AC TRANSIT DISTRICT GM Memo No. 07-225 Board of Directors ...
AC TRANSIT DISTRICT GM Memo No. 07-225 Board of Directors ...
AC TRANSIT DISTRICT GM Memo No. 07-225 Board of Directors ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
BRIEFING MEMO<br />
<strong>AC</strong> <strong>TRANSIT</strong> <strong>DISTRICT</strong> <strong>GM</strong> <strong>Memo</strong> <strong>No</strong>. <strong>07</strong>-<strong>225</strong><br />
<strong>Board</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Directors</strong><br />
Executive Summary Meeting Date: October 17, 20<strong>07</strong><br />
Committees:<br />
Planning Committee<br />
External Affairs Committee<br />
Rider Complaint Committee<br />
<strong>Board</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Directors</strong><br />
Finance Committee<br />
Operations Committee<br />
Paratransit Committee<br />
Financing Corporation<br />
SUBJECT:<br />
Legislative Report<br />
RECOMMENDED <strong>AC</strong>TION:<br />
Fiscal Impact:<br />
<strong>No</strong>ne<br />
Information Only Briefing Item Recommended Motion<br />
Background/Discussion:<br />
Lynn Suter and Associates report on legislative affairs.<br />
Prior Relevant <strong>Board</strong> Actions/Policies:<br />
Attachments:<br />
Legislative Report from Lynn Suter and Associates<br />
Approved by: Rick Fernandez, General Manager<br />
Prepared by: Mary King, Acting Deputy General Manager<br />
Date Prepared: October 5, 20<strong>07</strong><br />
BOARD <strong>AC</strong>TION: Approved as Recommended [ ] Other [ ]<br />
Approved with Modification(s) [ ]<br />
[To be filled in by District Secretary after <strong>Board</strong>/Committee Meeting]<br />
The above order was passed on<br />
___________________, 20<strong>07</strong>.<br />
Linda Nemer<strong>of</strong>f, District Secretary<br />
By
3<br />
Lynn M. Suter<br />
and Associates<br />
Government Relations<br />
<strong>GM</strong> <strong>07</strong>-<strong>225</strong> Attachment<br />
October 2, 20<strong>07</strong><br />
TO:<br />
Greg Harper, President, and<br />
Members <strong>of</strong> the <strong>AC</strong> Transit <strong>Board</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Directors</strong><br />
Mary King, Acting D<strong>GM</strong><br />
FR:<br />
RE:<br />
Lynn M. Suter & Associates<br />
Legislative Update<br />
Special Sessions: There has been a lot <strong>of</strong> activity but little progress on both special<br />
session topics. Yesterday at 2:00 p.m. we enjoyed one <strong>of</strong> those legislative whip-lash<br />
moments. The Senate went into session to consider Senate PresProTem Perata's $6.8<br />
billion water bond package at the same time the Governor held a press conference to<br />
explain his latest 200 page Health Coverage Proposal.<br />
Water bonds: The water bond package in SBX2 2 was presented to the Senate<br />
Committee on Natural Resources and Water on Monday. The Senate Appropriations<br />
Committee approved it Tuesday morning and then it was presented on the Senate Floor<br />
that afternoon. The failure on the Senate Floor (23-12) was no surprise - - Republicans<br />
will not negotiate until water storage (read: reservoir) construction funding is included.<br />
Perata vows to take the package to the ballot via the initiative route. Also failing passage<br />
in the Senate Natural Resources Committee on Monday was a competing Republican<br />
package totaling $9 billion that would include $5.1 billion for two new dams and<br />
increased capacity for a third (Los Vaqueros in CoCoCounty). The Governor and<br />
Republican leadership declared that they, too, will take the initiative route with their<br />
proposal. While the Assembly held one informational hearing on the topic, it is unclear if<br />
they plan on pursuing their own proposal that would likely face the same fate on the<br />
Assembly Floor.<br />
More Dam Water Wars: Special Session bills will miss the deadline for placement on<br />
the February 5 ballot. Central Valley Ag interests say they'll put up $1 million to get the<br />
signature gathering process started for the Republican package. Looks like combating<br />
