Assemblyman Josh Hoover says Capitol Annex project leaders are hiding information from lawmakers | California Politics 360
Aselli and Josh Hoover, thank you so much for making time for us. Absolutely, it’s great to be here. So first, just to set the stage for us. I mean, as *** state lawmaker who’s not part at all of really the day to day capital annex project decisions, I mean, how much do state lawmakers like yourself really know about this project? So the most that we really know about the project is sort of the updates that we’ll get occasionally, uh, which is actually very rarely. Um, they did invite us last year to go on sort of *** behind the scenes walk of the construction, uh, so they, they sent that invite out to all legislators, and I participated in that, uh, took *** couple photos. This was, it’s the building’s come *** long way since then, um, but it, it was, you know, interesting. We were given, you know, details on the opening date and the, you know, basic details on the architecture, but. Beyond that, we really know nothing more than the public. I mean, has there been an update for you all this year? I have received no updates this year. I’ve also never received an update on costs specifically. It’s only been updates on progress, on opening date, you know, being on track to open. And on architecture, but, uh, never the legislature as far as I know has never been updated on costs. You filed *** piece of legislation this year to invalidate the broad nondisclosure agreements that are legally forcing thousands of people to keep everything about this project *** secret, essentially, um, and also, you know, to get the commitment that the planned West Side visitor center does not happen on the West Side. What’s the status of that? So it’s actually really interesting. I introduced AB 2445 after multiple years, by the way, of trying to get information without legislation. I finally got tired of waiting. Um, we put forward the bill that does exactly what you said. It would invalidate it would invalidate all the NDAs that have been signed, uh, allow the secrecy to end. Um, it would also ensure that NDAs can’t be used on future publicly funded projects, which I think is really important, and it would try to protect the West Steps by prohibiting *** visitor center from being built there. Unfortunately that bill continues to sit in the Rules Committee unreferred. Uh, it, it has not been sent to *** policy committee, so we can’t even talk about hearing the bill in committee because it hasn’t even been sent there yet. Uh, we actually put an official inquiry in today. to ask them why has this bill not been referred, when can we plan on it being referred, and, and we’ll definitely let you know when and if we get *** response, but we’re headed into spring break, so I do not expect *** response soon. And I expect them to continue to kick the can down the road on this. Yeah, we should mention that Assembly Member Blanca Pacheco, who leads Joint Rules which oversees the Capitol annex project, she’s involved. I mean, she’s the leader of the committee that would decide where this goes. I mean, have you talked to her at all? Uh, I haven’t talked to her yet about the referral itself. Uh, it’s still, you know, uh, typically, right, uh, these bills get referred in bunches, and, but unfortunately every one of my bills that I introduced other than this one has been referred at this point. And so this is why we’re putting an official inquiry in with the committee to ask exactly what’s going on and if necessary I will talk to her. Do you know how soon? I mean, I know you don’t expect any time soon, but there are deadlines that will come up fast. I mean to even allow *** bill like this to move forward. Just any idea when you could hear back? Yes, I mean this bill is ready to be heard. It’s in print. We’re not waiting on any amendments. We want to have this discussion and honestly if they would like to vote this bill down, let’s have that hearing and vote it down and give us the reasons you’re voting it down. But yeah, I don’t expect to hear anything for about *** week because of the spring recess that we’re going on. Um, so, but if things happen sooner, uh, what I have seen is there’s zero urgency to address this issue publicly. What’s your reaction to the approach that Pacheco and then also state Senator John Laird, who’s also in charge of this project, their approach to, I mean, our public records request and also just the rejection of interview requests so far this year. I’ve been really disappointed and