Predictions from the Legislative Analyst that the state will have more revenue than the governor projects in his May budget revision — with most of the money going to the schools under the provisions of Prop 98 — could set up a spending tug-of-war with Prop 98 in the middle.

Passed in 1988, Prop 98 set a guaranteed percentage of the state’s general fund budget for K-12 and community college education. The measure also established a complicated formula to not only send money to the schools each year, but to make up for what the schools did not receive during particularly dismal budget years.

There’s consensus that California needs a big new deal to govern water. There’s no consensus on what should be in it. Habitat restoration? Rebuilt levees to withstand earthquakes? Or new tunnels to divert water from the Sacramento River to farmers and cities in Southern California?

These are all possibilities for the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, a water source for 25 million of California’s 38 million people. But if there’s to be a smart deal on the most contentious and complicated issue in California, the most important ingredient isn’t water. It’s sunscreen—the sunscreen that participants in any negotiations should apply to themselves as they head out to look at the affected places firsthand.

Even the most casual observer knows the City is cooking the books.

We are all familiar with the angst associated with the annual budget.  But this year is a cake walk as General Fund revenues are projected to increase by $325 million, accompanied by unanticipated pension savings of over $50 million.

But the Mayor’s budget that was approved by the Budget and Finance Committee last week is hardly balanced as the City once again has failed to provide adequate funding for its two severely underfunded pension plans and our failing infrastructure. 

SACRAMENTO — The Senate Governance and Finance Committee on Wednesday passed six constitutional amendments to make it easier for local voters to pass various tax increases on property owners.

“California didn’t knowingly vote for centralized power,” said Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis, speaking about the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, as she opened the committee hearing on the bills. Wolk, the committee chairwoman, echoed longtime critics of Prop. 13 that it reduced the ability of local governments to increase taxes, requiring the state government to step in and fund programs.

One of the first local ballot measures aimed at cutting public pension costs, a cap on Pacific Grove payments to CalPERS approved by voters three years ago, was ruled unconstitutional by a Monterey County superior court judge last week.

Judge Thomas Wills ruled Friday that Measure R violated the contract clause of the state constitution, reaffirming the view that pensions promised on the date of hire are a “vested right” that can’t be cut without providing a new benefit of equal value.

Finally, a major California institution has offered Californians the kind of advertising campaign we need to hear: “Believe in Something Bigger,” it asks us, and we should. Instead of the stale, small debate about California’s future, evidenced again this month with the release of the revised budget, we should be thinking about a bigger, better California, and how to build the new governance system, infrastructure, and human connections to make it possible.

Unfortunately, “Believe in Something Bigger” is the slogan of the California lottery.

Southern California recently captured the world’s attention with the landing of Caltech’s and JPL’s Mars Rover, the launching of SpaceX’s Dragon Rocket, and the final flight of the Space Shuttle Endeavour over the region’s historic landmarks and locales. These events projected an image that Angelenos all know to be true – Southern California remains home to a large share of the world’s creative and innovative talent.

These milestones became reality because of strong research and development programs and a collaborative work environment that brought together motivated and skilled people from diverse backgrounds. Wouldn’t it be great if all Angelenos got the government they deserved, one that is as creative and innovative when it came to developing and implementing policies that foster economic and income growth, and the creation of quality jobs?  

I was once an Industrial Relations and Safety Manager.  My job included  handling all the regulations pertaining to hazardous chemicals used at our facility.  In California, every business is required to have on hand a material safety data sheet (MSDS) for each and every product with any ingredient listed as hazardous under Prop. 65.

Proposition 65, passed by voters in 1986, was meant to protect citizens from exposure to harmful chemicals via a system of warning notices, and penalties for dangerous exposures and unauthorized releases.  Today, that list includes over 800 chemicals and the list grows each and every year. 

As May Budget Revisions go, this one was different.

In past years, the annual May Budget Revision  has reflected the need for spending adjustments, usually reductions.  The final budget normally reflects which programs will survive. Important decisions, to be sure, but the same type of rhetoric each year.

This year, Governor Brown made it much more than just a budget revision. He made it about the way California makes decisions. The concept of true governance reform permeated today’s Budget Revision, and Governor Brown was pushing it. The theme you heard is that Sacramento may not know best. More on that in a moment.

The Obama Administration is running a campaign to convince us gullible citizens that a 2% sequester cut will curtail critical services and therefore taxes must be increased.  In the latest stunt, California Pacific Airlines has been notified by the FAA that, due to the “sequester”, they had no staff to continue processing their application to begin commercial service at Palomar Airport in Carlsbad, California.

Jonathan Horn, in a May 8^th  U-T San Diego article, www.utsandiego.com, says that the new airline has been trying for 3 years to get certification to begin service.  “The new holdup comes less than a month after the proposed airline and the FAA worked out what the federal agency had called major issues with its initial application to operate.”