25 STATE BUDGET
A Balanced Budget that Cuts Spending, Makes Government Leaner, and
Preserves Core Services — Without Proposing New Taxes on
Hardworking Californians
KEY TAKEAWAYS:
A BALANCED BUDGET OVER TWO YEARS
The Governor is solving two years of budget problems in a single budget,tightening the
state’s belt to get the budget back to normal after the tumultuous years of the COVID-19
pandemic. By addressing the shortfall for this budget year —and next year —the
Governor is eliminating the 2024-25 deficit and eliminating a projected deficit for the
2025-26 budget year that is $27.6 billion (after taking an early budget action) and $28.4
billion respectively. This approach will set California on a sound and fiscally responsible
path. By making tough and responsible decisions now, the state is projected to have a
positive operating reserve balance over the next two fiscal years.
CUTTING SPENDING, MAKING GOVERNMENT LEANER
Governor Newsom’s revised balanced state budget cuts one-time spending by $19.1
billion and ongoing spending by $13.7 billion through 2025-26, including through a nearly
8% cut to state operations and a targeted elimination of 10,000 unfilled state positions,
improving government efficiency and reducing non-essential spending — without raising
taxes on individuals or proposing state worker furloughs. The budget makes government
more efficient, leaner, and modern — saving costs by streamlining procurement, cutting
bureaucratic red tape, and reducing redundancies.
PRESERVING CORE SERVICES & SAFETY NETS
The budget maintains service levels for many key housing, food, health care, and other
assistance programs that Californians rely on while addressing the deficit by pausing the
expansion of certain programs and decreasing numerous recent one-time and ongoing
investments.
NO NEW TAXES & MORE RAINY DAY SAVINGS
Governor Newsom is balancing the budget by getting state spending under control —
cutting costs, not proposing new taxes on hardworking Californians and small businesses —
and reducing the reliance on the state’s “Rainy Day” reserves this year.
Attachment B
35
HOW WE GOT HERE:
The budget shortfall is rooted in two separate but related developments over the past two years:
#1: REVENUE PROJECTIONS
California’s revenue is highly dependent on personal income taxes, including taxing capital
gains — the taxing of profits when individuals buy or sell stocks. In 2021, the stock market
(especially tech stocks important to California's economy) boomed and the state collected
significant tax revenue. Following a 2022 market downturn, the state collected significantly less
taxes than projected. And while the market bounced back by late 2023, the state continued to
collect less tax revenue than projected in part due to something called “capital loss carryover,”
which allows losses from previous years to reduce how much an individual is taxed.
#2: IRS DELAYS
Under typical circumstances, market declines would become evident as tax receipts were
received, but following extreme winter storms across the state in 2023, the Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) extended the tax filing deadline for 99% of all California taxpayers. The delayed tax
receipts, coupled with the ways the pandemic upset economic indicators, made it difficult to
accurately predict revenues. Once processed after the federal delay to November 16, key tax
receipts were 22% lower than projected. Without a delay, the revenue drop would have been
incorporated into last year’s budget and the shortfall this year would be significantly smaller.
BIGGER PICTURE:
LONG-STANDING VOLATILITY
California’s revenues are highly dependent on personal income tax, including capital gains,
which significantly fluctuate based on economic and stock market conditions. As a result,
California’s budget conditions, relying on fluctuating revenue, have always been volatile —
across both Democrat and Republican administrations.
CALIFORNIA REMAINS STRONG
The Governor’s revised balanced budget sets the state up for continued economic success.
California’s economy remains the 5th largest economy in the world and for the first time in years,
the state’s population is increasing and tourism spending recently experienced a record high.
California is #1 in the nation for new business starts, #1 for access to venture capital funding, and
the #1 state for manufacturing,high-tech, and agriculture.
2
Attachment B
36
GOVERNOR’S 2024-25 MAY REVISION BUDGET
May 14, 2024
TO: CSAC Board of Directors
County Administrative Officers
FROM: Graham Knaus, CSAC Chief Executive Officer
Jacqueline Wong-Hernandez, CSAC Chief Policy Officer
RE: Governor’s 2024-25 May Revision Budget Proposal
As expected, the Governor’s 2024-25 May Revision budget proposal grapples with an even larger
gap between projected and actual revenues, increasing the state’s budget problem by an
additional $7 billion. What was unexpected, however, was the sparse budgetary detail delivered
piecemeal between the lengthy press conference on Friday, May 10 and the statutory deadline of
Tuesday, May 14. In that window of time, we learned that the Administration’s proposed cuts, if
enacted, would severely impact counties’ ability to deliver on services and programs that
Californian’s rely upon: the social safety net, housing, homelessness services, public safety, and
infrastructure.
Given the magnitude of the budget problem, it is important to acknowledge that none of the
choices before lawmakers are easy. County leaders, however, are all too familiar with what to do
when faced with a funding shortfall; make tough decisions on spending cuts while ensuring that
the most critical priorities are maintained. As the state and county budgets are woven together,
county leaders know that the state will need county expertise and ground truth from their primary
intergovernmental partner to balance the budget in a manner that meets our collective
responsibility for the safety and wellbeing of Californians.
Changes in budget committee leadership in 2024 in both houses and the general climate in
Sacramento shape the upcoming conversations as we prepare to work closely with the
Administration and legislative leadership to right size the budget plan to preserve core county
services and county workforce. Foremost, the Legislature faces the first truly difficult year for
budget deliberations in more than a decade, after a prolonged period of economic recovery
following the height of the Great Recession, and there are few lawmakers with experience facing
statewide fiscal crises.
Amidst the whirlwind of anxiety and handwringing over the size of the state’s budget deficit,
Governor Newsom and legislative leadership introduced in mid-March what they have labeled a
package of “early action” budget-balancing solutions. By early April, Governor Newsom, Senate
President pro Tempore McGuire, and Assembly Speaker Rivas had agreed to $17.3 billion worth
of early budget actions to shrink the budget shortfall before the release of the May Revision to
make future budget-balancing negotiations “more manageable.” This package was not, however,
composed of many tough decisions necessary to forge a path to a prudent and realistic budget
that lives within our means but does not eliminate crucial services. Rather, the majority of the
Attachment C
37
May 14, 2024
Page 2 of 30
$17.3 billion early action budget package included drawing upon $12.2 billion in reserves from
the Budget Stabilization Account – the voter-created “rainy day fund.”
Thus, the early action package of budget-balancing solutions doesn’t soften the sting of the
remaining $27.6 billion 2024-25 budget shortfall and $28.4 billion 2025-26 budget shortfall. It’s
also worth noting that this projected deficit still relies on the Legislature agreeing to reduce K-12
education funding in future years by counting money allocated to schools in 2022-23 and 2023-
24 toward future years’ Proposition 98 obligations. Acceptance of that proposal is built into the
Administration’s revenue assumptions; any reduction or rejection of that plan would result in a
larger budget problem in future years.
In the coming weeks, the budget negotiations will begin in earnest, with the tight constitutional
deadline for the Legislature to pass the budget bills by June 15. Budget committees and their
subcommittees in the Assembly and Senate will hold hearings to review the Governor’s May
Revision budget proposals and craft the legislative vehicles that will eventually become law. As
required by the State Constitution, the budget chair in each house of the California Legislature
introduced the Governor’s proposed budget bill in January (AB 1812 and SB 917). These bills will
be amended to reflect the proposed revisions to the 2024-25 budget announced this week.
As county leaders, now is the time to make your community's voice heard by providing written
comments or in-person testimony directly to these committees. We also encourage you to contact
legislative staff and officials from your region to share the county perspective and your own budget
priorities and areas of concern.
Your CSAC advocacy team has been working tirelessly for months to shape this year’s budget.
However, we are stronger together and by making our collective voices heard during the coming
weeks we can help craft a budget that serves all of our communities.
We look forward to providing you updates, advocacy tools and analysis as the budget process
evolves over the coming days.
The following pages provide statewide revenue and expenditure summary charts as well as
specific budget proposals by policy area. For more detail on these and other items of importance,
see the following policy sections below or contact CSAC legislative staff.
If you have questions regarding the Budget Action Bulletin, please e-mail Jessica
Sankus, CSAC Principal and Fiscal Policy Analyst, at jsankus@counties.org.
Attachment C
38
May 14, 2024
Page 3 of 30
Budget Problem at the May Revision
Governor’s January 2024-25 Budget $37.9 billion
Increased Shortfall Since January $7.0 billion
Early Budget Solutions Package (April 2024) -$17.3 billion
Remaining Budget Problem as of 2024-25 May Revision $27.6 billion
2024-25 May Revision General Fund Budget Summary
(Dollars in Millions)
2023-24 2024-25
Prior Year Balance $46,260 $9,726
Revenue and Transfers $189,354 $205,249
Total Resources Available $235,614 $214,975
Non-Proposition 98 Expenditures $153,450 $124,368
Proposition 98 Expenditures $72,438 $76,606
Total Expenditures $225,888 $200,974
Fund Balance $9,726 $14,001
Reserve for Liquidation of Encumbrances $10,569 $10,569
Special Fund for Economic Uncertainties -$843 $3,432
Public School System Stabilization Account $2,590 -
Safety Net Reserve $900 -
Budget Stabilization Account/Rainy Day Fund $22,555 $19,429
Attachment C
39
May 14, 2024
Page 4 of 30
General Fund Expenditures by Agency – Year-over-Year Change
(Dollars in Millions)
2024-25 May Revision Total State Expenditures by Agency
(Dollars in Millions)
Change from 2023-24
2023-24 2024-25 $ Change % Change
Legislative, Judicial, Executive $12,704 $7,582 -$5,122 -40.3%
Business, Consumer Services & Housing $2,868 $631 -$2,237 -78.0%
Transportation $1,041 $554 -$487 -46.8%
Natural Resources $11,686 $5,410 -$6,276 -53.7%
Environmental Protection $2,333 $624 -$1,709 -73.3%
Health and Human Services $73,622 $70,194 -$3,428 -4.7%
Corrections and Rehabilitation $15,312 $14,174 -$1,138 -7.4%
K-12 Education $73,739 $76,323 $2,584 3.5%
Higher Education $21,635 $21,830 $195 0.9%
Labor and Workforce Development $1,248 $844 -$404 -32.4%
Government Operations $4,770 $2,540 -$2,230 -46.8%
General Government:
Non-Agency Departments $2,770 $1,355 -$1,415 -51.1%
Tax Relief/Local Government $595 $579 -$16 2.7%
Statewide Expenditures $1,565 -$1,666 -$3,231 -206.5%
TOTAL $225,888 $200,974 -$24,914 -11.0%
General
Fund
Special
Funds
Bond
Funds Total
Legislative, Judicial, Executive $7,582 $5,168 $262 $13,012
Business, Consumer Services & Housing $631 $1,341 $538 $2,510
Transportation $554 $16,665 $86 $17,305
Natural Resources $5,410 $3,040 $516 $8,967
Environmental Protection $624 $4,723 $11 $5,358
Health and Human Services $70,194 $40,452 $10 $110,657
Corrections and Rehabilitation $14,174 $4,001 - $18,175
K-12 Education $76,323 $123 $16 $76,462
Higher Education $21,830 $109 $599 $22,538
Labor and Workforce Development $844 $1,163 - $2,007
Government Operations $2,540 $406 - $2,946
Non-Agency Departments $1,355 $1,989 $2 $3,346
Tax Relief/Local Government $579 $3,626 - $4,205
Statewide Expenditures -$1,666 $2,333 $3 $670
TOTAL $200,974 $85,140 $2,043 $288,157
Attachment C
40
May 14, 2024
Page 5 of 30
General Fund Revenue Sources
(Dollars in Millions)
Revenue Source 2023-24 2024-25 $ Change % Change
Personal Income Tax $111,203 $116,304 $5,101 4.6%
Sales and Use Tax $33,320 $34,045 $725 2.2%
Corporation Tax $33,282 $37,759 $4,477 13.5%
Insurance Tax $3,905 $4,016 $111 2.8%
Alcoholic Beverage Taxes and Fees $417 $422 $5 1.2%
Cigarette Tax $43 $41 -$2 -4.7%
Motor Vehicle Fees $46 $46 $0 0.0%
Other $7,985 $9,490 $1,505 18.8%
Subtotal $190,201 $202,123 $11,922 6.3%
Transfer to the Budget Stabilization
Account/Rainy Day Fund
-$847 $3,126 $3,973 469.1%
Total $189,354 $205,249 $15,895 8.4%
2024-25 Revenue Sources
(Dollars in Millions)
Revenue Source
General
Fund
Special
Funds Total Change from
2023-24
Personal Income Tax $116,304 $2,923 $119,227 $5,404
Sales and Use Tax $34,045 $15,665 $49,710 $989
Corporation Tax $37,759 - $37,759 $4,477
Highway Users Taxes - $9,475 $9,475 $159
Insurance Tax $4,016 - $4,016 $111
Alcoholic Beverage Taxes and Fees $422 - $422 $5
Cigarette Tax $41 $1,390 $1,431 -$42
Motor Vehicle Fees $46 $12,432 $12,478 $448
Other $9,490 $34,748 $44,238 -$2,903
Subtotal $202,123 $76,633 $278,756 $8,648
Transfer to Rainy Day Fund $3,126 -$3,126 - -
TOTAL $205,249 $73,507 $278,756 $8,648
Attachment C
41
May 14, 2024
Page 6 of 30
“Big Three” Tax Revenue
The Department of Finance estimates that the budget shortfall has grown by roughly $7 billion
since the release of the January Budget proposal, adding to the $37.9 billion shortfall estimated
by the Department of Finance in January. The primary reason for the additional shortfall is due to
weaker-than-expected cash receipts for 2022-23 and 2023-24, with each of the “big three”
revenue sources falling $10.5 billion below earlier projections collectively. Specifically, sales and
use tax revenue is $2.3 billion lower, personal income tax revenue is $2.4 billion lower, and
corporation tax revenue is $5.8 billion lower.