you know when we heard in December, I know you did *** very thorough interview with both of them in December, um, and we heard from them directly that there would be more updates. I would obviously the public would appreciate that. I would also appreciate that as *** legislature, as *** legislator because if we are behind budget, if we are, uh, you know, over cost estimates, we need to know that so that we can properly prepare for it. And make changes as necessary. The legislature cannot make those decisions if we don’t have the information, and it’s pretty amazing to me that they’re not only hiding this from the public, but they’re hiding it from the very people that are ultimately going to move into this building and the very people that make the budgetary decisions on on state projects. So it’s been very disappointing. I want to see more transparency as quickly as possible. I think that can happen with or without my legislation. And but it, but it’s up to the leadership to actually make that happen. Yeah, on another end of this, Governor Gavin Newsom, when I laid this out for him this week, he said that no, like the public shouldn’t have to wait, you know, as long as they apparently do for this kind of information, and, and he, he said he would try to help. He thought there was some progress. He’s noted there wasn’t, so let him go back. Just what was your reaction when you saw that? That was really interesting actually. I was actually very appreciative of the governor’s sort of immediate no, that’s not OK, given the facts that you presented. It’s not OK. And you know, I know he said it’s because he’s *** taxpayer. It’s also should be because he’s governor. You know, we wrote him *** letter in December, uh, myself and Assembly Member Joe Patterson, that asked him to help us with this, right? We asked him to step in. And work with the legislature to try to get more transparency for the public. At the time he was not enthusiastic to do that. In fact, his office told us they basically just referred us back to the Joint Rules Committee and sort of said, you know, that’s really where this should be decided. Um, maybe now he’s changed his mind now that we’re seeing the Rules Committee continue to keep information from the public. I hope that he means that, and I’d love to work with him to get more transparency here. And perhaps I mean, the governor, Governor Newsom specifically, he didn’t approve the project. He’s never going to use the building because it won’t be finished until he’s out of office. And yeah, I mean the legislature through legislation did take power away from him to be like the overseer. It’s, I mean, it’s really up to the legislature. So I mean, do you see him having the impetus? Like why should the governor really get involved here if he’s really not going to be part of this? Well, I think the governor should do it because it’s the right thing to do, you know, the governor has clearly national aspirations. He has aspirations beyond the governor’s office. This is *** great issue to show that he actually cares about transparency. He cares about accountability. And he cares that the public should get the information on *** public project that they are paying for. By the way, $1.1 billion more than, as you’ve pointed out, some sports stadiums. This is not *** tiny project. This is something that the public needs to have full access to the information on. Is there anything else you think we should know? No, not right now, I think, uh, yeah, I mean, I’m happy to share, I don’t know, some other things about the bill and stuff, but no, I mean, I mean other than that, yeah, if, if the bill, I mean, have you had *** like solid reception from Democrats? I mean it, it’s, it’s confusing to really understand how they feel because obviously it’s the two Democrats are in charge of this project. We really haven’t had any others on the record. Um, have you heard from any? On my end it’s been radio silence on this bill since the day we introduced it. I haven’t heard from any of my colleagues about it. Obviously hasn’t even been referred to *** committee. It’s very clear they’re trying to avoid the bill, um, but I also think the bill is really important because it would also protect the historic West Steps, and I think that is something that the public also cares about, wants to make sure that’s preserved for future generations, and our bill would would do that as well. So for many reasons we hope the bill gets *** hearing. Lemon, thank you so much for your time. Appreciate it. Thanks for having me.