water-bond forces will face an initiative road-show rather than passage <strong>of</strong> a Special<br />
Session compromise. The Governor insists the parties can still come together in a "bipartisan<br />
manner" on a compromise so that when people turn on their faucets in 40 years<br />
"there's water coming out." Hang in there - - we certainly haven't heard the last <strong>of</strong> this<br />
debate. Despite the sound and fury, compromise is still possible. Deadline for the June<br />
ballot is January 24.<br />
1127-11 th Street, Suite 512 ν Sacramento, CA 95814 ν Telephone 916/442-0412 ν Facsimile 916/444-0383<br />
email: lmsa@lmsa.com
Health Coverage gamble: Enter the lottery! Meanwhile, back in Gov-land, his new<br />
health coverage plan includes state lottery funding instead <strong>of</strong> the proposed new tax on<br />
docs and additional fees on employers. Docs have been fighting a 2% fee on their<br />
revenues to fund an insurance purchasing pool, and it looks like they won. The gov<br />
proposes to lease administration <strong>of</strong> the lottery to a private company, magically producing<br />
additional revenues for the purchasing pool. We don't know if his numbers are right or<br />
wrong, but we're sure they are suspect. Number-crunching hasn't been this Admin's high<br />
suit in any area, so there's no reason to expect it now. He still has no author for the bill,<br />
but announced it would be a "Committee Bill." That seems entirely unlikely to us, but<br />
the Governor may have a definition <strong>of</strong> "Committee Bill" that transcends our usual<br />
understanding. The Gov's new proposal, as with past efforts, makes everything<br />
contingent upon (a) more federal money and (b) passage <strong>of</strong> a finance package by voters.<br />
In other words, if passed, the Gov can declare victory on a health care package that never<br />
goes into effect.<br />
Prop 1B Transit Capital Funds: Caltrans has released draft guidelines for implementing<br />
the Public Transportation, Improvement and Service Enhancement Account Program<br />
(PTMISEA). These guidelines provide the framework for the allocation <strong>of</strong> $600 million<br />
in PTMISEA funds appropriated in the 20<strong>07</strong>-08 budget. In short, the guidelines are<br />
consistent with the implementing statute. However, the debate continues on whether<br />
these funds should flow along the same path as STA revenue, or can these funds bypass<br />
the regional entity and be allocated directly to the operators.<br />
The comment period on the draft guidelines closed October 8. The final guidelines are<br />
expected to be released by October 22, and application deadline is currently scheduled for<br />
<strong>No</strong>vember 30 th .<br />
Transit Oriented Development Program: Last month the Department <strong>of</strong> Housing and<br />
Community Development (HCD) released draft guidelines for the Transit Oriented<br />
Development program contained in Prop 1C. The budget appropriated $90 million for<br />
this program. The guidelines were widely criticized by cities, counties, and transit<br />
operators across the state. In response to this criticism, HCD is expected to release<br />
revised guidelines by mid-October. A brief comment period will follow the release <strong>of</strong> the<br />
revised guidelines, and HCD plans to release a <strong>No</strong>tice <strong>of</strong> Funding Availability (NOFA)<br />
for the TOD program in early <strong>No</strong>vember<br />
In addition, HCD has recently scheduled a series <strong>of</strong> stakeholder meetings to review its<br />
plans for the Infill Incentive Account program, which is also funded by Prop 1C bonds.<br />
The Legislature appropriated $300 million in the 20<strong>07</strong>-08 budget for this program and<br />
adopted implementation language in SB 86, which was a budget trailer bill. A<br />
stakeholder meeting is scheduled for October 22 in Oakland from 1-4 p.m. in the<br />
auditorium <strong>of</strong> the Elihu M. Harris Building. HCD plans to issue a NOFA for this<br />
program in January.<br />
Budget News: Our prediction that this year’s fiscal plan wouldn’t last 90 days was<br />