Economic Outlook and Future Revenue Estimates
The state’s fiscal condition, and performance of California’s economy, relies on a robust mix of
stock market performance, strong labor markets, and a healthy demand for goods and services.
Despite a significant state budget problem, and some experts questioning whether the state
experienced a recession for periods in 2023, the May Revision does not predict a recession in
the state’s near future. Nonetheless, the state faces many challenges in improving the vibrancy
of its economy, including persistent inflation, labor force participation, and high housing and
energy costs.
CSAC characterized the economic outlook shared in the January Budget proposal as mixed
signals, with some cautious optimism tempered with uneven economic futures. Due to unrelenting
inflation and underperforming revenue receipts in 2022-23 and 2023-24 than projected, the fiscal
condition has worsened since the January Budget proposal.
Because of the state’s reliance on personal income tax revenue for an outsized portion of its
budget and, by extension, capital gains tax revenue, our fiscal condition relies heavily on the
performance of financial investments. Persistent inflation continues to be a drag on economic
conditions and, therefore, the fiscal health of our state. The underperformance of the state’s
expected sales and use tax revenue is reflected locally. In the fourth quarter of 2023, typically the
best quarter for sales and use tax revenue driven by holiday consumer demand, 41 counties
generated less sales and use tax revenue compared to the same window of time in 2022.
These receipts are not surprising considering overall consumer sentiment, which includes fatigue
and frustration with the stubbornly high cost of everyday essentials. According to the Public Policy
Institute of California’s most recent statewide survey, “about six in ten Californians believe the
state will have bad times financially during the next 12 months” and “strong majorities continue to
say they are less comfortable making a major purchase and other household purchases
compared to six months ago.” Another factor compounding the diminishment of sales tax revenue
is the continuing shift in consumer spending from goods to services, of which virtually all are
exempt from sales and use tax. Looking forward, sales and use tax revenues are expected to
increase statewide in 2024-25 by only 1.8% on average.
The labor market is continuing the trend of “normalizing,” since the COVID-19 pandemic and
shows signs of slow, steady growth in some areas, and some difficulties in other areas. The
workforce growth remains relatively strong, with recent growth exceeding pre-pandemic growth.
While the January Budget proposal projected that the state’s unemployment rate would rise to
5.2% by 2025, the rate is already up to 5.3% through March 2024, exceeding the national average
REVENUE OUTLOOK
Attachment C
42
May 14, 2024
Page 7 of 30
of 3.8%. This rise is attributed largely to growth in the workforce and not to layoffs of currently
employed workers.
The “boom and bust” nature of our state’s revenue is tied not only to market performance, but
compensation for our workforce, particularly for higher wage earners. The administration reports
that wages grew 4.3% in 2023 after a 0.7% contraction the year prior and are expected to remain
around the same level for this year and next. Total wages and salaries are expected to grow by
4.5% over the next few years, however the pace and extent of that growth, like much of our
economy and fiscal condition, will rely in large part on inflation and interest rates and other factors
outside of the control of our state and its policymakers. The technology sector, long a source of
the more highly compensated members of our state’s workforce, is expected to add fewer jobs in
2024 than it did last year, which could be a further limit on growth. The information sector, another
sector with some of the highest earners in the state, also saw a decline in employment, but
experienced strong average wage growth.
Over the next few years, the state’s economy is expected to remain in a slow growth state until
inflation is tamed and interest rates are reduced, neither of which can be relied upon. Housing
and energy costs remain significant drags on taming inflation and have declined slower than
projected by the administration. Global conflict, upcoming federal elections, and pending ballot
measures add to the uncertainty faced by our state and its communities.
Attachment C
43
May 14, 2024
Page 8 of 30
Local Public Safety
Proposition 47 Savings Estimate
The May Revision includes an estimated total state savings of $94.8 million in 2024-25, which is
nearly $7 million higher than January projections. Proposition 47, approved by voters in 2014,
requires misdemeanor rather than felony sentencing for certain property and drug crimes, and
permits incarcerated persons previously sentenced for these reclassified crimes to petition for
resentencing. Each year, state savings from the implementation of Proposition 47 are allocated
through grants to public agencies for various recidivism reduction programs (such as mental
health and substance use treatment services), truancy and dropout prevention, and victims'
services.
Post Release Community Supervision (PRCS)
The May Revision eliminates the payments to county probation departments to address the
temporary increase in the number of individuals released from prison on PRCS as a result of
Proposition 57 (2016). The Governor’s January Budget proposal had included an estimated $4.4
million General Fund for probation in 2024-25 to supervise the PRCS population.
Community Corrections Performance Incentive Grant
The Community Corrections Performance Incentive Grant, established by SB 678 (Chapter 608,
Statutes of 2009), was created to provide incentives for counties to reduce the number of felony
probationers sent to state prison. The Governor’s January Budget proposal included $113.6
million General Fund in 2024-25 for probation departments. Updated projections are not included
in the May Revision.
Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC)
Additional Adjustments to Address the Budget Shortfall:
• Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) Grants – A reduction of $10.5 million in 2023-24
for competitive grants to counties for the provision of MAT to treat substance use
disorders.
• Organized Retail Theft Vertical Prosecution Grant Program – A reduction of $3.6 million
one-time for funding not awarded to district attorneys to utilize vertical prosecution
models.
• Adult Reentry Grants – A one-time reduction of $57 million over three years for
community-based organizations to provide reentry services for those formerly
incarcerated in state prison.
• California Violence Intervention and Prevention (CalVIP Grant Program) – Proposed
elimination of the CalVIP Grant Program to be funded through a newly established Gun
Violence Prevention and School Safety Fund beginning in 2024-25.
• Cannabis Tax Fund Loan – A budgetary loan of $75 million from the Cannabis Tax Fund
to the General Fund from resources not currently projected to be used for operational or
programmatic purposes.
Local Detention Facility Oversight
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
Attachment C
44
May 14, 2024
Page 9 of 30
• The May Revision proposes an increase of $3.2 million for the BSCC in 2024-25 and
$7.6 million ongoing to implement in-custody, county jail death reviews pursuant to SB
519, Chapter 306, Statutes of 2023.
Juvenile Justice
• The May Revision includes statutory changes that will transfer administration of 2011
juvenile realignment grants from the BSCC to the Office of Youth and Community
Restoration.
• The May Revision increases one-time reimbursements by $2.3 million to cities and
counties for costs associated with SB 203 (Chapter 335, Statutes of 2020), which
requires youths, 17 years of age or younger, to consult with legal counsel prior to
custodial interrogation and the delivery of Miranda rights.
Department of State Hospitals
Incompetent to Stand Trial (IST) Solutions
• Jail-Based Competency Treatment (JBCT) and Community Based Restoration
(CBR)/Diversion programs – A reduction of $73.3 million in 2023-24 one-time General
Fund and $49.9 million in 2024-25 one-time General Fund to reflect activation delays in
JBCT and CBR/Diversion programs, as well as county stakeholder contracts that are not
yet executed.
• Other IST Solutions adjustments – A reduction of $45 million in 2023-24 one-time
General Fund to reflect updated implementation timelines for various IST Solutions
initiatives and $129.4 million General Fund is proposed to be shifted from 2025-26 to
2026-27. These funds have multiyear authority under current law, and over time the
investments will move consistently with updated program activities.
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)
• Adult Population Adjustment – The May Revision reflects an estimated average daily
adult incarcerated population of 90,860 in 2024-25, which is 825 fewer than projected in
the Governor’s January budget proposal. The projected average daily population of
those on parole is 41,287 in 2024-25, which is a decrease of 935 compared to estimates
included in the Governor’s January budget proposal. These projections yield a net
decrease of $21.2 million for staffing reductions in 2024-25, with varying amounts in the
subsequent years.
• Chuckawalla Valley State Prison – A net reduction of $44.4 million one-time funding with
the acceleration of the closure of Chuckawalla Valley State Prison in Riverside County
from March 31, 2025, to November 30, 2024.
• Housing Deactivations – A reduction of $80.6 million ongoing for savings associated with
deactivating various housing units within 13 of CDCR’s state prisons.
• California Advancing and Innovating Medi-Cal Justice-Involved (CalAIM JI) Initiative –
$16.5 million in reimbursements one-time for CDCR to continue the development of an
information technology-based Medi-Cal billing system that supports CalAIM JI
implementation.
• Los Angeles County Fire Camp Contract – A reduction of $2.4 million in 2024-25 and
$4.8 million ongoing in savings after the state’s elimination of the contract.
• Modifications to Pre-Release Reentry Funding – Adjustments to enable CDCR to utilize
existing funding to offset increased costs associated with operating existing community
Attachment C
45
May 14, 2024
Page 10 of 30
correctional reentry programs, while supporting the expansion of reentry programs
based on projections of when new facilities will become operational. This proposal
replaces the Governor’s January Budget proposal for community correctional reentry
centers.
Judicial Branch
• CARE Act Funding – A reversion of up to $17.5 million from projected savings from the
trial courts for the implementation of the CARE Act (see Health and Human Services
section for more on the CARE Act).
• Trial Court Trust Fund Unrestricted Fund Balance – A transfer of $25 million of
unrestricted Trial Court Trust Fund dollars to the General Fund. The Governor’s January
budget proposed a transfer of $80 million, bringing the cumulative total to $105 million.
• Trial Court Operations – A reduction of $139.8 million General Fund, ongoing.
• Trial Court Trust Fund Backfill – A reduction of $45 million, ongoing.
• Remote Access to Court Proceedings – $5.1 million to be reappropriated to support the
implementation of AB 716 (Chapter 526, Statutes of 2021), which prohibits a court from
excluding public access to the courtroom when remote access is available.
Department of Justice (DOJ)
Adjustments for Some Recently Signed Legislation:
• Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Policies: AB 449 (Chapter 524, Statutes of 2023) – to be
increased by $1.9 million in 2024-25 and $1.7 million annually thereafter.
• Tribal Police: AB 44 (Chapter 638, Statutes of 2023) – to be increased by $1.3 million in
2024-25 and $1.2 million annually thereafter.
• Restorative Justice Program: AB 60 (Chapter 513, Statutes of 2023) – to be increased
by $346,000 in 2024-25 and $271,000 annually thereafter.
• Criminal Records Relief: AB 567 (Chapter 444, Statutes of 2023) – to be increased by
$333,000 in 2024-25 and $313,000 annually thereafter.
Attachment C
46
May 14, 2024
Page 11 of 30
The May Revision builds on the reductions proposed in the Governor’s January Budget including
further 2024-25 cuts, as well as reductions to programs that were appropriated in previous budget
years, but have not been expended. These funds have been “swept” back into the General Fund
as part of the budget solution. In addition, the May Revision shifts some program expenditures
from 2024-25 into future years.
There are several programs that the May Revision attempts to preserve by shifting the funding
source from the General Fund to other funds. Most significantly, the May Revision includes an
additional $1.7 billion in shifts across climate resilience programs from the General Fund to the
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF).
Flood and Water Management
Major Reduction to Water Storage in Future Years
The May Revision proposes a one-time reduction of $500 million in 2025-26 for water storage
facilities in the Department of Water Resources budget. This funding was intended to support
significant additional water supply investments and provided a needed state commitment to
balance local and regional water investments.
Reduction to Multi-Benefit Land Repurposing
The May Revision proposes to sweep the funding from the Department of Conservation’s Multi-
Benefit Land Repurposing Program which was created to support the conversion of lands
necessitated by the reduction of groundwater use under the Sustainable Groundwater
Management Act (SGMA). $5.7 million in the current year and $5.6 million appropriated in the
2021 Budget are proposed for reduction.
Emergency Water Programs Cut
The May Revision proposes to cut and sweep $11 million General Fund for the California
Emergency Relief Fund’s Water Tank Program and $21.5 million for the California Emergency
Relief Fund’s Save our Water Program. These programs were established to support
communities affected by drought and water loss.
Flood Programs Sustained through Budget Shifts
The May Revision proposes to sustain a number of flood programs in 2024-25 by shifting funding
on a one-time basis from the General Fund to the GGRF. These include:
• $102.5 million for habitat restoration.
• $39 million for systemwide flood risk.
• $87 million for urban flood risk and Central Valley Flood risk programs.
Tapping into Water Bonds and Federal Funds for Capital Investments
Finally, the May Revision proposes to fund several programs through reimbursement from bonds
and federal funds (Proposition 50 of 2002, Proposition 1 of 2016, and Proposition 68 of 2018).
These include:
• $3 million for water use efficiency grants from Proposition 50.
• $15 million for Cache Creek Channel and Levee Rehabilitation and $673,000 for grantee
and technical support from Proposition 68.
AGRICULTURE, ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Attachment C
47
May 14, 2024
Page 12 of 30
• $5.2 million for Flood Control and Delta Levee Subventions and $2 million for San Joaquin
River Restoration from Proposition 1.
• $50 million to support new construction and vegetation enhancement at the Salton Sea
from the Federal Trust Fund.
Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances
Counties are on the front lines to clean up Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances that have leeched
into our soil and water. The May Revision proposes a reversion of $100.7 million General Fund
in prior year funds and reduction of $30 million in 2024-25 for Per-and Polyfluoroalkyl support.
This would maintain just under $23 million that was previously allocated to the program.
Forestry and Fire Protection
Fire Prevention and Forest Resilience Postponed
The May Revision proposes to shift $26 million General Fund from 2024-25 to the 2027-28 fiscal
year for major wildfire and forest resilience unit fire prevention projects, delaying fire prevention
projects by three years.
