The governor and the California Legislature should heed LAO’s chilling conclusion: “Taken together, these trends raise serious concerns about the state’s fiscal sustainability.”
Understandably, very few citizens of California follow closely the state budget process which, for the 2026-27 fiscal year, just kicked off with the release of the Governor’s proposal. Of course, part of that may be due to the complexity of public finance issues, but the reality is that since 2010 with the passage of Proposition 25, the state has no discernible annual spending plan.
Technically, the timing of passing a budget hasn’t changed. It’s merely that the deadlines in the constitution are ignored.
This column has previously reported on how all phases of the budget dance are fake insofar as they are subject to substantial amendments throughout the year. This happens through so-called “trailer bills” and “junior budget bills,” rendering what was for decades a rational process for fiscal planning into a never-ending convoluted outflow of taxpayer cash.
The real corruption in the budget process – percolating for several years prior – was constitutionalized in 2010 with the passage of Proposition 25, laughingly labeled the “On-Time Budget Act of 2010.” Its real purpose was to repeal the two-thirds vote requirement for the state budget. Voters were promised three things. First, annual budgets would be passed on time; second, the budget process would be fully transparent; and third, legislators would forfeit their pay if the budget was late. As we now know, all three of these representations were lies.
While the “budget bill” is constitutionally mandated to be enacted by June 15, what the politicians actually pass on that date is a temporary placeholder budget.