grossly optimistic. Department <strong>of</strong> Finance and others are lowering their expectations just<br />
2
one month after passage <strong>of</strong> the tardy state budget. When the budget was signed last<br />
month, Department <strong>of</strong> Finance was estimating a $5 billion shortfall based upon reduced<br />
income tax revenues. That projection is now up to an $8.6 billion deficit, according to<br />
latest DOF numbers which consider reduced revenues and base-line spending needs.<br />
Among other FY 20<strong>07</strong>-08 Budget assumptions that cause even wider discrepancies are:<br />
• EdFund will be sold for $1 billion. This is a precarious number, at best. <strong>No</strong>body<br />
really knows how much EdFund would generate in one-time funding, or if it can<br />
be sold at all.<br />
• Ballot initiatives by rival tribes could block compacts just approved for additional<br />
slot machines. In addition, the per-machine revenues may not be achievable.<br />
• The California Transit Association has sued to block divergence <strong>of</strong> $1.3 billion in<br />
mass transit funds to the state general fund.<br />
• STRS sued and won at trial and appellate court levels to block tapping the refund<br />
for $500 million. The Governor has agreed to return the $500 million to STRS,<br />
an amount that would severely cut into the state’s reserve account.<br />
• The budget does not fund major state employee pay raises, including a stalled<br />
contract with the CCPOA - - an amount estimated at $300 million during Sessionend<br />
attempts at legislation sponsored by prison employees.<br />
• Plummeting home sales are steeper than predicted, and will cut further into state<br />
income tax revenues. The following is a link to DOF’s September revenue<br />
forecast: http://www.d<strong>of</strong>.ca.gov/HTML/FINBULL/20<strong>07</strong>_FB/September/<br />
Legislation<br />
The Legislature adjourned on September 12 th , which was two days earlier than scheduled.<br />
This has sparked a debate over the Governor’s signing deadline. As you know, at the end<br />
<strong>of</strong> session the Governor has 30 days to act on bills. Many assumed that the deadline this<br />
year would be October 12 th . While Legislative Counsel initially agreed with this date,<br />
Leg Counsel has rescinded that opinion and now declares the Governor has until<br />
midnight on October 14 th to sign or veto bills.<br />
That extra time will be needed. To date the there remain 596 bills pending on the<br />
Governor’s desk. Given the large number <strong>of</strong> bills still pending, we will send an updated<br />
bill chart prior to the <strong>Board</strong> meeting next week.<br />
3
Bill Topic Status Client-Position<br />
AB 57 (Soto) Highways: federal Governor’s Desk <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Support<br />
E-09/12/20<strong>07</strong> funds: Safe Routes to<br />
School.<br />
NOTE: AB 57 repeals the sunset date for the Safe Routes to<br />
School (SRTS) grant program, thereby extending the program<br />
indefinitely. The bill also specifies that any budget appropriation<br />
for this program shall be in addition to any federal funds allocated<br />
for this program.<br />
AB 118 (Nunez)<br />
E-09/27/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Alternative fuels and<br />
vehicle technologies:<br />
funding programs.<br />
Governor’s Desk<br />
<strong>AC</strong> Transit-Support<br />
& Seek Amendments<br />
NOTE: The bill would enact the California Alternative and<br />
Renewable Fuel, Vehicle Technology, Clean Air, and Carbon<br />
Reduction Act <strong>of</strong> 20<strong>07</strong>. Beginning July 1, 2008, this bill would<br />
increase vehicles registration fees and vessel registration fees, as<br />
well as increase the smog abatement fee.<br />
The purpose <strong>of</strong> this bill is to create a funding source for research,<br />
development, and deployment <strong>of</strong> clean fuels and advanced vehicle<br />
technologies. The goal is to increase the use <strong>of</strong> less carbon<br />
intensive fuels and to increase the diversification <strong>of</strong> the state’s fuel<br />
market.<br />