Fund Shifts All Around … Sustaining Fire Prevention Programs
The May Revision proposes a shift of $120 million from the Timber Regulation and Restoration
Fund (Timber Tax) to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), to offset shifts from the
GGRF to the General Fund. Programs proposed to be sustained through this t hree-way swap
include:
• $20 million Prescribed Fire Liability Pilot program from the General Fund to the GGRF,
sustaining this county-supported program.
• $40 million in g2024-25 and $42 million in 2027-28 for Wildfire and Forest Resilience
program fire prevention grants.
• $10 million in 2025-26 for tribal wildfire and forest resilience grants. These grants support
fire prevention and resilience on tribal lands. This is accompanied by a proposed reversion
of $10 million in unexpended funds from the current year.
Adding Five Firefighter Hand Crews
The May Revision proposes to add $46.5 million from the General Fund with 226 positions for
five new firefighter hand crews. Hand crews are requested annually and provide ongoing support
for vegetation management, hazardous fuel reduction projects, and wildland fire suppression.
Regional Forest and Fire Capacity (RFFC) Program Cut and Postponed
The May Revision proposes to eliminate $20 million GGRF funds proposed for 2024-25 for the
RFFC Program. The revised Cap and Trade Spending Plan shifts the $20 million for this program
from 2024-25 to 2027-28. The RFFC program supports local and regional efforts to assess the
resilience of their forests and communities, identify forest health and wildfire prevention priorities,
build local partner capacity, and develop a pipeline of shovel ready fuels reduction projects.
Fire Insurance
During his press conference to announce the May Revision, Governor Newsom said that his
administration intends to put forth Trailer Bill Language that will address the state’s insurance
crisis. We are still awaiting the final language, but anticipate that it will center on speeding up the
rate filing process.
Attachment C
48
May 14, 2024
Page 13 of 30
Coastal Planning and Programs
Sea Level Rise Planning and Adaptation (SB 272)
The May Revision proposes $2.1 million General Fund in the 2024-25 and $3.8 million ongoing
(with 18 permanent positions) for state support of SB 272 (Chapter 384, 2023). SB 272 mandated
that local governments incorporate sea level rise into Coastal Commission approved local coastal
plans by 2034.
Offshore Wind Permitting
The May Revision proposes $1.5 million General Fund on a one-time basis for the Coastal
Commission’s continued role in offshore wind energy planning and management. The funds are
anticipated to be used to review proposed lease areas for consistency with state and federal
coastal acts, and to support engagement with state, tribal, federal and local partners.
Waste & Recycling
Compost Permitting Pilot Program
Two years ago, $7.5 million was committed for the Compost Permitting Pilot Program. $7 million
was to be allocated during this year’s fiscal cycle for grants to local governments. The funding
was intended to help local government entities and facilities locate and permit small and medium
sized compost facilities and would serve as a tool to help local jurisdictions implement the goals
set forth by SB 1383 (Chapter 395, Statutes of 2016) of diverting organic waste away from
landfills.
The May Revision reverts $6.7 million for the Compost Permitting Pilot Program from the General
Fund, leaving $800,000 of what was previously committed.
Wildlife Conservation Board Programs
The May Revision proposes to sustain programs within the Wildlife Conservation Board by shifting
funding source from the General Fund to GGRF. These include the following changes in 2024-
25:
• $101 million for streamflow enhancement programs, which change the amount and timing
of water moving through streams to benefit fish and wildlife.
• $70 million for protection of fish and wildlife from changing ecosystem conditions.
• $42 million for nature-based solutions, which can include landscape level projects to
protect natural features and processes supporting broad ecosystems.
Elimination of the Habitat Conservation Fund (HCF)
The May Revision proposes to revert $45 million back to the General Fund in the current year
and $20 million ongoing by accelerating the sunset date for the fund which is scheduled to sunset
in 2030. The HCF was created in 1990 through Proposition 117 to provide an annual transfer of
funds from mainly General Fund for acquisition of deer and mountain lion habitat, and to support
wetlands, habitat, open space and other environmental purposes.
Attachment C
49
May 14, 2024
Page 14 of 30
Farming and Agriculture
The May Revision proposes a series of significant General Fund and GGRF reversions, cuts or
eliminations to farming and agriculture support programs at the Department of Food and
Agriculture (CDFA) across all sectors of farming and ranching. These include:
• $2.1 million for Fairs and Exposition Resiliency Program from the Budget Act of 2021.
• $5 million for relief for small farmers program which was created after devastating floods
in 2023.
• $10 million for the farm to school incubator grant program from the Budget Act of 2022.
• $200,000 for technical assistance to underserved farmers from the Budget Act of 2022.
• $2.8 million for the State Water Efficiency and Enhancement Program (SWEEP) in 2023-
24. A further $20.6 million per year in 2023-24 and 2026-27 from GGRF is proposed to be
eliminated.
• $6.9 million for the Water Efficiency Technical Assistance Program from the Budget Act
of 2021.
• A delay of $7 million for the Livestock Methane Reduction Program (GGRF) from 2024-25
to 2025-26.
Local Food Purchasing Assistance
The May Revision proposes to add a federal trust fund reimbursement to offset $25.8 million for
local food purchasing assistance. This program is an agreement between the CDFA, Department
of Social Services, California Association of Food Banks, and California Dairy Research
Foundation for incentives to producers and landowners implementing climate-smart agriculture
on working lands.
Extreme Heat & Community Resilience
During recent budget surplus years, important investments were made in several programs
designed to help local communities and residents endure extreme heat and other emergency
events. This year’s projected budget shortfall has led the Administration to propose substantial
reductions to the programs.
The May Revision proposes to eliminate funding for the Extreme Heat and Community Resilience
Program; however, it maintains $70 million previously which was previously allocated for 2023-
24 and then delayed to 2024-25.
To address revenue shortfalls, the May Revision also proposes significant cuts to climate
resilience and adaptation programs, including:
• $50 million reduction for the Regional Climate Resilience Program at the Office of Planning
and Research.
• $9.8 million reversion in 2023-24 funding for Regional Climate Collaboratives Program at
the Strategic Growth Council.
• $5 million reversion in 2023-24 funding for the Climate Adaptation and Resilience Planning
Grants at the Office of Planning and Research.
Climate Bond
CSAC has been monitoring conversations around the possibility of a climate and natural
resources bond, especially as climate programs are facing a reduction of investments. The
Attachment C
50
May 14, 2024
Page 15 of 30
Governor has not expressed interest in a climate and natural resources bond and, in fact, said
that he believes the voters do not have an appetite for bonds. With a lack of commitment from
the Administration and no consensus in the Legislature, the fate of any potential bond is firmly up
in the air. If a climate and natural resources bond becomes a reality, CSAC will advocate for
provisions that aid counties in complying with the state’s climate mandates that must be fulfilled
by counties, including implementation of SB 1383.
Attachment C
51
May 14, 2024
Page 16 of 30
Broadband
Middle-Mile, Last-Mile, and Loan Loss Reserve Programs
The May Revision proposes adjustments to prior investments to assist in closing the projected
budget shortfall. This unfortunately includes adjustments to SB 156 (Chapter 112, Statutes of
2021), a CSAC-supported measure that made a historic $6 billion investment in broadband
infrastructure. $2 billion of direct funding was previously allocated for last-mile network
construction, while $3.3 billion was previously earmarked to construct a statewide open-access
middle-mile network.
The May Revision proposes reductions to the California Department of Technology’s Middle
Mile Broadband Initiative: $250 million reduction in 2024-25 and $1.3 billion in 2025-26. It
proposes to delay $200 million in 2025-26 for the Last-Mile Grant Program administered by the
California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). Also, reductions to the CPUC’s Loan Loss
Reserve Program are proposed: $175 million in 2023-24, $150 million in 2024-25, and $175
million in 2025-26.
Broadband Mapping
The May Revision proposes an increase of $1.3 million in one-time funding in 2024-25 and $1.2
million annually thereafter for CSAC-supported AB 286 (Chapter 645, Statutes of 2023), with an
increased allocation for two additional permanent positions. The funding will help improve the
CPUC's statewide broadband map with increased transparency, granularity, and accuracy for
household broadband service data.
Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program
The May Revision includes a proposed increase of $1.9 billion in one-time funding and an
allocation of 31 permanent positions to implement the Broadband Equity, Access, and
Deployment (BEAD) program. This reflects the anticipated amount of federal funds announced
for California by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration in June of 2023.
California Lifeline Program
The May Revision proposes an increase of $30.9 million in ongoing funding for the California
Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) for the Universal Lifeline Telephone Service Trust
Administrative Committee Fund to implement the California Lifeline Program. Out of that increase,
$2.2 million is allocated funding for a new contract for a Third-Party Administrator who will
administer the CPUC’s Foster Youth Line Program, which provides unlimited talk/text and up to
25 GB of free data with a participating service provider. The remaining $28.8 million was proposed
based on the CPUC’s estimation that program participation will increase as customers who were
previously enrolled in the federal Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) will transition back to
the California Lifeline Program now that the ACP expired in April 2024.
CSAC supports the expansion of broadband infrastructure, increasing affordability and enhancing
access to broadband for all Californians. Nearly 15 million Californians live in a broadband
monopoly. Today, one in five Californians do not have fast, reliable, and affordable connectivity.
State resources and investments are an essential first step towards increasing connectivity and
affordability and CSAC will continue to advocate for closing the digital divide.
GOVERNMENT FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION
Attachment C
52
May 14, 2024
Page 17 of 30
Privacy
Internet Websites and Email Addresses
The May Revision proposes increases of $147,000 in 2024-25 and $147,000 in 2025-26 for the
Department of Technology to conduct an inventory of all high-risk automated decision systems
used by state entities per the CSAC-opposed AB 1637 (Chapter 586, Statutes of 2023). The
enacted law requires local agencies to secure and migrate to a new “.gov” or “.ca.gov” domain no
later than January 1, 2029 and requires all associated email addresses connected to reflect the
updated domain within the same time frame.
Labor
Healthcare Minimum Wage Increase
The May Revision did not include the trigger mechanism previously mentioned in the Governor’s
January Budget that would allow the Governor to delay implementation of the increased minimum
wages and salaries of healthcare workers as per SB 525 (Chapter 890, Statutes of 2023), during
times of economic downturn. Please see the Health and Human Services section for more details.
Workers’ Compensation
There is a proposed $300,000 increase in 2024-25 and 2025-26 for the CSAC-opposed SB 623
(Chapter 621, Statutes of 2023), which was a substantial expansion of California’s current
workers’ compensation presumption for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder to public safety
dispatchers and communications workers.
California Jobs First (Formerly the Community Economic Resilience Fund (CERF))
The May Revision proposes to reduce funding by $50 million annually beginning in 2024-25
through 2026-27.
Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF)
The Governor’s January Budget proposed statutory changes to make charter schools eligible to
receive ERAF, which would diminish the portion of excess ERAF available to local agencies in
counties with excess ERAF. After several months of discussions and budget subcommittee
hearings, the trailer bill language was published on May 14.
The Governor’s January Budget proposal lacked an appropriation to backfill the insufficient ERAF
amounts for Alpine, Mono, and San Mateo counties. The three counties would collectively require
an appropriation of $72.9 million to be held harmless under the Vehicle License Fee reduction
made in 2004.
Attachment C
53
May 14, 2024
Page 18 of 30
The May Revision proposal includes $256.2 billion ($70.2 billion General Fund – nearly 35% of
the state’s overall General Fund budget expenditures) in 2024-25 for all health and human
services programs that support our state’s most vulnerable communities. The May Revision
reflects a reduction of more than $3.4 billion General Fund compared to expenditure
appropriations included in the Governor’s January budget proposal.
Although the Governor’s January Budget largely maintained funding for critical investments made
in recent years, it included specified delays, deferrals, and targeted reductions to health and
human services programs. In addition, the Governor’s January Budget proposed to withdraw $900
million from the Safety Net Reserve to fund existing benefits and services within Medi-Cal and
CalWORKs. Due to the larger projected budget shortfall, the May Revision proposes additional
reductions beyond those proposed in the Governor’s January Budget to health and human
services investments, including cuts to critical public health infrastructure, workforce
development, and social safety net programs.
Realignment
The Governor's May Revision includes updated revenue assumptions for 1991 Realignment and
2011 Realignment. For 1991 Realignment, while total revenues are projected to increase in 2023-
24, only Vehicle License Fee (VLF) revenues are projected to have growth. For sales tax
revenues, the projections indicate a slight decrease in 2023-24 and no caseload or general
growth. The projections for 2024-25 indicate growth for both revenue sources. However, there is
no general growth projected for sales tax, but rather only revenues to cover a portion of caseload
growth. The Realignment revenue tables, including specific projections by subaccount, are
included in the appendix at the end of this Budget Action Bulletin.
HEALTH
Proposed Health and Behavioral Health Budget Solutions
To address the larger projected budget shortfall, in addition to the solutions approved under early
action and proposed in the Governor’s Budget in January, the May Revision proposes the
following notable proposals in the area of health and behavioral health:
• Managed Care Organization (MCO) Tax — reduction of $6.7 billion over multiple years
from the Medi-Cal provider rate increases planned for January 1, 2025, as well as
Graduate Medical Education and Medi-Cal labor workforce. On the revenue side, the May
Revision proposes an amendment to the MCO tax to include health plan Medicare
revenue in the total revenue limit calculation, which increases the allowable size of the tax
resulting in an additional net state benefit of $689.9 million in 2024-25, $950 million in
2025-26, and nearly $1.3 billion in 2026-27. Overall, the May Revision includes an
additional $9.7 billion in MCO tax funds over multiple years to support the Medi-Cal
program.
