Most reports ordered by California’s Legislature this year are shown as missing

Many new laws include a requirement for progress reports to the Legislature, but state agencies and commissions assigned to prepare those reports often fail to submit them on time, or at all, according to the Legislature’s website.

Of the 867 reports due between Jan. 1 and Dec. 9 of this year, 84% have not been filed to the Office of Legislative Counsel, according to a CalMatters analysis. Of the 16% that were submitted — 138 reports — 68 were filed late. Another 344 reports are due by Dec. 31.

Some agencies told CalMatters the reports were completed, but they were not properly filed with the Office of Legislative Counsel, as state law requires. It’s not clear how many of the missing reports were improperly filed.

The data is in line with previous CalMatters reporting that found 70% of about 1,100 reports due between February 2023 and February 2024 had not been filed to the Office of Legislative Counsel. About half of those that were filed were late.

Legislators say the lack of data can make it challenging to decide, for example, whether to grant a program more money.

Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris, the Irvine Democrat who previously chaired an Assembly administrative oversight committee, says delayed or missing information is a “huge issue, and a huge challenge.”

“We’ve got to ensure that we are making data-driven decisions and evaluating programs using real information,” she said. “I don’t think there’s enough attention and focus on the oversight and accountability piece of what we do in state government.”

One of the key policy areas where that’s been an issue, she said: spending on housing and homelessness programs.

“We are spending billions and billions of dollars … on programs to end homelessness,” she said. “And not only are agencies unable to tell you the program’s working. In some cases, they’re not even able to tell you where the money was. That’s really shameful.”

Izzy Gardon, spokesperson for Gov. Gavin Newsom, whose branch oversees state agencies, said via email that departments “actively coordinate with the Legislature to prioritize the high volume of required reports.”

“The administration welcomes opportunities to work with the Legislature to streamline reporting requirements to enhance government efficiency, improve oversight, and reduce taxpayer costs,” he said.

Last year, the Legislative Analyst’s Office flagged delayed reporting on funds for wildfire and forest resilience as an example where, “reporting has not been provided by the statutory deadlines, making it much less useful for informing decision-making.”

“If you don’t have the reporting, it’s hard to do an oversight hearing that’s as effective,” said Helen Kerstein, one of the legislative analysts, at a June 2023 hearing. “That’s why it’s so critical to have that front-end accountability, to make sure that the state is well-positioned to ensure that the dollars are being spent in the most effective way.”

State law requires agencies to submit a printed copy of the reports to the Secretary of the Senate, an electronic copy to the Assembly Chief Clerk’s office, and either a printed or electronic copy to the Office of the Legislative Counsel. The Assembly and Senate each compile a list of reports received.

Legislators have recently prioritized more oversight of how the laws they pass are carried out by government agencies. As the new session kicked off on Dec. 2, the Legislature announced new rules to reduce the number of bills lawmakers can introduce — something Petrie-Norris thinks will help.

Last year, in the Assembly, Speaker Robert Rivas also reorganized the oversight committee into one focused on the budget to have better oversight of spending.

“We must ensure that existing state programs are working full-speed ahead,” he said at the start of this year’s session, adding his oft-repeated manta: “Our job is not just making new laws. It’s looking in the rearview mirror.”