A surplus of nearly $54 million grew in California Parks Department coffers over 12 years without anyone reporting it, a discovery that has triggered a review of accounts holding more a quarter of the state's budget.

California revealed Friday that it had found extra money in two "special purpose funds," $20.4 million in the Parks and Recreation Fund and $33.5 million in the Off-Highway Vehicle Fund. The balances had not been forwarded to the Department of Finance, which manages the state's budgets.

Discovery of the surplus comes at a difficult time politically. California last year had threatened to close one-fourth of its parks because of inadequate funding. Activists scrambled to prevent that, in many cases asking private companies, nonprofits, cities and counties to sponsor targeted locations.

"This is deeply disappointing because we just went to many partners around the state to get them to step up and cover the shortfall," Secretary for Natural Resources John Laird said Friday. "I'm truly sorry about that."

The state's attorney general and Finance Department are conducting investigations. Many questions were unanswered initially, including whether the poor accounting was a bureaucratic lapse or something more nefarious.

Laird didn't explain why the mistake would have started 12 years ago. He also said it was unclear how many people within the Parks Department had oversight over the money.

"It's a small number that was involved in fiscal divisions or operations of the Parks Department," Laird said.

Detection of the $54 million also spurred a larger inquiry.

California now will examine all 560 of its "special purpose" funds, which typically hold money from fees and then fund programs in narrow categories. They have become a major part of the state's spending.

The 2012-2013 budget Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed last month included a $91.3 billion general fund and $39.4 billion in special purpose funds.

Elizabeth Ashford, a Brown spokeswoman, characterized the Parks Department misreporting as unusual.

"We're not going to speculate if there's other money out there," Ashford said. "If there is, we're certainly going to find it."

But the state also revealed that two divisions hadn't regularly compared balances on special purpose accounts. The Controller's Office knew about the $54 million in the Parks Department, but the Department of Finance did not.

The controller is more the state accountant, while Finance prepares budgets, said Michael Cohen, chief deputy director of the Department of Finance. The Parks Department was responsible for reporting its special purpose fund totals to the Finance Department.

While the controller and Finance compare numbers for the state's $91.5 billion general fund, the special purpose accounts are "not routinely" matched up, Cohen said.

"That is changing going forward," Cohen said. "We will be reconciling our records."

Many special purpose funds exist in the environmental and energy sectors. For 2012-2013, the state plans to spend $1.9 billion in dedicated accounts under the Department of Natural Resources umbrella and $46 million in the environmental protection category.

The funds affect businesses and people connected to those sectors.

The Department of Pesticide Regulation Fund, for example, comes from an amount charged on sales of pesticides. It bankrolls the state's regulatory efforts on pesticides. A charge added to motor oils goes into the Used Oil Recycling Fund and pays for programs aimed at preventing dumping of the used product.

Money in the State Parks and Recreation Fund comes from dollars people handed over as park entrance fees, Cohen said. The Off-Highway Vehicle Fund accumulates from registration fees on those vehicles, recreation facility use fees and a portion of the state's fuel tax total.

Repercussions

The money was found during a probe of other potential Parks Department financial problems. The books were examined after the Sacramento Bee reported that an unauthorized department vacation buyout program had cost $271,000.

After the $54 million was found, Parks Department Director Ruth Coleman resigned and acting Chief Deputy Director Michael Harris was ousted.

The money would have covered the $11 million budget cut to parks in 2011-2012 plus the additional $11 million cut for this fiscal year.

The Legislature will help decide how to spend the $54 million, Laird said. Some parks still have limited hours and could be brought back to an open full-time status, he said.

Those who spent the last year working to keep parks open said they feared the discovery could hurt parks in the longer term. The state needs sponsorships of parks in the future because budget constraints will continue, several said.

"So many people have worked so hard the past year," holding bake sales and car washes to raise money for parks, said state Sen. Joe Simitian (D). "I worry they will conclude the funds aren't really necessary, or that the loss of trust will put damper on the enthusiasm."

He added, "It's a blow to the credibility of the organization. That's undeniable."

But the $54 million is a one-time pool of money, he said, and park expenses are ongoing. The deferred maintenance for the parks currently is at least $1.2 billion.

State Assemblyman Jared Huffman (D), like Simitian, had worked over the past year to find solutions to prevent park closures. He reacted sharply to news of the financial misreporting.

"It's an outrage. There's no way to sugarcoat it," Huffman said. "I am very frustrated and angry, and I'm glad that the governor is bringing this out into the light of day."

There were several park-sponsorship agreements that were about to be completed, Huffman said, adding, "I hope that this controversy isn't a setback for that and doesn't throw those parks' status back into limbo."

Parks advocates said they hope corporate and private donors won't flee.

"We think this is a huge but isolated situation," said California State Parks Foundation spokesman Jerry Emory. "The state park crisis continues, and there's still a very large need for corporate donors and philanthropists and foundations to step up and help state parks."

The nonprofit in recent months has given out about $830,000 in grants for 29 state parks, raised from companies and foundations that include Chipotle Mexican Grill, AAA, the S.D. Bechtel Jr. Foundation and the Thomas J. Long Foundation.

Emory said none of the donors had expressed concern about their money or asked for it back.

"We certainly have not received any frantic calls from any of the corporation or donors we work with," Emory said. He said he thought that if there were backlash, it would "evolve over the next couple weeks."

The larger impact of the scandal will be felt in the future, he said.

"We were making great strides working with [the Department of Parks and Recreation] with this whole park closure issue, and new ideas were being put to the table in terms of new ways to manage state parks and raise funds," he said. "All those discussions are going to have to be put on the back burner right now until things stabilize in Sacramento and we can get back at it."

Damage to Brown's tax proposal?

There also were questions about whether the revelation of the surplus would damage Brown's likelihood of winning his call for voters to raise their own taxes.

The state's November ballot will include a proposition asking people to hike the state's sales tax by half a cent for four years and income taxes on individuals earning more than $250,000 for seven years. The two moves would generate $7 billion annually, with money going to schools and public safety.

If the measure fails, a number of "trigger cuts" would go into effect. The largest cuts would be to schools and courts, but there also would be new hits to flood prevention, forestry firefighting, lifeguards at state beaches, and the number of both Fish and Game wardens and state park rangers.

One of the biggest obstacles to any tax increase is voters' skepticism that the money will be used well, said Darry Sragow, a Los Angeles-area Democratic strategist who has worked on environmental issues.

"Obviously, this confirms to voters that government doesn't do a great job of taking care of money," he said of the $54 million.

Voters also in general are cynical about government, he said.

"This certainly heightens the total lack of trust that a lot of Californians have in general in government," Sragow said. "This would only confirm the fears that voters have."