• Elimination of Public Health Infrastructure Funding — elimination of $52.5 million in 2023-
24 and $300 million General Fund ongoing for public health investments, including the
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Attachment C
54
May 14, 2024
Page 19 of 30
entire $200 million in ongoing funding previously approved in the 2022 Budget Act for local
health jurisdictions.
• Healthcare Workforce Reductions – elimination of $300.9 million in 202324, $302.7 million
in 2024-25, $216 million in 202526, $19 million in 2026-27, and $16 million in 202728 for
various healthcare workforce initiatives overseen by the Department of Health Care
Access and Information (HCAI) including community health workers, nursing, social work,
addiction psychiatry and medicine fellowships, Song-Brown residencies, Health
Professions Career Opportunity Program, the Psychiatry Local Behavioral Health
Program, and California Medicine Scholars Program. The May Revision also eliminates
$189.4 million Mental Health Services Fund for programs that were proposed to be
delayed to 2025-26 in the Governor's January Budget proposal.
• Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative (CYBHI) Investment Reductions —
reduction of $72.3 million one-time in 2023-24, $348.6 million in 2024-25, and $5 million
in 2025-26 for school-linked health partnerships and capacity grants for higher education
institutions, the behavioral health services and supports platform, evidence-based and
community-defined grants, public education and change campaign, and the youth suicide
reporting and crisis response pilot.
• Behavioral Health Continuum Infrastructure Program (BHCIP) Reduction – elimination of
$450.7 million one-time ($70 million in 2024-25 and $380.7 million in 2025-26) from the
last round (Round 6) of BHCIP, while maintaining $30 million one-time General Fund in
2024-25.
• Behavioral Health Bridge Housing (BHBH) Funding Reduction – reduction of $340 million
total ($132.5 million in 2024-25 and $207.5 million in 2025-26) for the BHBH Program,
while maintaining $132.5 million General Fund in 2024-25 and $117.5 million ($90 million
Mental Health Services Fund and $27.5 million General Fund) in 2025-26. This leaves
slightly over $1 billion in funding for this program to address the immediate housing and
treatment needs of individuals with serious behavioral health conditions who are
experiencing unsheltered homelessness.
• Equity and Practice Transformation Payments to Providers – elimination of $280 million in
one-time funding over multiple years for grants to Medi-Cal providers for quality, health
equity, and primary care infrastructure. The May Revision maintains $70 million General
Fund included in the 2022 Budget Act.
• Medi-Cal Expansion Regardless of Immigration Status – maintenance of the expansion of
Medi-Cal to all Californians regardless of immigration status, but elimination of the In-
Home Supportive Services (IHSS) benefit for beneficiaries in this population at any age.
This benefit reduction results in General Fund savings of approximately $433 million,
consisting of $338 million related to lower-than-expected utilization, and $95 million of
actual utilization that would be reduced upon eliminating the benefit entirely.
• Freeze Medi-Cal County Administration Increases — reduction of $20.4 million in 2024-
25, $42 million in 2025-26, $65 million in 2026-27, and $88.8 million in 2027-28 to freeze
funding levels for county administration of Medi-Cal eligibility functions.
Attachment C
55
May 14, 2024
Page 20 of 30
• Naloxone Distribution Project and Medication Assisted Treatment Reduction — reduction
of $57.3 million in 2024-25 and ongoing, and $3.7 million from state operations in 2024-
25 and ongoing.
• Proposition 56 General Fund Backfill — in recent years, Proposition 56 revenues have
been insufficient to fully cover the cost of Proposition 56 payments. The May Revision
proposes to use $145.4 million from MCO tax revenue in 2024-25 to support the Medi-Cal
Family Planning, Women’s Health, and Physician Services supplemental Proposition 56
payments in lieu of General Fund. In addition, the May Revision proposes $64 million
General Fund in 2024-25 to fully fund Dental Services Proposition 56 supplemental
payments.
• Health Enrollment Navigators – elimination of $18 million General Fund in remaining
funding for the Health Enrollment Navigators Project, and an additional $8 million in
remaining funding for Health Enrollment Navigators for Clinics, in 2024-25. These funds
are provided to counties and community-based organizations for Medi-Cal outreach,
enrollment, and retention activities.
Proposition 1 – Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA)/Behavioral Health Infrastructure
Bond Act (BHIBA): Initial Funding for County and State Implementation
Proposition 1, which voters approved at the March 2024 statewide primary election, seeks to
address the behavioral health and homelessness crises facing our state through significant
reforms to our existing mental health system and $6.4 billion in critically needed investment in our
state’s behavioral health infrastructure.
The May Revision proposes a total of $85 million ($50 million General Fund and $30 million
federal funds) in 2025-26 for county behavioral health administrative costs for planning and
implementation of portions of the BHSA. Notably, it appears no ongoing funding is currently
included for county administrative costs associated with implementation of Proposition 1.
Welfare and Institutions Code (WIC) section 5963(c) specifies the following costs shall be
included in the Governor’s 2024-25 May Revision:
• New and ongoing county and behavioral health agency administrative costs to implement
Article 2 (behavioral health planning and reporting) and WIC section 14197.71 (aligning
county behavioral health plans and Medi-Cal managed care plan contract requirements);
• Any costs for plan development required under the Article that exceed the 5%
administrative cap; and,
• Any costs for reporting required by Article 2 that exceed the 2% cap (4% for small counties)
for improving plan operations.
The May Revision estimate reflects very early and limited consultation by the Administration with
county associations to develop the initial and ongoing impacts of this complex initiative given time
constraints due to the delayed results confirming voter approval of Proposition 1 and the pending
development of numerous policy criteria and processes. CSAC will continue its engagement with
the Administration and county partners as the budget details are deliberated and finalized.
Attachment C
56
May 14, 2024
Page 21 of 30
The May Revision also includes the following resources for state entities involved with Proposition
1 efforts:
• Department of Health Care Serves (DHCS) – $126.9 million total funds, including ($16.9
million General Fund, $28.2 million BHSA Fund, $31.6 million Opioid Settlement Fund,
$10.4 million Behavioral Health Infrastructure Bond Act, and $39.8 million federal funds)
in 2024-25 for DHCS to begin implementation of the provisions of Proposition 1. DHCS
has also proposed budget trailer bill language, which they indicate addresses technical
clean-up issues, that was released on May 14.
• Department of Health Care Access and Information (HCAI) – $631,000 one-time for the
planning, implementation, and oversight of the Behavioral Health Services Act Workforce
Initiative.
• Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission (MHSOAC) – $494,000
annually in 2024-25 through 2026-27, and $394,000 in 2027-28 and ongoing, to support
staffing and workload related to the implementation of the behavioral health transformation
efforts.
On May 14, the Governor held a press conference announcing the Administration’s intention to
expedite the initial round of Proposition 1 bond funding. Following the press conference, DHCS
released a Bond BHCIP Program Update on BHCIP Rounds 1 and 2, which provides an overview
of the program, BHCIP to date, technical assistance, and eligibility (entities, considerations and
facility types), and funding parameters. Of note, for Bond BHCIP Round 1, the $1.5 billion
available exclusively for counties, cities, and tribal entities will not be subject to a regional funding
cap, although the remaining BHCIP funding will be subject to the regional funding caps as outlined
in the program update document.
Community Assistance, Recovery and Empowerment (CARE) Act
Consistent with the Governor’s Budget released in January, the May Revision continues to support
statewide implementation of the CARE Act. CSAC has requested and is still pending detailed
budget information from the Department of Finance but was provided with top-line information that
General Fund support for state and county activities consists of $71.3 million in 2023-24,
increasing to $107.7 million in 2026-27 at full implementation. Compared to the Governor's
January Budget proposal, the May Revision reflects decreases primarily to account for updated
assumptions on caseload/utilization.
Lanterman-Petris-Short (LPS) Act – SB 43
The May Revision includes $539,000 in 2024-25 and $512,000 in 2025-26 and annually thereafter
to support six permanent positions at DHCS for activities to expand DHCS data collection and
reporting requirements pertaining to involuntary detentions under the LPS Act pursuant to SB 43
(Chapter 637, Statutes of 2023). Notably, no funding is included for counties to implement the
provisions of these new activities under the LPS Act.
California Advancing and Innovating Medi-Cal (CalAIM)
Consistent with the Governor’s January budget proposal, the May Revision maintains the multi-
billion-dollar commitment to continue efforts to transform the healthcare delivery system through
CalAIM, to strengthen the Medi-Cal program by offering Californians more equitable, coordinated,
and person-centered care.
Attachment C
57
May 14, 2024
Page 22 of 30
Medi-Cal
The Medi-Cal budget includes $157.3 billion ($37.2 billion General Fund) in 2023-24 and $159.1
billion ($35.6 billion General Fund) in 2024-25. Medi-Cal is projected to cover approximately 15.2
million Californians in 2023-24 and 14.5 million in 2024-25—more than one-third of the state’s
population. Since the release of the Governor’s Budget in January, caseload reductions due to
eligibility redeterminations have continued, but the trend of discontinuances has slowed due in
part to flexibilities put in place to streamline the renewal process.
The May Revision proposal continues to support implementation of significant investments made
to date in the Medi-Cal program, including fully funding the expansion of benefits to adults
regardless of immigration status. The May Revision includes $1.4 billion ($1.2 billion General
Fund) in 2023-24, and $3.3 billion ($2.8 billion General Fund) in 2024-25 to implement the
expansion to income eligible adults aged 26-49 regardless of immigration status, which took effect
on January 1, 2024.
Managed Care Organization (MCO) Provider Tax
As proposed in the Governor’s January budget and enacted through the early action budget
agreement in SB 136 (Chapter 6, Statutes of 2024), DHCS submitted a request to modify the
MCO tax proposal to the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in March
2024. The modified tax model increases the amount of the tax and is estimated to generate $1.5
billion in additional net funding to the state over the remaining duration of the tax. The requested
effective date for the modification is January 1, 2024, through December 31, 2026. CMS approval
of the modification is still pending.
The May Revision reflects the following updates to the MCO tax proposal:
• Medicare revenue – DHCS proposes modifications to the MCO tax proposal to more fully
account for Medicare revenue in determining the maximum aggregate tax allowable while
meeting federal requirements. The May Revision assumes $689.9 million in net reduced
General Fund costs in 2024-25 related to this change. DHCS will be proposing trailer bill
language to effectuate this proposal.
• Maintains 2024 targeted rate increases – the May Revision continues to include $727
million total funds ($291 million from the Medi-Cal Provider Payment Reserve Fund) for
increasing provider rates for primary care, non-specialty mental health services, and
obstetric care (including doulas) services to at least 87.5% of Medicare rates.
• Eliminates MCO tax investments proposed in the Governor’s January budget, other than
the targeted rate increases implemented on January 1, 2024. The May Revision proposes
to use MCO tax revenues, previously proposed in the Governor’s January budget to
support additional targeted rate increases, other investments, and transfers to the Medi-
Cal Provider Payment Reserve Fund for later use, to support existing costs in Medi-Cal.
Combined, these proposed actions result in reduced General Fund costs of $75 million in
2023-24 and $879 million in 2024-25. Proposed eliminations include:
o Eliminates MCO Tax Graduate Medical Education (GME) and Workforce Pool
Funding. The Governor’s January budget reflected annual funding for GME
beginning in 2023-24 and annual funding for the Medi-Cal Workforce Pool
beginning in 2024-25. The May Revision proposes to eliminate these expenditures
in 2023-24, 2024-25, and ongoing, and redirect the MCO tax funding to cover
existing services in Medi-Cal.
Attachment C
58
May 14, 2024
Page 23 of 30
o Eliminates 2025 MCO tax targeted rate increases/investments and fund reserve.
The Governor’s January budget reflected $1.9 billion total funds ($773.9 million
state funds) in 2024-25 for targeted rate increases and other investments. The May
Revision proposes to eliminate these expenditures in 2024-25 and ongoing.
Health Care Worker Minimum Wage (SB 525)
The May Revision reflects no new information about implementation of SB 525 (Chapter 890,
Statutes of 2023), which increases the minimum wage incrementally to $25 an hour for specified
health care workers. Additionally, the Department of Finance confirmed the May Revision includes
no funding for implementation of SB 525. The Administration had initially sought early action in
January by the Legislature to amend SB 525 to add an annual trigger mechanism to make the
wage increases subject to a determination of sufficient General Fund revenues, clarify the
exemption for state facilities, and make other implementation clarifications, however, no proposed
budget trailer bill language or details have been released to date to effectuate the changes.
Notably, wage increases for some health care providers will go into effect on June 1, 2024, under
current law. The Governor indicated during the budget press conference on May 10 that the issue
would be resolved/addressed by the time the budget is signed.
Public Health
State and Local Public Health Infrastructure Investments Proposed for Elimination
The May Revision proposes to eliminate the full $200 million in ongoing General Fund to local
health jurisdictions that is critically needed to address vital public health priorities such as
modernizing local public health infrastructure and bolstering public health staffing. The May
Revision also proposes to eliminate the $100 million in ongoing General Fund to the Department
of Public Health to support increased state public health capacity in foundational areas such as
emergency preparedness and response and workforce development and training.
Increase in Directed Payments to Public Hospitals
The May Revision proposes to increase directed payments to public hospitals through programs
such as the Enhanced Payment Program and Quality Incentive Pool . The May Revision proposes
to develop an administrative fee on intergovernmental transfers related to these directed payment
programs. Collectively, these actions are estimated to result in General Fund reimbursements of
$37 million in 2024-25 and $74 million in 2025-26 and annually thereafter to provide additional
support to public hospitals.