SB 118 would establish two programs. One administered by<br />
CARB which would focus on grants and loans that reduce<br />
emissions, and one by the Energy Commission which would<br />
provide grants and loans on the development and deployment <strong>of</strong><br />
alternative fuel vehicles. Both <strong>of</strong> these programs could be an<br />
important funding source for <strong>AC</strong>’s fuel cell and alternative fuel<br />
program.<br />
Prior versions <strong>of</strong> the bill excluded local public agencies from<br />
applying for these funds, raised concerns that mandated programs<br />
would not be eligible, and did not mention hydrogen as an<br />
alternative fuel. All <strong>of</strong> theses issues have been corrected.<br />
AB 193 (Committee<br />
on Budget)<br />
E-09/10/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Transportation Signed Into Law <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
revenues.<br />
Chapter 313, Statutes<br />
<strong>of</strong> 20<strong>07</strong><br />
NOTE: As requested by the Governor, this bill makes the<br />
corrections to the budget trailer bill that redirected spill over funds<br />
to the Transportation Debt Service Fund, which is used to<br />
4
eimburse the general fund for debt service payments on<br />
transportation bonds. The Governor vetoed a portion <strong>of</strong> the fund<br />
transfer due to technical errors in the implementing language. AB<br />
193 restores the veto and corrects the errors.<br />
SB 193 also eliminates duplicative reporting requirements for the<br />
Local Street and Road program in Prop 1B. The implementation<br />
language in SB 88 required cities and counties to follow a more<br />
general reporting requirement as well as a reporting process that<br />
applied only to the local street and road program. SB 193<br />
eliminates the requirement for cities and counties to follow the<br />
general reporting requirements.<br />
AB 196 (Committee<br />
on Budget)<br />
E-09/10/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Transportation bond Signed Into Law <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
funds: cities and<br />
counties.<br />
Chapter 314, Statutes<br />
<strong>of</strong> 20<strong>07</strong><br />
NOTE: This bill cleans-up the implementation language for the<br />
Local Street and Road program in Prop 1B. The budget<br />
appropriated $950 million for this program. AB 196 specifies that<br />
$400 million shall be allocated to counties and $550 million to<br />
cities, which is consistent with the original appropriation request<br />
for this program.<br />
With this appropriation, a total <strong>of</strong> $600 million will remain for<br />
future appropriation to counties and a total <strong>of</strong> $450 million will<br />
remain for future appropriation to cities.<br />
AB 490 (Hancock)<br />
C-09/11/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Local government: Signed Into Law <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Sponsor<br />
public utility districts:<br />
Alameda-Contra Chapter 213, Statutes<br />
Costa Transit <strong>of</strong> 20<strong>07</strong><br />
District: San<br />
Francisco Bay Area<br />
Rapid Transit<br />
District:<br />
compensation <strong>of</strong><br />
directors.<br />
NOTE: As you know, the Governor signed AB 490 into law. The<br />
provisions <strong>of</strong> this bill take affect on January 1, 2008.<br />
As signed into law, AB 490 increased the compensation rate for<br />
<strong>AC</strong> Transit’s board from $500 to $1,000 per month if specified<br />
attendance requirements are met. In addition, the bill allows the<br />
<strong>Board</strong> to adjust the compensation rate for inflation. The bill also<br />
5
allowed BART to make inflationary adjustments, and updated the<br />
compensation rate for Public Utility Districts.<br />
AB 574 (Torrico)<br />
E-09/11/20<strong>07</strong><br />
High-occupancy toll Governor’s Desk <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
(HOT) lanes.<br />
NOTE: As sent to the Governor AB 574 would eliminate the fouryear<br />
sunset date for each <strong>of</strong> authorized high-occupancy toll lane<br />
