What are California taxpayers actually getting for their money?
California spends enormous amounts dealing with poverty, homelessness, unemployment, health care, housing and food assistance. CalFresh alone provided more than $12.5 billion in federally funded food benefits in 2024-25.
I am not suggesting we abandon people who genuinely need help. I am asking a question government should always answer: What results are taxpayers getting for the money?
The same question applies to infrastructure.
When I served in county government, I learned that getting a project approved doesn’t mean it will be built promptly — or at its original price. Environmental reviews, permitting, lawsuits, engineering, funding delays and government processes consume years. Meanwhile, labor, asphalt, concrete, steel and equipment become more expensive. Taxpayers pay for the waiting. Look at Highway 99 in Madera County.
Caltrans is moving ahead with the South Madera project, widening the existing freeway from four lanes to six while rehabilitating existing pavement. Caltrans identifies a 5.8-mile four-lane bottleneck and estimates construction at $126.86 million — approximately $21.9 million per widening-mile.
Compare that with Texas. TxDOT widened 6.8 miles of Interstate 30 from four lanes to six, replaced existing asphalt with continuously reinforced concrete and included a new bridge over a railroad. The contract was $88.9 million — approximately $13.1 million per mile.
Using those published figures, Madera is about $8.8 million more per widening-mile — roughly 67 percent higher.
The projects aren’t identical, and the Texas contract was awarded in 2020. Both states also have prevailing-wage requirements on public works, while federally funded construction can fall under the federal Davis-Bacon Act. So wages alone don’t explain the difference.
And remember what “federal funding” means: it is taxpayer money collected across the United States. When federally assisted California projects become more expensive, taxpayers beyond California can share the cost.
Then there is Westberry Bridge — a project Madera residents know firsthand.
I was personally involved with Westberry in 2007 while working in the private sector. The bridge was then estimated at approximately $6.5 million, but it didn’t move forward.
City records show that, by 2008, studies had been completed, regulatory bridge approval obtained, geotechnical work performed and design had reached approximately 30 percent before work stopped.
Today, Westberry Bridge is listed at approximately $16.7 million, with funding still unsecured.
That’s approximately $10.2 million more — a 157 percent increase from the $6.5 million estimate I remember.
Nearly two decades later, taxpayers still don’t have the bridge.
Government often measures success by how much money it spends. Taxpayers should ask something different: What did we receive? How long did it take? What was the original price? What was the final price?
Whether we’re discussing poverty programs, homelessness, highways or bridges, spending more money isn’t success by itself.
Delay has a price — and taxpayers always receive the bill.