Children’s Hospital Directed Payments
The May Revision proposes new directed payments for children’s hospitals in the amount of $230
million total funds (50% federal funds, 50% Medi-Cal Provider Payment Reserve Fund (from MCO
tax revenue)) annually. The directed payments will support access to critical hospital services for
California’s most vulnerable children being treated for the most serious and life-threatening
diseases.
HUMAN SERVICES
The Governor’s May Revision proposes substantial cuts that impact all human services programs.
Many of these cuts are ongoing or program eliminations and are in addition to cuts included in
the January Budget. CSAC has significant concerns with these cuts as they will have detrimental
Attachment C
59
May 14, 2024
Page 24 of 30
impacts to the services that vulnerable Californians rely on every day and that counties administer
on behalf of the state.
In-Home Supportive Services
Below are the May Revision proposals impacting the In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS)
program:
• Elimination of the IHSS permanent back-up provider system ($11.6 million)
• Changing the Medi-Cal expansion for undocumented individuals so that these individuals
will not be eligible for IHSS ($94.7 million)
• Reduction in funding for the IHSS Career Pathways Program ($60 million)
The IHSS permanent backup provider system was enacted in 2022 and facilitates recipients to
find a provider and receive care in times of immediate need. While eligibility for Medi-Cal for
undocumented individuals who are included in the Medi-Cal expansion is not proposed to be
altered by the May Revision, these individuals would no longer be eligible for the IHSS program
under this proposal. Overall IHSS costs for 2023-24 and 2024-25 are higher than projected in the
Governor’s Budget due to growth in projected caseload, hours per case, and cost per hour.
Child Welfare and Foster Care
Below are the May Revision proposals impacting child welfare and foster care:
• Elimination of Foster Care Caregiver Approvals ($50 million General Fund); and
• Subjecting the implementation of the new foster care rates proposal to a trigger provision.
In addition to these new cuts, the May Revision continues the cuts proposed in the Governor’s
January budget that include the elimination of the Family Urgent Response System, the
Supervised Independent Living Program supplement, and the Housing Navigation and
Maintenance program. The resource family approval funding is used to meet timeline
requirements for approval of relative caregivers through the Resource Family Approval process.
For the foster care rates proposal, the May Revision includes an increase of $2.5 million for
automation costs from the amount included in the January Budget proposal. The trigger language
for this proposal would make implementation of the new tiered rate structure dependent upon the
availability of General Fund revenues over the multiyear forecast in spring 2026. The updated
trailer bill language was released today and reflects stakeholder feedback and the addition of the
trigger provision. CSAC will review this updated language.
Adult Protective Services
Below are the May Revision proposals impacting the Adult Protective Services (APS) program:
• Reduction in funding for the APS Expansion ($40 million General Fund)
• Elimination of APS Training funding ($4.8 million General Fund)
The Adult Protective Services Expansion was enacted in 2021 and lowered the population served
by APS from 65 to 60 years of age. In addition, it allowed for increasing social worker staffing to
provide long-term case management for individuals with more complex needs. The proposed cut
would reduce funding from $70 million to $30 million annually. The APS training funding that is
Attachment C
60
May 14, 2024
Page 25 of 30
proposed to be eliminated supports social work staff and is used for uniformity and consistency
in APS services.
CalWORKs
Below are the May Revision proposals impacting the CalWORKs program:
• One-time reduction to Employment Services Component of the Single Allocation ($272
million General Funds and Federal Funds)
• Reduction in funding for the Home Visiting Program ($47.1 million General Fund and
Federal Funds)
• Elimination of funding for Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services ($126.6 million
General Fund)
In addition to these new cuts, the May Revision continues several cuts proposed in the Governor’s
January budget proposal related to CalWORKs funding with slight modifications. The elimination
of funding to the Family Stabilization and Expanded Subsidized Employment programs remains,
but would now begin in 2024-25 instead of being retroactive to the current year. For the Single
Allocation, the ongoing cuts proposed in January for the Eligibility component and Employment
Services component remain as well. The May Revision includes $1.3 billion in total funding for
the Single Allocation in 2024-25, which is a decrease of $162 million from January. The $272
million reduction to the Employment Services component is partially offset by an increase in
Employment Services caseload. Finally, the May Revision includes a 0.3% increase in the
Maximum Aid Payment (MAP) effective October 1, 2024. This reflects the revenues available for
an increase in the Child Poverty and Family Supplemental Support Subaccount and is lower than
the 0.8 MAP increase estimated in the January Budget.
Aging
Below are the May Revision proposals impacting California Department of Aging programs:
• Elimination of the Older Californians Act Modernization Program ($37.2 million General
Fund)
• Elimination of the Older Adult Behavioral Health Program ($20 million General Fund)
The Older Californians Act Modernization Program funds pilot programs in the areas of
community-based services programs, senior nutrition, caregiver supports, volunteer
development, and aging in place.
Nutrition Assistance
Below are the May Revision proposals impacting nutrition assistance programs:
• Delay of California Food Assistance Program Expansion ($31.2 million General Fund)
• Eliminates funding for the Minimum Nutrition Benefit Pilot ($15 million General Fund)
• Elimination of funding for Work Incentive Nutrition Supplement Program ($25 million
General Fund)
The California Food Assistance Program (CFAP) provides CalFresh food benefits for non-citizens
who do not qualify for federal benefits. The 2022 Budget included funding to expand CFAP to all
income-eligible Californians, age 55 years or older, regardless of their immigration status. The
Attachment C
61
May 14, 2024
Page 26 of 30
May Revision proposes to delay CFAP automation to instead begin in 2026-27 with benefits now
beginning in 2027-28. The CalFresh Minimum Nutrition Benefit Pilot Program would have
provided eligible CalFresh recipients with a minimum monthly benefit of $50 over 12 months,
increasing from $23. The May Revision proposes to decrease funding for the pilot by $15 million
one-time in 2024-25, eliminating the program. The Work Incentive Nutrition Supplemental (WINS)
Program provides $10 per month supplemental food benefits to working families who receive
CalFresh benefits but do not receive CalWORKs benefits. Beginning in 2025-26 and ongoing, the
May Revision proposes to decrease funding by $25 million, eliminating the program.
Child Care
Below are May Revision proposals impacting child care:
• Pause expansion of child care slots ($489 million, nearly all General Fund)
• $34.8 million General Fund cut to the Emergency Child Care Bridge Program
The Governor’s May Revision proposes to pause the multi-year expansion of subsidized child
care slots originally committed to through the 2021 Budget Act. Approximately 119,000 subsidized
child care slots have been added since funding was first authorized, with a goal of creating over
200,000 new slots by 2026-27. The May Revision proposes to pause the expansion until fiscal
conditions allow for resuming the expansion. This pause will result in a revenue gain of $489
million in 2024-25 and $951 million in 2025-26. The Governor’s May Revision proposes to reduce
the Emergency Child Care Bridge Program by $34.8 million in 2024-25 and ongoing. This program
facilitates the placement of children within the foster care system into a stable childcare setting.
Attachment C
62
May 14, 2024
Page 27 of 30
HOMELESSNESS
The Governor’s May Revision proposes substantial funding reductions for numerous
homelessness programs. CSAC has significant concerns with these cuts as they will have
detrimental impacts to homelessness response efforts including services and housing supports
for vulnerable populations.
Below are the May Revision proposals impacting homelessness programs:
• Elimination of Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention (HHAP) Program Round 5
supplemental grant funding ($260 million General Fund)
• Elimination of funding for the Bringing Families Home (BFH) Program ($80 million
General Fund)
• Elimination of funding for the Home Safe Program ($65 million General Fund)
• Elimination of funding for the Housing and Disability Advocacy Program (HDAP) ($50
million General Fund)
In addition to these new cuts, the May Revision maintains funding reductions included in the
Governor’s January Budget for programs that help foster youth find and retain housing. This
includes an ongoing $13.7 million reduction for the Housing Navigator and Maintenance Program
and an ongoing $25.5 million reduction for the Supervised Independent Living Placements
supplemental payment. The $260 million in HHAP Round 5 supplemental funding that is proposed
to be cut was originally intended to be distributed as HHAP bonus funding from Rounds 3 and 4.
The funding for the three social services programs was originally proposed to be delayed in the
January Budget proposal but is now proposed to be eliminated. BFH provides housing-related
supports to child welfare involved families and those at risk of homelessness. Home Safe helps
prevent homelessness for victims of elder and dependent adult abuse and neglect served by APS.
HDAP serves people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness and are likely eligible for
disability benefits and housing supports. The May Revision does not include ongoing funding or
a sixth round of funding for the HHAP Program.
Attachment C
63
May 14, 2024
Page 28 of 30
HOUSING, LAND USE, AND TRANSPORTATION
Housing and Land Use
The May Revision reduces the remaining balances from several programs that support affordable
housing, including the Veterans Housing and Homelessness Prevention Program, the Infill
Infrastructure Grant Program, the Multifamily Housing Program and the Foreclosure Intervention
Housing Preservation Program. These reductions are in addition to the $1.2 billion in cuts to
affordable housing funding previously proposed in the Governor’s January Budget. CSAC will
continue to advocate on behalf of counties for funding to address housing affordability in our
communities.
Adaptive Reuse Program
The Governor’s January Budget did not propose changes to the Adaptive Reuse Program, leaving
it with an allocation of $127.5 million in 2023-24 General Fund. The May Revision proposes to
revert this remaining money back to the General Fund, eliminating the program.
Infill Infrastructure Grant Program
The Governor’s January Budget included $225 million for the Infill Infrastructure Grant (IIG)
program in 2024-25. The May Revision reverts $25 million in funds appropriated in the 2023
Budget Act and $10 million appropriated in the 2022 Budget Act for the IIG program. The goal of
the IIG program is to prioritize prime infill parcels in downtown oriented areas and brownfields.
Multifamily Housing Program
The Governor’s January Budget proposed to reduce previous General Fund allocations to the
Multifamily Housing Program (MHP) by $250 million, leaving a balance of $75 million. The May
Revision now proposes to cut this full remaining balance. The MHP provides competitively
awarded grants to a broad variety of affordable housing projects.
Foreclosure Intervention Housing Preservation Program
The Governor’s January Budget proposed to cut $237.5 million in General Fund from the
Foreclosure Intervention Housing Preservation Program (FHIPP), leaving a balance of $236.5
million. The May Revision now proposes to eliminate the remaining $236.5 million in 2023-24 for
this program, in addition to the $237.5 million proposed in the January Budget, eliminating the
program.
CalHome
The 2022 Budget Act included $350 million one-time General Fund ($250 million in the 2022
Budget Act and $100 million committed for 2023-24) for the Department of Housing and
Community Development’s CalHome program, to provide local agencies and nonprofits grants to
assist low- and very-low-income first-time homebuyers with housing assistance, counseling and
technical assistance. The Governor’s January Budget proposed to remove $100 million one-time
General Fund in 2023-24. This cut remains, but there were no further reductions to the program
proposed in the May Revision.
Attachment C
64
May 14, 2024
Page 29 of 30
Veterans Housing and Homelessness Prevention Program
The May Revision reverts $26.3 million appropriated in the 2022 Budget Act for the Veterans
Housing and Homelessness Prevention Program. This action effectively ends General Fund
support for the program.
Regional Early Action Planning Grants 2.0
The May Revision extends the timeline to spend the Regional Early Action Planning (REAP)
Grants 2.0 from June 30, 2024 to June 30, 2026 to align the encumbrance dates with statute.
The Governor’s January Budget proposed to cut $300 million from the REAP 2.0 Program, with
no changes in the May Revision. CSAC will advocate for the restoration of REAP 2.0 funding
provided in past budgets.
Low Income Housing Tax Credits
The May Revision includes a one-time additional $500 million in state supplement Low-Income
Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC), which supports affordable housing production. The LIHTC program
provides investments to a variety of affordable housing projects, helping to leverage federal
affordable housing resources in the process. By statute, the state must allocate a specified
amount to state LIHTC each year. In recent years, the state budget has also included a $500
million supplement to the statutory threshold. The Governor’s January Budget did not include
such a supplement for 2024-25. The May Revision proposes to continue the supplement at the
same amount provided in past budgets.
Transportation
After years of unprecedented General Fund allocations to transportation programs, the May
Revision proposes further reductions and fund shifts beyond those proposed in the Governor’s
January Budget. The May Revision proposes additional General Fund reductions of $973 million
and $555 million in fund shifts.
Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program
The Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program funds capital projects that support state and local
intercity rail, bus, ferry, and rail transit systems. The May Revision proposes shifting $551.1 million
in program resources from the General Fund to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF).
Additionally, the May Revision proposes reducing the Competitive Transit and Intercity Rail
Capital Program by $148 million. This reduction consists of the balance of unawarded grant funds
in the program. These changes are in addition to the Governor’s January Budget proposals that
would delay $3.2 billion General Fund to future fiscal years and shift $791 million of funding from
the General Fund to the GGRF.
Zero Emission Transit Capital Program
The 2023 Budget Act established the Zero Emission Transit Capital Program and appropriated
$1.1 billion in GGRF and Public Transit Account resources beginning in 2023-24 to 2026-27. The
funding will be allocated to regional transportation planning agencies by a population-based
formula and another formula based on revenues to fund zero-emission transit equipment and
operations. The May Revision proposes to shift $460 million of the GGRF funding provided to the
2027-28 Budget. This shift will likely delay the awarding of grant funds and the purchasing of
program compliant vehicles.
Attachment C
65
May 14, 2024
Page 30 of 30
Active Transportation Program
The Active Transportation Program is a transportation grant program that funds projects which
increase the use of active modes of transportation, such as walking and biking. The May Revision
proposes an additional $300 million reduction of General Fund resources to the program. This is
in addition to the $200 million reduction proposed in the Governor’s January Budget.
