Bipartisan California lawmakers criticize Newsom’s COVID-19 spending, warn of ‘overreach’

California lawmakers from both parties on Friday criticized Gov. Gavin Newsom’s coronavirus spending, telling officials he had misused emergency authority they gave him at the start of the outbreak in March.

“With this pandemic, what you’ve done, is stretch the scope to do anything,” said Assemblyman Phil Ting, D-San Francisco, chairman of the Assembly Budget Committee.

Ting and other lawmakers scrutinized Newsom’s spending on coronavirus-related contracts at a special oversight hearing, where the California Department of Finance disclosed plans to increase the state’s projected COVID-19 costs by another $5.7 billion.

Lawmakers received a letter detailing the projected expenses Thursday evening, which included budgeting for personal protective equipment and hospital surge capacity.

Newsom’s May budget revision also requested the Legislature add another $2.9 billion to an emergency reserve account so the administration could quickly access money needed to mitigate a potential fall resurgence of COVID-19.

Legislators said during the hearing they were reluctant to hand over a blank check to the administration after enduring what they described as two months of limited communication from the governor about his use of the $1 billion they allocated for the pandemic in mid-March.

Since then, Newsom’s administration has made deals worth hundreds of millions of dollars to buy protective gear and prepare hospitals for the outbreak. Some of the agreements have been canceled after vendors failed to deliver.

Ting said he was concerned about a “huge overreach of authority” in the administration’s plans to transfer money that he said should be subject to a budget review process.

“From my perspective, the only predicter of future behavior is past behavior,” said Assemblyman Vince Fong, R-Bakersfield. “Right now, you can hear from us in the Legislature, we have serious concerns about how the past behavior has taken place.”

Republicans have criticized Newsom’s spending on social safety net programs, which they consider illegitimate COVID-19 costs. Democrats also said the projected expenditures need to be narrowed and limited to health and public safety, especially considering the pandemic could continue for years.

“What we need to see is great limitations to parameters,” Ting said. “What we need to see is a lot more specifics on what you need authority for. This emergency (declaration) specified, you could spend money on anything for whatever you want, and justify it has an impact on any number of Californians during this pandemic period.”

The Legislative Analyst’s Office has also issued warnings of the administration’s spending plans. In a May 19 review of Newsom’s budget proposal advised lawmakers to “guard its constitutional role and authority.”

“In a number of areas across the budget,” the office said in its report, “the governor makes proposals that raise serious concerns about the Legislature’s role in future decisions. We are very troubled by the degree of authority that the administration is requesting that lawmakers delegate.”

The Finance Department said the money is needed for personal protective equipment like masks, hospital surge capacity, testing and other COVID-19-related expenses, according to the letter.

The administration argues the money is needed so it can immediately tap into stocked funds during a second wave in the fall, when the Legislature is scheduled to be on recess.

An ability to quickly respond and not have to consult expansively with the Legislature could be a matter of life and death, said Vivek Viswanathan, chief deputy director for budget at the finance department.

“Acting when it comes to this pandemic in a matter of weeks, or in a matter of days..could literally account for hundreds or thousands of lives saved,” Viswanathan said.

This story was originally published May 22, 2020 at 2:39 PM.