California Lawmakers Spent $415 Million on local Projects Amidst Budget Crisis
By Ryan Sabalow, CalMatters
Assemblymembers gather during a floor session the state Capitol in Sacramento on Sept. 12, 2025. Photo by Fred Greaves for CalMatters
Despite facing a $12 billion deficit this year, California’s Legislature still managed to spend at least $415 million for local projects to help lawmakers win their next elections.
CalMatters found close to 100 earmarks inserted into just one of the state’s budget bills for local projects and programs that had little apparent benefit to anyone outside the lawmakers’ districts.
Some of the earmarks raise concerns about legislative priorities in a arduous budget year, such as lawmakers spending millions from the general fund on museums, trails, parks and other amenities in wealthy communities. The spending includes $5 million in general fund money for a LGBTQ+ venue in high-cost San Francisco, $2.5 million for a private day school in Southern California and $250,000 for a private farm-animal rescue on the North Coast.
Around $250 million of the local-project earmarks were funds taken from the $10 billion Proposition 4 climate bond California voters approved last year.
Some of the Prop. 4 earmarks included:
- $26 million to programs paying farmers for private land conservation.
The earmarks were approved simultaneously occurring Gov. Gavin Newsom and lawmakers left state worker positions unfilled, suspended some health care benefits, forewent raises for firefighters, filled budget holes with high-interest bond money and took billions of dollars from the state’s “rainy day” emergency fund.
Kristen Cox, executive director of the Long Beach Community Table foodbank, said the money lawmakers spent this year to enhance communities in their districts – often for projects that some would consider frills – isn’t going to the neediest Californians.
“It’s misprioritization,” she said. “My priorities are to help the people that need it the most. Their priorities seem to be ‘Let’s make this city look gentrified and pretty and stunning.'”
A secret process that benefits lawmakers
Many of the earmarks – one-time allotments of cash for a specific purpose or project – are fairly benign and went to local infrastructure needs such as fire stations, parks, public schools and environmental projects.
They also represent just a small portion of the state’s $321 billion budget, which pays for programs and services that typically are intended to help all of California.
But inside the notoriously secretive budget negotiation process, lawmakers also have the ability to set aside sizable chunks of money to benefit their districts through an even more opaque earmark system.
It allows them to direct money to their pet projects without leaving a fingerprint – at least until they issue a press release touting a new community perk or show up.
California Lawmakers quietly Funneled Millions to Their Districts in State Budget
California lawmakers quietly inserted millions of dollars in “earmarks” – funds specifically directed to projects in their districts – into the state budget this year, raising questions about openness and equitable distribution. A CalMatters investigation reveals at least $382 million in earmarks were tucked into the budget, with some lawmakers benefiting significantly as they eye higher office.
State Sen. Scott Wiener, who recently announced a run for Nancy Pelosi’s congressional seat, saw at least $9 million in earmarks directed to projects benefiting San Francisco voters. These included funding for parks, restroom improvements, and the preservation of a historic LGBTQ+ venue in the Castro neighborhood. Additional funds were allocated for a new oncology clinic at Chinese Hospital ($1 million) and accessibility improvements at Wah Mei child progress center ($250,000). Wiener’s office declined to comment.
The earmarks are largely anonymous, making it difficult to determine which lawmakers requested them and which districts benefited. while the governor’s management is responsible for some, legislative staff confirmed that earmark requests are not public record. CalMatters utilized the Digital Democracy database to trace earmarks within SB 105 – one of 40 budget-related bills signed by Governor Newsom – to their respective districts. It’s likely more earmarks are hidden within the remaining budget measures.
Concerns about the secretive nature and volume of earmarks surfaced during a September senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee meeting. Several Democratic lawmakers questioned the fairness of the distribution, suggesting funds weren’t necessarily going to the communities with the greatest need.
“The broader concern about equity and balance in those earmarks is certainly a point really well taken,” said Sen. Ben Allen. Sacramento Sen. Christopher Cabaldon noted the presence of numerous specific allocations across various funding streams.
Despite these concerns, not a single Democrat in the Legislature voted against the budget, and Governor Newsom signed it into law. Neither Newsom’s office nor Wiener’s responded to requests for comment.
Susan Shelley of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association criticized the earmarks as hypocritical, notably given support from some lawmakers and groups for tax increases and bond measures.
In an interview, Assemblymember Gregg Hart said preserving the ranch’s habitat in perpetuity is in line with what voters intended when they voted for Proposition 4.
“In my district, this is a signature ranch that is an environmental gem,” Hart said. “And preserving that is a very high-value project.”
The conservation board also must allocate $10 million in Proposition 4 earmarks to programs that will pay farmers and private wetland landowners in the Central Valley to flood their fields to provide habitat for waterbirds.
Central Valley farmers already have received hundreds of millions of dollars in federal crop subsidies over the decades.
The flooded-field earmarks came from Democratic Sen. Jerry McNerney, who represents the Stockton area, and Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry representing the Davis area.
In an emailed statement,McNerney called the $10 million expenditure a “win-win for farmers and for wetlands … ensuring that migratory birds have places to rest and refuel on their long journey on the Pacific Flyway.”
The total number of earmarks relying on Proposition 4 funds has Senate Republican Leader Brian Jones of San Diego saying, “I told you so.” He urged voters to reject the bond last year.
“It was going to be pork,” he said. “It was going to be earmarked projects that the legislators are going to be able to move …. into things that really didn’t have anything to do with the story that was being told to the voters when they voted.”
Jones’ district was the recipient of some earmarks, though he said he made no requests for Proposition 4 money. His earmarks were from the general fund. They include $1.4 million for San Diego County dam repairs and $615,000 to the San Diego Mountain Biking Association “for building and maintaining public trails for mountain biking.”