Public Works
The May Revision proposes a $143.9 million reduction to the Zero Emission Vehicle Fueling
Infrastructure Grant Program. This program provides grant funding to counties to support the
implementation of California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF)
regulations. Beginning January 1, 2024, CARB began to require that all public fleet owners begin
replacing their medium and heavy-duty fleet vehicles with Zero-Emission Vehicles (ZEV). The
most common types of compliant ZEV’s utilize either battery-electric components or hydrogen
fuel cell technology. State funding is necessary to provide resources to counties to acquire the
ZEV medium and heavy-duty vehicles without increasing rates and fees. Additionally, counties
need financial assistance to build out the necessary charging infrastructure to implement the ACF
regulations.
CSAC will continue to advocate for policies and funding that ease the implementation of Advanced
Clean Fleets for counties. If a 2024 Climate, Water, and Natural Resources Bond begins to take
shape, CSAC will advocate for including funding for the infrastructure needed to comply with
Advanced Clean Fleets regulations.
Attachment C
66
CalWORKs Social Mental Family Child
MOE Services Health Support Poverty
Base Funding
Sales Tax Account $752,888 $152,266 $2,480,037 $337,129 $462,930 $512,972 $4,698,222
Vehicle License Fee Account 367,663 1,071,315 216,223 105,480 185,798 420,228 2,366,708
Subtotal Base $1,120,551 $1,223,582 $2,696,259 $442,610 $648,728 $933,200 $7,064,929
Growth Funding
Sales Tax Growth Account:$- $6,530 $65,869 $13,246 $- $15,609 $101,253
Caseload Subaccount -- (65,869)--- (65,869)
General Growth Subaccount - (6,530)- (13,246)- (15,609) (35,384)
Vehicle License Fee Growth Account - 21,888 -44,399 -52,320 118,608
Subtotal Growth $-$28,418 $65,869 $57,644 $-$67,929 $219,861
Total Realignment 2022-231/$1,120,551 $1,252,000 $2,762,128 $500,254 $648,728 $1,001,129 $7,284,790
Base Funding
Sales Tax Account $749,929 $0 $2,535,901 $348,998 $619,283 $526,503 $4,780,614
Vehicle License Fee Account 370,622 1,208,812 216,223 146,920 70,189 472,549 2,485,315
Subtotal Base $1,120,551 $1,208,812 $2,752,123 $495,918 $689,473 $999,052 $7,265,929
Growth Funding
Sales Tax Growth Account:$-$0 $0 $0 $-$0 $0
Caseload Subaccount --0 ---0
General Growth Subaccount -0 -0 -0 0
Vehicle License Fee Growth Account - 26,528 -53,809 -63,410 143,746
Subtotal Growth $-$26,528 $0 $53,809 $-$63,410 $143,746
Total Realignment 2023-241/$1,120,551 $1,235,340 $2,752,123 $549,727 $689,473 $1,062,461 $7,409,675
Base Funding
Sales Tax Account $749,929 $174,461 $2,535,901 $348,998 $444,822 $526,503 $4,780,614
Vehicle License Fee Account 370,622 1,119,731 216,223 200,729 185,798 535,958 2,629,061
Subtotal Base $1,120,551 $1,294,192 $2,752,123 $549,727 $630,620 $1,062,461 $7,409,675
Growth Funding
Sales Tax Growth Account:$-$0 $67,688 $0 $-$0 $67,688
Caseload Subaccount -- (67,688)--- (67,688)
General Growth Subaccount -0 -0 -0 0
Vehicle License Fee Growth Account - 3,911 -7,934 -9,350 21,195
Subtotal Growth $-$3,911 $67,688 $7,934 $-$9,350 $88,883
Total Realignment 2024-251/$1,120,551 $1,298,104 $2,819,811 $557,661 $630,620 $1,071,811 $7,498,558
1/ Excludes $14 million in Vehicle License Collection Account moneys not derived from realignment revenue sources.
1991 Realignment Estimate at 2024 May Revision
$s in Thousands
2024-25 State Fiscal Year (Projected)
2022-23 State Fiscal Year (Actual)
2023-24 State Fiscal Year (Projected)
Health TotalAmount
Attachment C
67
2022-23 2022-23
Growth
2023-24 2023-24
Growth
2024-25 2024-25
Growth
$3,336.8 $3,432.1 $3,445.7
637.3 9.5 646.8 1.4 648.2 6.4
489.9 340.8 489.9 386.0 489.9 385.0
1,893.2 71.4 1,964.7 10.3 1,974.9 47.9
76.7 4.8 81.5 0.7 82.2 3.2
239.7 9.5 249.2 1.4 250.6 6.4
Youthful Offender Block Grant Special Account (226.4) (235.4) (236.7)
Juvenile Reentry Grant Special Account (13.2) (13.8) (13.8)
436.0 399.6 448.8
1,120.6 8.8 1,120.6 1.3 1,120.6 5.9
5,125.9 5,293.9 5,318.1
2,984.7 79.6 3,064.3 11.4 3,075.8 53.4
2,141.1 88.4 2,229.6 12.7 2,242.3 59.3
Women and Children's Residential Treatment
Services (5.1) (5.1) (5.1)
County Intervention Support Services
Subaccount 4 (3.7) - -
176.9 25.4 118.6
$10,196.2 $10,271.6 $10,451.8
1.0625% Sales Tax 9,345.5 9,355.6 9,534.1
General Fund Backfill5 20.0 40.1 42.8
Motor Vehicle License Fee 830.7 875.9 874.9
$10,196.2 $10,271.6 $10,451.8
3Base Allocation is capped at $1,120.6 million. Growth does not add to the base.
5 General Fund backfill pursuant to Chapter 413, Statutes of 2014; Chapter 54, Statutes of 2018; Chapter 690, Statutes of 2019; Chapter 78, Statutes of 2020; Chapter 82, Statutes of
2021; Chapter 225, Statutes of 2022; Chapter 251, Statutes of 2022; Chapter 442, Statutes of 2023; Chapter 833, Statutes of 2023; and Chapter 56, Statutes of
2023.
2 Base Allocation is capped at $489.9 million. Growth does not add to the base.
2011 Realignment Estimate1 at 2024 May Revision
Behavioral Health Subaccount
Growth, Support Services
Account Total and Growth
District Attorney and Public Defender Subaccount
Juvenile Justice Subaccount
Growth, Law Enforcement Services
Mental Health3
Law Enforcement Services
($ millions)
Trial Court Security Subaccount
Enhancing Law Enforcement Activities Subaccount2
Community Corrections Subaccount
4This chart reflects a fiscal year 2022-23 transfer of $3.7 million from Behavioral Health Subaccount Fund 3217 to the County Intervention Support Services Subaccount Fund 3325
pursuant to GOV 30027.10.
Support Services
Protective Services Subaccount
1This chart reflects estimates of the 2011 Realignment subaccount and growth allocations based on current revenue forecasts and in accordance with the formulas outlined in Chapter
40, Statutes of 2012 (SB 1020).
Revenue
Revenue Total
Attachment C
68
Sales Tax VLF
Alpine 61,552.34$ 126,673.40$ 21,465.00$ 125,814.44$ 13,150.00$ 112,664.44$ 13,150.00$
Amador 934,667.22$ 1,780,272.34$ 278,460.00$ 1,796,039.74$ 620,264.00$ 1,175,775.74$ 620,264.00$
Butte 6,834,771.95$ 12,122,978.57$ 724,304.00$ 11,809,232.71$ 5,950,593.00$ 5,858,639.71$ 5,950,593.00$
Calaveras 1,055,153.26$ 1,917,628.57$ -$ 1,783,669.10$ 913,959.00$ 869,710.10$ 913,959.00$
Colusa 857,278.43$ 1,542,841.91$ 237,754.00$ 1,582,724.60$ 799,988.00$ 782,736.60$ 799,988.00$
Del Norte 961,173.11$ 1,773,977.71$ 44,324.00$ 1,667,684.89$ 781,358.00$ 886,326.89$ 781,358.00$
El Dorado 3,901,260.35$ 7,026,361.00$ 704,192.00$ 6,979,088.01$ 3,535,288.00$ 3,443,800.01$ 3,535,288.00$
Glenn 935,364.36$ 1,716,622.49$ 58,501.00$ 1,626,292.71$ 787,933.00$ 838,359.71$ 787,933.00$
Humboldt 7,047,476.04$ 12,459,770.10$ 589,711.00$ 12,058,174.28$ 6,883,182.00$ 5,174,992.28$ 6,883,182.00$
Imperial 6,932,332.38$ 12,228,880.46$ 772,088.00$ 11,959,980.50$ 6,394,422.00$ 5,565,558.50$ 6,394,422.00$
Inyo 1,280,583.35$ 2,338,750.95$ 561,262.00$ 2,508,357.78$ 1,100,257.00$ 1,408,100.78$ 1,100,257.00$
Kings 3,360,155.16$ 5,988,228.05$ 466,273.00$ 5,888,793.73$ 2,832,833.00$ 3,055,960.73$ 2,832,833.00$
Lake 1,413,209.89$ 2,564,967.81$ 118,222.00$ 2,457,839.82$ 1,022,963.00$ 1,434,876.82$ 1,022,963.00$
Lassen 964,244.01$ 1,818,435.48$ 119,938.00$ 1,741,570.49$ 687,113.00$ 1,054,457.49$ 687,113.00$
Madera 3,361,465.18$ 5,931,970.53$ 81,788.00$ 5,625,134.23$ 2,882,147.00$ 2,742,987.23$ 2,882,147.00$
Marin 7,989,358.84$ 14,283,084.81$ 1,196,515.00$ 14,081,375.19$ 7,725,909.00$ 6,355,466.19$ 7,725,909.00$
Mariposa 536,785.69$ 990,377.66$ -$ 916,298.01$ 435,062.00$ 481,236.01$ 435,062.00$
Mendocino 2,092,298.01$ 3,762,637.00$ 347,945.00$ 3,721,728.01$ 1,654,999.00$ 2,066,729.01$ 1,654,999.00$
Modoc 589,799.29$ 1,089,664.03$ 70,462.00$ 1,049,955.19$ 469,034.00$ 580,921.19$ 469,034.00$
Mono 744,076.45$ 1,461,193.25$ 409,928.00$ 1,569,118.62$ 369,309.00$ 1,199,809.62$ 369,309.00$
Napa 3,327,416.97$ 5,965,139.52$ 546,957.00$ 5,903,708.10$ 3,062,967.00$ 2,840,741.10$ 3,062,967.00$
Nevada 2,097,469.76$ 3,759,967.75$ 96,375.00$ 3,572,287.51$ 1,860,793.00$ 1,711,494.51$ 1,860,793.00$
Plumas 924,992.96$ 1,630,428.37$ 66,295.00$ 1,573,029.80$ 905,192.00$ 667,837.80$ 905,192.00$
San Benito 1,240,016.51$ 2,266,658.16$ -$ 2,104,004.80$ 1,086,011.00$ 1,017,993.80$ 1,086,011.00$
Shasta 5,968,011.65$ 10,478,325.22$ 184,049.00$ 9,978,231.52$ 5,361,013.00$ 4,617,218.52$ 5,361,013.00$
Sierra 190,286.21$ 354,308.23$ 7,330.00$ 331,154.66$ 135,888.00$ 195,266.66$ 135,888.00$
Siskiyou 1,601,614.74$ 2,910,729.78$ 287,627.00$ 2,879,982.91$ 1,372,034.00$ 1,507,948.91$ 1,372,034.00$
Solano 8,297,426.37$ 14,698,376.89$ 115,800.00$ 13,866,961.95$ 6,871,127.00$ 6,995,834.95$ 6,871,127.00$
Sonoma 13,874,157.34$ 24,385,330.36$ 438,234.00$ 23,218,633.02$ 13,183,359.00$ 10,035,274.02$ 13,183,359.00$
Sutter 3,230,484.75$ 5,830,056.63$ 674,240.00$ 5,840,868.83$ 2,996,118.00$ 2,844,750.83$ 2,996,118.00$
Tehama 2,148,824.43$ 3,893,528.92$ 446,992.00$ 3,893,607.21$ 1,912,299.00$ 1,981,308.21$ 1,912,299.00$
Trinity 845,503.83$ 1,585,011.62$ 292,662.00$ 1,633,906.47$ 611,497.00$ 1,022,409.47$ 611,497.00$
Tuolumne 1,650,384.66$ 3,006,998.38$ 305,830.00$ 2,977,927.82$ 1,455,320.00$ 1,522,607.82$ 1,455,320.00$
Yuba 2,711,712.47$ 4,756,278.89$ 187,701.00$ 4,593,415.42$ 2,395,580.00$ 2,197,835.42$ 2,395,580.00$
Yolo 1,961,022.15$ 4,087,846.27$ 1,081,388.00$ 4,278,153.85$ 943,110.00$ 3,335,043.85$ 943,110.00$
CMSP Board 60,444,984.27$ 185,797,900.55$ -$ 147,745,730.89$ NA NA 246,242,884.82$
SUBTOTAL 162,367,314.40$ 368,332,201.66$ 11,534,612.00$ 325,340,476.83$ 90,012,071.00$ 87,582,674.94$ 336,254,955.82$
FY24/25 Interim
Redirection Calculation
CMSP 24-25 Realignment Maintenance of
Effort
60% Realignment + 60%
MOE
Jurisdictional Risk
Limitation
Adjustment to CMSP
Board Redirection
Attachment C
69
Sales Tax VLF Sales Tax VLF
Placer 1,975,132.71$ 3,951,131.62$ 368,490.00$ 1,223,351.24$ 3,475,002.90$ 368,490.00$ 3,776,852.60$
Sacramento 18,043,411.58$ 36,725,637.89$ 7,128,508.00$ 11,073,547.81$ 32,428,453.58$ 6,351,292.20$ 36,672,205.00$
Santa Barbara 4,479,502.50$ 9,490,733.55$ 3,794,166.00$ 2,695,565.51$ 8,405,681.53$ 1,620,782.07$ 9,354,610.87$
Stanislaus 6,141,978.33$ 12,599,483.05$ 3,510,803.00$ 3,756,009.76$ 11,132,596.16$ 2,173,736.46$ 12,549,118.71$
SUBTOTAL 30,640,025.12$ 62,766,986.11$ 14,801,967.00$ 18,748,474.32$ 55,441,734.17$ 10,514,300.74$ 62,352,787.18$
Sales Tax VLF
Fresno*13,435,331.79$ 27,842,895.96$ 44.38%18,319,277.47$
Merced*3,234,466.01$ 6,311,601.13$ 43.41%4,143,947.74$
Orange*32,534,654.99$ 60,964,716.61$ 52.02%48,638,373.11$
San Diego*38,497,582.27$ 68,140,036.13$ 49.33%52,604,337.16$
San Luis Obispo*2,444,829.85$ 5,150,617.07$ 44.45%3,376,176.16$
Santa Cruz*2,993,931.59$ 6,429,825.38$ 46.61%4,392,413.13$
Tulare 5,762,301.18$ 11,265,815.70$ 47.88%10,227,575.35$ 678,162.92$ 9,549,412.43$ 7,639,529.94$
SUBTOTAL 98,903,097.68$ 186,105,507.98$ 10,227,575.35$ 678,162.92$ 9,549,412.43$ 139,114,054.70$
*Opted for Historical Percentage
Sales Tax VLF
Alameda 20,978,167.81$ 44,808,782.42$ 81.68%840,262,011.78$ 843,579,338.80$ (3,317,327.02)$ -$
Contra Costa 10,746,967.30$ 22,766,658.69$ 80.50%497,884,435.58$ 671,924,324.23$ (174,039,888.66)$ -$
Kern 9,106,803.46$ 18,958,901.38$ 66.26%356,458,071.39$ 256,154,579.94$ 100,303,491.44$ 18,596,336.03$
Los Angeles 166,968,365.66$ 358,624,464.54$ 83.00%5,921,752,718.53$ 6,735,619,657.03$ (813,866,938.50)$ -$
Monterey 4,341,783.00$ 9,223,695.28$ 51.19%263,595,924.22$ 243,509,627.06$ 20,086,297.16$ 6,944,168.33$
Riverside 17,285,692.63$ 35,455,168.01$ 84.44%655,462,592.29$ 792,793,268.99$ (137,330,676.70)$ -$
San Bernardino 20,450,025.27$ 39,567,902.78$ 58.54%546,751,140.17$ 409,967,142.15$ 136,783,998.02$ 35,134,495.08$
San Francisco 31,850,054.39$ 68,408,251.96$ 57.36%673,018,219.17$ 805,263,955.46$ (132,245,736.29)$ -$
San Joaquin 7,889,883.35$ 15,552,429.44$ 96.74%323,587,989.14$ 346,648,740.27$ (23,060,751.13)$ -$
San Mateo 7,475,614.81$ 15,888,709.22$ 80.82%212,876,477.17$ 245,722,828.79$ (32,846,351.61)$ -$
Santa Clara 18,083,936.71$ 38,208,452.00$ 85.00%1,501,327,585.80$ 1,483,152,554.76$ 18,175,031.04$ 14,540,024.83$
Ventura 7,084,698.26$ 14,849,401.93$ 80.62%334,164,209.13$ 218,426,268.73$ 115,737,940.40$ 17,683,271.57$