(HOT) projects in the Counties <strong>of</strong> Alameda, San Diego, and Santa<br />
Clara. The bill also allows each entity authorized to operate the<br />
HOT lanes to bond <strong>of</strong>f <strong>of</strong> the revenue stream.<br />
AB 665 (DeSaulnier)<br />
E-09/12/20<strong>07</strong><br />
So far, signals from the Governor’s <strong>of</strong>fice are positive for a<br />
signing. The Governor’s staff is carefully reviewing each word<br />
and every comma placement to make sure there are no hidden<br />
surprises.<br />
Growth management. Governor’s Desk<br />
<strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
NOTE: This bill requires the Department <strong>of</strong> Housing and<br />
Community Development, to the extent funds are available, to<br />
produce an annual Growth Management Information Report and<br />
requests the University <strong>of</strong> California to produce a study on land<br />
use planning and growth management strategies.<br />
AB 945 (Carter)<br />
E-09/11/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Transportation needs Governor’s Desk <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
assessment.<br />
NOTE: This bill requires the California Transportation<br />
Commission to prepare transportation needs assessment every five<br />
years.<br />
The bill directs the CTC to work with regional transportation<br />
planning agencies, and statewide associations such as the League<br />
<strong>of</strong> Cities, CS<strong>AC</strong>, and the California Transit Association.<br />
AB 1091 (Bass)<br />
E-09/12/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Transit-Oriented Governor’s Desk <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
Development<br />
Implementation<br />
Program.<br />
NOTE: For projects funded by the Transit-Oriented Development<br />
Implementation Program in Prop 1C, this bill expands the radius<br />
between an eligible project and a transit station from one-quarter<br />
mile to one-half mile. The bill also specifies that the distance must<br />
be readily walkable, but the bill does not define the term “readily<br />
walkable.”<br />
6
AB 1492 (Laird)<br />
E-09/28/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Vehicles: transit Governor’s Desk <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Support<br />
buses: right-<strong>of</strong>-way.<br />
NOTE: This bill allows the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit<br />
District (SCMTD) and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation<br />
Authority (VTA) to resume a pilot project that requires motorists<br />
to yield to a transit bus that is equipped with a right-<strong>of</strong>-way yield<br />
sign on the left rear <strong>of</strong> the bus.<br />
AB 1543 (Leno)<br />
E-09/12/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Treasure Island Governor’s Desk <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
Transportation<br />
Management.<br />
NOTE: This bill creates the Treasure Island Transportation<br />
Management Act to develop and fund an innovative and<br />
sustainable transportation plan for Treasure Island and Yerba<br />
Buena Island in San Francisco Bay.<br />
The bill allows the San Francisco <strong>Board</strong> <strong>of</strong> Supervisors to create an<br />
administrative entity that would be in charge <strong>of</strong> administering<br />
congestion pricing fees, on- and <strong>of</strong>f-street parking fees, and a<br />
transit pass fee on residents and other users <strong>of</strong> Treasure Island.<br />
The revenue would be used to fund ferry, bus and other<br />
transportation services on and to the island.<br />
AB 1581 (Fuller)<br />
E-09/06/20<strong>07</strong><br />
AB 1672 (Nunez)<br />
E-09/11/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Traffic-actuated Signed Into Law <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
signals: bicycles:<br />
motorcycles. Chapter 337, Statutes<br />
<strong>of</strong> 20<strong>07</strong><br />
NOTE: This bill requires cities and counties, upon first placement<br />
<strong>of</strong> a traffic-actuated signal or replacement <strong>of</strong> the loop detector <strong>of</strong> a<br />
