When it comes to spending state taxpayer dollars, many people think they can do better than the politicians elected to do the job. Students in Mary Jo Zenk’s Introduction to Nonprofit and Public Administration class got a chance to find out. . .During the spring semester, she invited a representative of Next 10, a nonpartisan, nonprofit policy organization based in San Francisco, to lead her class through an exercise involving budget priorities, called the California Budget Challenge.
As Californians grapple with further draconian cuts to education and social services as the deficit soars – again – to $16 billion, a budgetary bright spot has appeared on the horizon: the billions of dollars in revenues that will be generated once a state carbon market launches later this year.
Starting later this year, California's cap-and-trade system to fight global warming will generate billions of dollars in revenue, as companies buy and sell permits to produce greenhouse gases.
How should the money be used?
With the first permit auction scheduled for November, that question still hasn't been answered by Sacramento - not fully, at least. Now a series of studies, released Wednesday by the Next 10 public policy group, delves into the question's legal and economic implications, trying to assess which options would most benefit Californians.
State rebates could offset electrical sticker shock, finds a new study
Forcing utilities to pay for their carbon emissions, as California plans to do, will mean more costly megawatts. Six months before formal compliance with the state’s new cap & trade system begins, regulators are still sorting out what to do about that.
Reports: Funding energy efficiency programs makes economic sense
Sacramento Business Journal by Melanie Turner, Staff Writer
As California policymakers discuss how to spend revenue generated by the state’s soon-to-be-launched carbon market, four related studies providing legal and economic analysis of different investment scenarios were released late Wednesday.