SUBTOTAL 322,261,992.64$ 682,312,817.65$ 12,127,141,374.37$ 13,052,762,286.22$ (925,620,911.85)$ 92,898,295.84$
24-25 Interim Redirection 630,620,093.54$
Calculated Redirection
DPH 24-25 Realignment Health
Realignment
Indigent Care %
Total Revenue FY 24-25 Total Costs
FY 24-25 Savings Calculated Redirection
Article 13 Formula 24-25 Realignment Health
Realignment
Indigent Care %
Total Revenue FY 24-25 Total Costs
FY 24-25 Savings
Redirection Article 13 60/40 24-25 Realignment Maintenance of
Effort
FY 10-11 Total Realignment MOE Capped at 14.6%
of 10-11 Realignment
Attachment C
70
2024 Contra Costa County
Bills of Interest
BILL TITLE AUTHOR SUMMARY LAST STATUS UPCOMING DATES POSITION
1 AB 817 Open Meetings: Teleconferencing: Subsidiary Body Pacheco (D)
Provides that the Ralph M. Brown Act requires, with specified
exceptions, each legislative body of a local agency to provide notice of
the time and place for its regular meetings. Provides that existing law
authorizes the legislative body of a local agency to use alternate
teleconferencing provisions during a proclaimed state of emergency.
Authorizes, until specified date, a subsidiary body to use alternative
teleconferencing provisions and imposes requirements for notice,
agenda, and public participation.
05/01/2024: To SENATE Committees on LOCAL
GOVERNMENT and JUDICIARY.Support
2 AB 1820 Housing Development Projects: Applications: Fees Schiavo (D)
Authorizes a development proponent that submits a preliminary
application for a housing development project to request a preliminary
fee and exaction estimate. Requires the local agency to provide the
estimate within a specified number of business days of the
submission of the preliminary application. Specifies that the
preliminary fee and exaction estimate is for informational purposes
only and does not affect the scope, amount, or time of payment of any
fee or exaction.
05/15/2024: From ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: Do pass.
3 AB 1957 Public Contracts: Best Value Construction
Contracting Wilson (D)
Provides that existing law establishes a pilot program to allow the
Counties of Alameda, Los Angeles, Monterey, Riverside, San
Bernardino, San Diego, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Yuba to
select a bidder on the basis of best value for construction projects in
excess of a specified amount. Authorizes any county of the State to
utilize this program and extends the operation of provisions until
specified date.
05/09/2024: In ASSEMBLY. Read third time.
Passed ASSEMBLY. *****To SENATE.
4 AB 1961 End Hunger in California Act of 2024 Wicks (D)
Requires the Strategic Growth Council, in consultation with specified
entities, to appoint and convene the End Hunger in California Master
Plan Task Force to make recommendations for future comprehensive
strategies aimed at addressing access to healthy and culturally
relevant food for all Californians. Requires the task force to meet at
least quarterly and to be composed of up to a specified number of
members from agencies and with specified knowledge and expertise
in various food-related subject matters.
05/15/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.
5 AB 1970 Mental Health: Black Mental Health Navigator Jackson (D)
Requires the Department of Health Care Services to develop criteria
for a specialty certificate program and specialized training
requirements for a Black Mental Health Navigator Certification.
Requires the department to collect and regularly publish data, not
less than annually, including, but not limited to, the number of
individuals certified, including those who complete a specialty
certificate program and the number of individuals who are actively
employed in a community health worker role.
05/01/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
6 AB 1999 Electricity: Fixed Charges Irwin (D)
Provides that under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission may
authorize fixed charges for any rate schedule on an income-graduated
basis. Prohibits modifications to the amount of the income-graduated
fixed charge from exceeding changes in inflation. Requires the
commission to adopt any modification to an existing fixed charge for
the collection of a reasonable portion of the fixed costs of providing
electrical service to residential customers in a stand-alone
proceeding.
05/15/2024: From ASSEMBLY Committee on
UTILITIES AND ENERGY: Do pass to Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS.
Support
7 AB 2089 Local Government: Collection of Demographic Data Holden (D)
Requires a city, county, or city and county, when collecting
demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of employees of
the city, county, or city and county, to include the additional collection
categories and tabulations for specified Black or African American
groups.
04/24/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
stateNetTracking_20240515_06_42 1
Attachment D
71
2024 Contra Costa County
Bills of Interest
BILL TITLE AUTHOR SUMMARY LAST STATUS UPCOMING DATES POSITION
8 AB 2132 Health Care Services Low (D)
Requires an adult patient receiving primary care services in a facility,
clinic, unlicensed clinic, center, office, or other setting to be offered a
tuberculosis (TB) risk assessment and TB screening test, if TB risk
factors are identified, to the extent these services are covered under
the patients health insurance, unless the health care provider
reasonably believes certain conditions apply. Requires the health care
provider to offer the patient follow up health care.
04/10/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date Support
9 AB 2200 Guaranteed Health Care for All Kalra (D)
Provides for the California Guaranteed Health Care for All Act. Creates
the California Guaranteed Health Care for All Program, or CalCare, to
provide comprehensive universal single-payer health care coverage
and a health care cost control system for the benefit of all residents of
the State. Provides that CalCare would be a health care service plan
subject to the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975.
Appropriates funds.
05/15/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.
10 AB 2236 Solid Waste: Reusable Grocery Bags: Plastic Film Bauer-Kahan (D)
Revises the single-use carryout bag exception to include a bag a bag
provided to a customer before the customer reaches the point of sale,
that is designed to protect a purchased item from damaging or
contaminating other purchased items in a checkout bag, or to contain
an unwrapped food item. Requires a reusable grocery bag sold by a
store to a customer at the point of sale to meet different requirements,
including that it not be made from plastic film.
04/10/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
11 AB 2263 The California Guaranteed Income Study and
Funding Act Friedman (D)
Provides for the California Guaranteed Income Study and Funding Act.
Establishes the Guaranteed Income Study and Funding Act
Coordinating Council. Requires the council to seek to attain, among
other things, the objective of examining the feasibility, benefits, and
challenges of scaling up permanent guaranteed income programs to
reach a larger proportion of the State's socially and economically
vulnerable populations, focusing on regions with a high cost of living.
05/08/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
12 AB 2265 Animals: Euthanasia McCarty (D)
Provides that existing law imposes various requirements relating to
animals on public animal control agencies and public animal shelters.
Defines Hayden's Law to mean several of those provisions relating to
animals. Requires a public animal control agency or public animal
shelter that seeks to adopt a policy, practice, or protocol that raises
the potential for conflict with Hayden's Law to first give notice to the
city or county body that funds the agency or shelter.
05/01/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
13 AB 2284 County Employees' Retirement: Compensation Grayson (D)
Relates to the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 and the
California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013. Authorizes
a retirement system, to the extent it has not defined grade, to define
grade to mean a number of employees considered together because
they share similarities in job duties, schedules, unit recruitment
requirements, work location, collective bargaining unit, or other
logical work-related group or class.
04/22/2024: In ASSEMBLY. Read second time. To
third reading.
14 AB 2302 Open Meetings: Local Agencies: Teleconferences Addis (D)
Relates to existing law which imposes prescribed restrictions on
remote participation by a member of a legislative body of a local
agency under alternative teleconferencing provisions. Revises the
limits, instead prohibiting such participation for more than a specified
number of meetings per year, based on how frequently the legislative
body regularly meets.
05/09/2024: In ASSEMBLY. Read third time.
Passed ASSEMBLY. *****To SENATE.
stateNetTracking_20240515_06_42 2
Attachment D
72
2024 Contra Costa County
Bills of Interest
BILL TITLE AUTHOR SUMMARY LAST STATUS UPCOMING DATES POSITION
15 AB 2330 Endangered Species: Incidental Take: Wildfire Holden (D)
Requires the Department of Fish and Wildlife to notify a local agency
within a specified number of days of receipt of a plan to conduct
wildlife preparedness activities on land designated as a fire hazard
severity zone if an incidental take permit or other permit is needed, or
if there are other considerations, exemptions, or streamlined
pathways that the wildfire preparedness activities qualify for,
including, but not limited to, the California Vegetation Treatment
Program.
05/08/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
16 AB 2404 State and Local Public Employees: Labor Relations Lee (D)
Provides that it is not unlawful or a cause for discipline or other
adverse action against a public employee for that public employee to
refuse to enter property that is the site of a primary strike, perform
work for a public employer involved in a primary strike, or go through
or work behind a primary strike line. Prohibits a public employer from
directing a public employee to take those actions. Authorizes
recognized employee organization to inform employees of and
encourage them to exercise these rights.
05/08/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
17 AB 2421 Employer-Employee Relations: Confidential
Communication Low (D)
Prohibits a local public agency employer, a state employer, a public
school employer, a higher education employer, or the district from
questioning any employee or employee representative regarding
communications made in confidence between an employee and an
employee representative in connection with representation relating to
any matter within the scope of the recognized employee organization's
representation.
04/24/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
18 AB 2474 Retirement: County Employees Retirement Law of
1937 Lackey (R)
Authorizes the board of retirement for the County of Los Angeles to
permit a person entitled to receive benefit payments to have them
deposited into a prepaid account. Requires the retirement system for
the County of Los Angeles, no later than the specified date, to submit
a report to specified legislative committees that includes certain
information regarding the implementation of these provisions.
05/08/2024: To SENATE Committee on LABOR,
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT AND RETIREMENT.
19 AB 2489 Local Agencies: Contracts for Special Services Ward (D)
Requires a county board of supervisors or a representative, at least a
specified number of months before beginning a procurement process
to contract with persons for special services that are currently, or
were previously, performed by employees of the county represented
by an employee organization, to notify, in writing, the exclusive
employee representative of the workforce affected. Provides that this
notice requirement does not apply in the event of an emergency.