traffic-actuated signal, to install those signals that detect<br />
motorcycle and bicycle traffic on the roadway.<br />
California Governor’s Desk <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
Transportation<br />
Commission.<br />
NOTE: This bill would require the CTC to consult with the chairs<br />
<strong>of</strong> the appropriate policy and budget committees 60 days prior to<br />
adopting changes to guidelines for the expenditure <strong>of</strong> Proposition<br />
1B funds.<br />
In addition, AB 1672 would increase the voting members on the<br />
7
CTC from 9 to 11 members. One new member would be<br />
appointed by the Senate Rules Committee and one by the Speaker<br />
<strong>of</strong> the Assembly<br />
SB 70 (Florez)<br />
E-09/19/20<strong>07</strong><br />
SB 717 (Perata)<br />
E-09/17/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Biodiesel.<br />
09/19/20<strong>07</strong>-Enrolled. <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Support<br />
To Governor at 11:45<br />
a.m. (09/19/20<strong>07</strong>-S<br />
ENROLLED)<br />
NOTE: This bill authorizes the State <strong>of</strong> California, cities, counties,<br />
mass transit districts, and school districts to use a biodiesel fuel<br />
blend <strong>of</strong> greater than 20 percent biodiesel to operate all their<br />
diesel-powered vehicles if certain conditions are met. In addition,<br />
SB 70 defines and specifies standards for biodiesel, biodiesel<br />
blends, renewable diesel, and renewable diesel blends.<br />
Transportation Governor’s Desk <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Support<br />
Investment Fund.<br />
NOTE: This bill would continue the transfer <strong>of</strong> Prop 42 sales tax<br />
revenue to the Transportation Investment Fund (TIF) beginning in<br />
fiscal year 2008-09 according to the existing 40-40-20 formula.<br />
The bill also alters the division <strong>of</strong> the 20% allocated to the Public<br />
Transportation Account. As amended the transit share would be<br />
split with 75% allocated pursuant to the State Transit Assistance<br />
formula and 25% allocated to transit capital projects programmed<br />
through the STIP.<br />
SB 976 (Torlakson)<br />
E-09/17/20<strong>07</strong><br />
San Francisco Bay Governor’s Desk <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
Area Water<br />
Emergency<br />
Transportation<br />
Authority.<br />
NOTE: This bill would overhaul the authorizing statute for the<br />
Water Transit Authority. In summary, SB 976 makes the<br />
following changes:<br />
♦ Renames the WTA the San Francisco Bay Area Water<br />
Emergency Transportation Authority.<br />
♦ Reduces its board from 11 to 5 members. The Governor<br />
appoints three members, the Speaker one member, and<br />
Senate Rules Committee appoints one member. The board<br />
members must be Bay Area residents<br />
♦ Authorizes the WETA to operate ferry service in the Bay<br />
Area.<br />
8
♦ Consolidates the operation <strong>of</strong> all ferry service, except for<br />
Golden Gate Ferry service, under the control <strong>of</strong> WETA.<br />
♦ Repeals existing law prohibiting the WETA to receive STA<br />
and TDA funds, as well as seek tax revenue.<br />
♦ Makes conforming changes in statute regarding RM 2<br />
funded ferry projects.<br />
9
3<br />
Lynn M. Suter<br />
and Associates<br />
Government Relations<br />
<strong>GM</strong> <strong>07</strong>-<strong>225</strong><br />
October 15, 20<strong>07</strong><br />
TO:<br />
Greg Harper, President, and<br />
Members <strong>of</strong> the <strong>AC</strong> Transit <strong>Board</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Directors</strong><br />
Mary King, Acting D<strong>GM</strong><br />
FR:<br />
RE:<br />
Lynn M. Suter & Associates<br />
Sign/Veto Update<br />
Legislation<br />
October 14 th was the deadline for the Governor to take action on all bills sent to his <strong>of</strong>fice<br />
at the end <strong>of</strong> session. The following is the final status <strong>of</strong> those bills we were tracking. If<br />
a chapter number does not appear, it’s because a number has not been assigned yet.<br />