Assemblyman Josh Hoover says Capitol Annex project leaders are hiding information from lawmakers | California Politics 360
Updated: 8:25 AM PDT Mar 29, 2026
California Republican Assemblyman Josh Hoover says some state lawmakers like him are getting little to no information on the Capitol Annex Project and how much it could cost taxpayers. “It’s amazing to me they’re not only hiding it from the public, but they’re hiding it from the people who are ultimately going to move into this building and make budgetary decisions on state projects,” Hoover said in an interview on California Politics 360. The construction project has been underway for years and is expected to house the offices of California state lawmakers, the future governor and lieutenant governor in the fall of 2027. The two lawmakers in charge of the project, Democratic Assemblymember Blanca Pacheco and State Senator John Laird, recently broke their promise to be more transparent about the taxpayer funded construction after years of secrecy. Broad non-disclosure agreements are legally forcing thousands of people involved to keep quiet. The building had an original cost estimate of $543 million in 2018. With the NDAs in place, the estimate ballooned to $1.1 billion in 2021. Lawmakers have not provided an updated estimate since and refuse to hand over key cost records. “We really know nothing more than the public,” Hoover said. “The legislature, as far as I know, has never been updated on cost.””I’ve been really disappointed,” Hoover said of project leaders falling short on their promise. “If we are behind budget, if we are over cost estimates, we need to know that so we can properly prepare for that as necessary.” Hoover filed a bill this year, AB 2445, that would invalidate the NDAs on the project and prohibit new construction of a visitor’s center on the capitol’s iconic west side. He said it’s the only bill he’s written this year that has not been referred to a committee. “Unfortunately, that bill continues to sit in the Rules Committee,” Hoover said. That committee is led by one of the project leaders, Assemblymember Pacheco. Hoover said he put an official inquiry into why the bill isn’t being referred to a committee on Thursday. Gov. Gavin Newsom said earlier this week he would try to help bring more transparency to the project. The governor’s office is involved in decision-making on the project but is not overseeing the day-to-day aspects of the project. Hoover and Assemblyman Joe Patterson sent Newsom a letter in December asking him to step in. “At the time he was not enthusiastic to do that in fact his office referred us back to the Joint Rules Committee,” Hoover said. “Maybe now he’s changed his mind now that we’re seeing the Rules Committee continue to keep information from the public, I hope he means that.”KCRA 3 Political Director Ashley Zavala reports in-depth coverage of top California politics and policy issues. She is also the host of “California Politics 360.” Get informed each Sunday at 8:30 a.m. on KCRA 3.
California Republican Assemblyman Josh Hoover says some state lawmakers like him are getting little to no information on the Capitol Annex Project and how much it could cost taxpayers.
“It’s amazing to me they’re not only hiding it from the public, but they’re hiding it from the people who are ultimately going to move into this building and make budgetary decisions on state projects,” Hoover said in an interview on California Politics 360.
The construction project has been underway for years and is expected to house the offices of California state lawmakers, the future governor and lieutenant governor in the fall of 2027.
The two lawmakers in charge of the project, Democratic Assemblymember Blanca Pacheco and State Senator John Laird, recently broke their promise to be more transparent about the taxpayer funded construction after years of secrecy. Broad non-disclosure agreements are legally forcing thousands of people involved to keep quiet.
The building had an original cost estimate of $543 million in 2018. With the NDAs in place, the estimate ballooned to $1.1 billion in 2021. Lawmakers have not provided an updated estimate since and refuse to hand over key cost records.
“We really know nothing more than the public,” Hoover said. “The legislature, as far as I know, has never been updated on cost.”
“I’ve been really disappointed,” Hoover said of project leaders falling short on their promise. “If we are behind budget, if we are over cost estimates, we need to know that so we can properly prepare for that as necessary.”
Hoover filed a bill this year, AB 2445, that would invalidate the NDAs on the project and prohibit new construction of a visitor’s center on the capitol’s iconic west side. He said it’s the only bill he’s written this year that has not been referred to a committee.
“Unfortunately, that bill continues to sit in the Rules Committee,” Hoover said. That committee is led by one of the project leaders, Assemblymember Pacheco. Hoover said he put an official inquiry into why the bill isn’t being referred to a committee on Thursday.
Gov. Gavin Newsom said earlier this week he would try to help bring more transparency to the project. The governor’s office is involved in decision-making on the project but is not overseeing the day-to-day aspects of the project.
Hoover and Assemblyman Joe Patterson sent Newsom a letter in December asking him to step in.
“At the time he was not enthusiastic to do that in fact his office referred us back to the Joint Rules Committee,” Hoover said. “Maybe now he’s changed his mind now that we’re seeing the Rules Committee continue to keep information from the public, I hope he means that.”
KCRA 3 Political Director Ashley Zavala reports in-depth coverage of top California politics and policy issues. She is also the host of “California Politics 360.” Get informed each Sunday at 8:30 a.m. on KCRA 3.