05/15/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.Oppose
20 AB 2502 Public Contracts: Emergencies Rivas (D)
Defines an emergency as an immediate action to prevent or mitigate
the loss or impairment of life, health, property, or essential public
services caused by the impacts of homelessness.
03/04/2024: To ASSEMBLY Committee on LOCAL
GOVERNMENT.
21 AB 2557 Local Agencies: Contracts for Special Services Ortega (D)
Provides that existing law authorizes a county board of supervisors to
contract for certain types of special services on behalf of the county,
any county officer or department, or any district or court in the county.
Requires each person who enters into a contract for special services
with the board of supervisors to submit quarterly performance reports
every specified number of days to the board of supervisors and the
exclusive representative of the employee organization.
05/08/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date Oppose
22 AB 2561 Local Public Employees: Vacant Positions McKinnor (D)
Provides that the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act authorizes local public
employees to form, join, and participate in the activities of employee
organizations of their own choosing for the purpose of representation
on matters of labor relations. Requires each public agency with
bargaining unit vacancy rates exceeding a specified percent for more
than a specified number of days to meet and confer with a
representative of the recognized employee organization to implement
a plan to fill all vacant positions.
05/01/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date Oppose
stateNetTracking_20240515_06_42 3
Attachment D
73
2024 Contra Costa County
Bills of Interest
BILL TITLE AUTHOR SUMMARY LAST STATUS UPCOMING DATES POSITION
23 AB 2631 Local Agencies: Ethics Training Fong M (D)
Requires the Fair Political Practices Commission, in consultation with
the Attorney General, to create, maintain, and make available to local
agency officials an ethics training course, as specified.
04/10/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
24 AB 2710 Peace Officers: Active Shooter Incidents Lackey (R)
Requires the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training to
convene a panel of law enforcement experts to report to the
Legislature and the commission, by specified date, specified topics
related to active shooter incidents, including successful trainings and
response protocols that have been demonstrated in active shooter
incidents and the use of school resource officers on campus for threat
prevention, detection, and assessment.
05/08/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
25 AB 2751 Employer Communications During Nonworking
Hours Haney (D)
Requires a public or private employer to establish a workplace policy
that provides employees the right to disconnect from communications
from the employer during nonworking hours, with certain exceptions.
Defines the right to disconnect. Requires nonworking hours to be
established by written agreement between an employer and
employee. Authorizes an employee to file a complaint of a pattern of
violation of the bill's provisions with the Labor Commissioner,
punishable by a specified civil penalty.
05/08/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
26 AB 2882 California Community Corrections Performance McCarty (D)
Adds a representative of a community-based organization with
experience in successfully providing behavioral health treatment
services to persons who have been convicted of a criminal offense and
a representative of a Medi-Cal managed care plan that provides the
Enhanced Care Management benefit to the membership of a local
Community Corrections Partnership.
04/17/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
27 AB 2973 Emergency Services Hart (D)
Authorizes a county board of supervisors or a local emergency
medical services agency to provide or support the provision of EMS to
persons located within the county. Requires a county board of
supervisors or a local EMS agency to adopt a written policy setting
forth specified requirements for an emergency ambulance services
provider in order to enter into a contract with a provider for emergency
ambulance services.
04/15/2024: In ASSEMBLY. Read second time and
amended. Re-referred to Committee on HEALTH.
28 AB 3222 Drug Court Success Incentives Pilot Program Wilson (D)
Authorizes the superior courts in the Counties of Sacramento, San
Diego, Contra Costa, and Solano to conduct a pilot program to provide
specific supportive services to adult defendants who participate in the
county's drug court. Requires the Judicial Council to administer the
program and authorizes the council to establish guidelines and
reporting requirements for the participating drug courts.
05/08/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
29 AB 3233 Oil and Gas: Operations: Restrictions: Local
Authority Addis (D)
Provides that existing law requires the operator of a well to file a
written notice of intention to commence drilling with the State Oil and
Gas Supervisor or district deputy. Authorizes a local entity, by
ordinance, to limit or prohibit oil and gas operations or development in
its jurisdiction, notwithstanding any other law or any notice of
intention, supplemental notice, well stimulation permit, or similar
authorization issued by the supervisor or district deputy.
05/08/2024: In ASSEMBLY Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date Support
30 SB 294 Health Care Coverage: Independent Medical Review Wiener (D)
Requires a health care service plan or disability insurer that provides
coverage for mental health or substance use disorders to treat a
modification, delay, or denial issued in response to an authorization
request for coverage of treatment for a mental health or substance
use disorder for an insured up to a specified age as if the modification,
delay, or denial is also a grievance submitted by the enrollee or
insured.
04/29/2024: To ASSEMBLY Committee on HEALTH.
stateNetTracking_20240515_06_42 4
Attachment D
74
2024 Contra Costa County
Bills of Interest
BILL TITLE AUTHOR SUMMARY LAST STATUS UPCOMING DATES POSITION
31 SB 402 Involuntary Commitment Wahab (D)
Provides that the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act authorizes the
involuntary commitment and treatment of persons with specified
mental disorders. Provides that under the act, when a person, as a
result of a mental health disorder, is a danger to self or others, or
gravely disabled, the person may, upon probable cause, be taken into
custody by specified individuals and placed in a facility for evaluation
and treatment. Authorizes a person to be taken into custody by a
licensed mental health professional.
04/29/2024: To ASSEMBLY Committees on HEALTH
and JUDICIARY.
32 SB 937 Development Projects: Permits and Other
Entitlements Wiener (D)
Provides that the Permit Streamlining Act requires a public agency
that is the lead agency for a development project to approve or
disapprove that project within specified time periods. Extends by a
specified number of months the period for the expiration,
effectuation, or utilization of a housing entitlement for a priority
residential development project that was issued before specified
date, and that will expire before specified date, with certain
exceptions.
04/30/2024: In SENATE. Read second time. To
third reading.
33 SB 964 Property Tax: Tax-Defaulted Property Sales Seyarto (R)
Relates to the sale to certain entities of a property that has been tax
defaulted for 5 years or more in an applicable county. Authorizes a
property or property interest to be offered for sale under provisions
authorizing a sale to certain entities that has not been offered for sale
under certain provisions if the State Board of Equalization conducts a
property valuation that shows that the property or property interest is
worth less than the amount of the defaulted debt.
05/13/2024: In SENATE Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
34 SB 1011 Encampments: Penalties Jones (R)
Prohibits a person from sitting, lying, sleeping, or storing, using,
maintaining, or placing personal property upon a street or sidewalk if a
homeless shelter, as defined, is available to the person.
04/16/2024: In SENATE Committee on PUBLIC
SAFETY: Reconsideration granted.
35 SB 1013 Taxation: Property Tax Assistance Bradford (D)
Establishes the Property Tax Assistance for Descendants of Enslaved
Persons Program for purposes of making, upon appropriation by the
Legislature, moneys available to persons who meet specified criteria
for purposes of providing financial assistance equal to the total
amount of property taxes paid on a residential dwelling, or a specified
amount, whichever is less, and as subject to specified limitations.
05/13/2024: In SENATE Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
36 SB 1017 Available Facilities for Inpatient Treatment Eggman (D)
Requires the Department of Health Care Services, with the
Department of Public Health and the Department of Social Services,
and by conferring with specified stakeholders, to develop a solution to
collect, aggregate, and display information about beds in specified
types of facilities, including licensed community care facilities and
licensed residential alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment
facilities, identify the availability of inpatient and residential mental
health or substance use treatment.
04/15/2024: In SENATE Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
37 SB 1031 San Francisco Bay Area: Local Revenue Measure Wiener (D)
Requires the Transportation Agency to select a transportation institute
to conduct an assessment that analyzes the benefits and disbenefits
to riders, and the administrative, financial, legal, contractual, and
governance feasibility, of various forms of consolidation and
enhanced coordination among transit agencies that are located in the
9-county San Francisco Bay Area. Requires the Agency to develop a
report of recommendations that, among other things.
05/13/2024: In SENATE Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
stateNetTracking_20240515_06_42 5
Attachment D
75
2024 Contra Costa County
Bills of Interest
BILL TITLE AUTHOR SUMMARY LAST STATUS UPCOMING DATES POSITION
38 SB 1032 Housing Finance: Portfolio Restructuring Padilla (D)
Provides that existing law authorizes the Department of Housing and
Community Development to monitor and fund various multifamily
housing loans. Requires that projects receiving loan forgiveness meet
specified requirements, including that the projects maintain the same
number of affordable units at the same affordable housing cost as
provided in the project's regulatory agreement.
04/08/2024: In SENATE Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
39 SB 1034 California Public Records Act: State of Emergency Seyarto (R)
Revises the unusual circumstances under which the time limit for an
agency to determine whether a records request seeks copies of
disclosable public records in the possession of the agency, and to
notify the person of the determination, may be extended to include the
need to search for, collect, appropriately examine, and copy records
during a state of emergency when the emergency has affected the
agency's ability to timely respond to requests, with specified
exceptions.
05/06/2024: To ASSEMBLY Committee on
JUDICIARY.
40 SB 1057 Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council Menjivar (D)
Provides that existing law requires a juvenile justice coordinating
council to consist of certain members. Requires each county juvenile
justice coordinating council to, at a minimum, consist of at least a
specified percent community representatives with the remainder of
the seats allocated in a specified manner. Requires, if a county board
of supervisors or a county's juvenile coordinating council's bylaws
established term limits, that all individuals of the council be subject to
the term limits.
05/13/2024: In SENATE Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date Oppose
41 SB 1060 Property Insurance Underwriting: Risk Models Becker (D)
Requires, if a property insurer uses risk models for underwriting
purposes, the risk models to account for wildfire risk reduction
associated with hazardous fuel reduction, home hardening,
defensible space, and fire prevention activities. Requires an insurer,
beginning on the specified date, and on or before each specified date
thereafter, to provide to the Department of Insurance information
necessary to ensure compliance with those risk model requirements.
05/13/2024: In SENATE Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
42 SB 1072 Local Government: Proposition 218: Remedies Padilla (D)
Provides for procedures and parameters for local compliance with the
requirements of the State Constitution for assessments and property-
related fees. Requires a local agency, if a court determines that a fee
or charge for a property-related service violates the provisions of the
State Constitution relating to fees and charges, to credit the amount of
the fee or charge attributable to the violation against the amount
required to provide the service, unless a refund is explicitly provided
for by statute.
05/02/2024: In SENATE. Read second time. To
third reading.
43 SB 1082 Augmented Residential Care Facilities Eggman (D)
Requires the Department of Health Care Services, jointly with the
County Behavioral Health Directors Association of California, to
implement a certification program to provide augmented services to
adults with serious mental illness in homelike community settings.
Requires those settings to be licensed by the Department of Social
Services as an augmented residential care facility. Requires an ARCF
to, among other requirements, conform with specified provisions of
the State Community Care Facilities Act.
04/29/2024: In SENATE Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
44 SB 1124 Deceptive Practices: Service Members and Veterans Menjivar (D)
Expands the definition of public social services to also include other
veterans benefits. Expands the definition of an unreasonable fee to
include a fee charged with respect to federal veterans benefits that
exceeds the amount that could be charged for those services by an
attorney or claims agent accredited by the United States Department
of Veterans Affairs.
05/13/2024: In SENATE Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
stateNetTracking_20240515_06_42 6
Attachment D
76
2024 Contra Costa County
Bills of Interest
BILL TITLE AUTHOR SUMMARY LAST STATUS UPCOMING DATES POSITION
45 SB 1159 Environmental Quality Act: Roadside Wildfire Risk Dodd (D)
Relates to categorical exemptions to the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act. Requires the Office of Planning
and Research to evaluate, and the Secretary of the Natural Resources
to consider, the inclusion of roadside projects no more than a
specified number of road miles from a municipality or census-
designated place that are undertaken solely for the purpose of wildfire
risk reduction in the classes of projects subject to a categorical
exemption.
05/13/2024: In SENATE Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date Support
46 SB 1245 In-Home Supportive Services: Health Professional Ochoa Bogh (R)
Defines licensed health care professional for specified purposes to
mean any person who engages in acts that are the subject of licensure
or regulation under specified provisions of the Business and
Professions Code or under any initiative act referred to in those
specified provisions.
04/15/2024: In SENATE Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date Support
47 SB 1254 CalFresh: Enrollment of Incarcerated Individuals Becker (D)
Requires the State Department of Social Services to partner with the
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and county jails to
enroll otherwise eligible applicants for the CalFresh program to
ensure that an applicant's benefits may begin before the reentry of the
applicant into the community from the State prison or county jail.
Requires the department to create a workgroup. Requires the
workgroup to create a report by the specified date with their
recommendations for a State reentry process.
05/06/2024: In SENATE Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date
48 SB 1317 Inmates: Psychiatric Medication: Informed Consent Wahab (D)
Provides that existing law prohibits, with specified exceptions, a
person sentenced to imprisonment in a county jail from being
administered any psychiatric medication without prior informed
consent. Extends these provisions. Requires any county that, between
specified dates, administers involuntary medication to any inmate
awaiting arraignment, trial, or sentencing, to prepare and submit a
report to the Legislature.
05/14/2024: In SENATE. Read second time. To
third reading.
49 SB 1432 Health Facilities: Seismic Standards Caballero (D)
Authorizes the State Department of Public Health to grant an
extension of the deadline for substantial compliance with seismic
safety regulations or standards to the specified date for any hospital
building for which the hospital owner submits specified items to the
department by specified dates. Authorizes the department to grant a
different extension to the deadline for substantial compliance with
seismic safety regulations or standards if the owner has demonstrated
one or more specified requirements.
05/06/2024: In SENATE Committee on
APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File.05/16/2024: Hearing Date Support
stateNetTracking_20240515_06_42 7
Attachment D
77