Legislation and Budget Update: May Revise and Mid-Session News

California’s state parks could see major impacts from this year’s state budget and legislative session, from the future of the popular California State Library Parks Pass program to climate funding, staffing levels, and protections for these natural spaces.

As the 2026 legislative session moves past its midpoint, there are significant updates to share on the bills and budget priorities we outlined in March. The past several weeks have brought both setbacks and encouraging developments, and the state budget picture has shifted meaningfully with the release of the Governor's May Revision. Here is where things stand.  

Key Takeaways

• The Governor’s May Revision continues funding for the California State Library Parks Pass
• Several California State Parks Foundation-sponsored bills have advanced so far this session
• Climate funding negotiations remain ongoing
• Proposed staffing cuts at California State Parks remain a concern 

Sponsored Bills: Where Things Stand 

AB 1804 (Hart)

This bill, our sponsored legislation authorizing California State Parks to work with the California State Library on the beloved California State Library Parks Pass program, has advanced to the Assembly floor. This is an important step forward for a program that has opened the gates of California's state parks to thousands of families who might not otherwise have had access, helping reduce financial barriers to visiting parks and expand equitable access to outdoor recreation across California. Combined with Governor Newsom's proposed continuous appropriation for the pass in the budget (see below), we remain hopeful that this year we can finally secure the permanent funding this program deserves. We are grateful to Assemblymember Hart and to all of you who signed our petition and took action in support. 

AB 2277 (Schultz)

We were disappointed to learn that this bill, which would support projects addressing climate change impacts in the state park system, and was co-sponsored with Save the Redwoods League and Sempervirens Fund, was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee and will not advance this year. 

AB 2277 would have enshrined climate stewardship explicitly in the Public Resources Code as a core part of the mission of the Department of Parks and Recreation. California's state parks are powerful natural allies in the fight against climate change — sequestering carbon, protecting biodiversity, and building landscape resilience — and we believe the law should reflect that reality clearly and unambiguously. 

While we are disappointed by this outcome, the case for recognizing climate stewardship as central to state parks management is strong, and we will continue to make it. We are grateful to Assemblymember Schultz and our co-sponsors for their commitment to this vision. 

SB 1097 (Wiener)

On a positive note, a bill we opposed that would have exempted certain clean energy projects from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) including, in some circumstances, projects on sensitive natural lands such as state parks, was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.  

California State Parks Foundation strongly supports the transition to clean energy, and we recognize the urgency of that work. At the same time, CEQA helps protect sensitive natural lands by requiring environmental review for many development projects. We believe that CEQA protections for sensitive natural lands remain essential, and that state parks must not become sacrifice zones in the energy transition. That’s why we took a position of “oppose unless amended” on this bill. We will continue to engage thoughtfully on how California balances its clean energy and conservation goals.  

Other Priority Bills Related to State Parks 

AB 2254 (Addis), which would improve stewardship of key overwintering sites for the endangered, iconic western monarch butterfly (many of which rely on California’s coastal state parks), moved on to the Assembly. So did AB 2185 (Hoover), which recognizes outdoor learning as an effective instructional method and establishes a pilot program to demonstrate impact and inform future policy. 

What Governor Newsom’s May Revision Means for California State Parks 

On May 14, Governor Newsom released his Fiscal Year 2026–27 May Revision to the budget, updating the spending plan he proposed in January. 

California’s state budget directly impacts park staffing, climate resilience projects, public access programs, habitat protection, and visitor services across the state park system. 

The revised budget reflects a stronger-than-expected revenue outlook, driven primarily by robust personal income tax receipts tied to elevated capital gains activity. General Fund revenues from the state's major tax sources are now projected to be approximately $16.5 billion higher than estimated in January. The revised proposal fully closes the state's projected deficit through FY 2027–28 and balances both the 2026–27 and 2027–28 fiscal years. 

Despite the improved revenue picture, the administration is not proposing major new ongoing General Fund commitments. The Governor continues to prioritize fiscal restraint, limiting long-term spending growth, and protecting against future economic volatility. General Fund spending in FY 2026–27 is now projected at $246.6 billion, approximately $1.8 billion lower than proposed in January. 

We are pleased that the May Revision continues to include the Governor's proposed continuous appropriation for the California State Library Parks Pass. This is an important commitment to a program that has proven its value in connecting Californians — especially those in underserved communities — to their state parks. Combined with AB 1804, we are closer than ever to putting this program on a permanent foundation. 

Climate Funding and the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) 

The May Revision also sets the stage for continued budget negotiations around the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), and the stakes are high.  Last year, the Legislature passed AB 1207 and SB 840, which modified the framework for allocating GGRF revenues and identified climate stewardship of natural and working lands as an important eligible use of these funds, among many others. 

However, the California Air Resources Board (CARB), which regulates the state’s Cap-and-Invest program for greenhouse gas emissions (the primary revenue source for GGRF), is currently considering amended regulations that could significantly reduce future revenues generated by the program. Early analyses estimate reductions of up to 50%. Such a decline underscores the importance of the Legislature revisiting whether the framework established in AB 1207 and SB 840 still prioritizes the state’s most effective and durable climate strategies.  

GGRF investments in natural and working lands are a critical part of that strategy, as these lands provide proven and effective carbon sequestration benefits while also supporting biodiversity, climate resilience, wildfire mitigation, and outdoor access. Properly stewarded natural and working lands sequester approximately 12% to 15% of annual U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Funding from GGRF is critical to providing long-term stewardship of California’s state parks and other natural lands. 

If CARB's amendments are adopted and revenues contract significantly, we urge the Legislature to revisit whether the framework established by SB 840 still prioritizes the most impactful programs. The budget process now moves to legislative negotiations, and we will continue to make the case that state parks must be part of California's climate solution and funded accordingly. 

California State Parks Staffing

In 2025, the Governor recommended eliminating hundreds of open positions in state environmental agencies, including California State Parks. As part of the 2025–26 budget negotiations with the Legislature, some positions were recommended for retention. However, the current budget would still eliminate 85 open positions at California State Parks. This recommendation would result in the loss of a dozen state park rangers/public safety officers; dozens of positions that support deferred maintenance and complex capital outlay projects; more than a dozen positions that support environmental, cultural, and historical resource protection; and many more positions that provide direct public services. 

Eliminating vacant positions would not lay off current California State Parks employees, but it would still harm the department. Reduced staffing capacity can impact park maintenance, visitor services, public safety, and the protection of natural and cultural resources. Vacant positions can still provide funding to state parks because a portion of the salary and benefits tied to those roles remains with the department as salary savings revenue. Hiring in state government is also a slow, bureaucratic process, so once positions are cut, restoring them can be extremely difficult.  

State parks are already severely understaffed, even as three new parks have been added to the department’s portfolio, and three more were recently expanded. In addition, at a time when the federal government has significantly reduced staff at national parks, it is critical that California continues to invest in its state parks and state parks staff to ensure that these resources are protected and that Californians and out-of-state visitors can continue to enjoy our world-class state parks.