The score card: For the 20<strong>07</strong> session Governor Schwarzenegger signed 750 bills and<br />
vetoed 214. This veto rate is consistent with past sessions where he has vetoed a little<br />
over 20% <strong>of</strong> all measures that reach his desk. Peter Detwiler with the Senate Local<br />
Government Committee has provided us with some interesting sign/veto factoids:<br />
• Schwarzenegger vetoed more bills in four years (1,019) than Reagan did in eight<br />
years (843).<br />
• Schwarzenegger signed the lowest number <strong>of</strong> bills <strong>of</strong> any recent governor (729 in<br />
2005).<br />
• Schwarzenegger holds the record for the lowest annual average (836 a year over four<br />
years).<br />
• Wilson signed the fewest bills <strong>of</strong> any recent, two-term governor (9,324 over eight<br />
years).<br />
• Deukmejian vetoed the most bills (2,298 over eight years).<br />
• Deukmejian vetoed the most bills in a single year (436 in 1990).<br />
• But the highest percentage <strong>of</strong> bills vetoed came from Davis (24.91% in 2000).<br />
• In his five years, Davis vetoed twice as many bills (1,098) as Brown did in eight years<br />
(528).<br />
• In 1982, Brown vetoed just 30 bills, setting the record for the lowest number <strong>of</strong><br />
vetoes.<br />
• The five years with the highest number <strong>of</strong> chaptered bills were all with Republican<br />
governors (1971, 1984, 1967, 1990, 1988).<br />
• Although political conservatives, Deukmejian and Reagan signed more bills than<br />
Brown, the more activist liberal.<br />
1127-11 th Street, Suite 512 ν Sacramento, CA 95814 ν Telephone 916/442-0412 ν Facsimile 916/444-0383<br />
email: lmsa@lmsa.com
Bill Topic Status Client-Position<br />
AB 57 (Soto) Highways: federal Signed Into Law <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Support<br />
E-09/12/20<strong>07</strong> funds: Safe Routes to<br />
School.<br />
Chapter 484, Statues<br />
<strong>of</strong> 20<strong>07</strong><br />
NOTE: AB 57 repeals the sunset date for the Safe Routes to<br />
School (SRTS) grant program, thereby extending the program<br />
indefinitely. The bill also specifies that any budget appropriation<br />
for this program shall be in addition to any federal funds allocated<br />
for this program.<br />
AB 118 (Nunez)<br />
E-09/27/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Alternative fuels and<br />
vehicle technologies:<br />
funding programs.<br />
Signed Into Law<br />
<strong>AC</strong> Transit-Support<br />
& Seek Amendments<br />
Chapter<br />
NOTE: The bill would enact the California Alternative and<br />
Renewable Fuel, Vehicle Technology, Clean Air, and Carbon<br />
Reduction Act <strong>of</strong> 20<strong>07</strong>. Beginning July 1, 2008, this bill would<br />
increase vehicles registration fees and vessel registration fees, as<br />
well as increase the smog abatement fee.<br />
The purpose <strong>of</strong> this bill is to create a funding source for research,<br />
development, and deployment <strong>of</strong> clean fuels and advanced vehicle<br />
technologies. The goal is to increase the use <strong>of</strong> less carbon<br />
intensive fuels and to increase the diversification <strong>of</strong> the state’s fuel<br />
market.<br />
SB 118 would establish two programs. One administered by<br />
CARB which would focus on grants and loans that reduce<br />
emissions, and one by the Energy Commission which would<br />
provide grants and loans on the development and deployment <strong>of</strong><br />
alternative fuel vehicles. Both <strong>of</strong> these programs could be an<br />
important funding source for <strong>AC</strong>’s fuel cell and alternative fuel<br />
program.<br />
Prior versions <strong>of</strong> the bill excluded local public agencies from<br />
applying for these funds, raised concerns that mandated programs<br />
would not be eligible, and did not mention hydrogen as an<br />
alternative fuel. While we have been told that <strong>AC</strong> should be<br />
eligible to apply for these funds, clean-up legislation may be<br />
necessary to clarify that <strong>AC</strong> Transit’s fuel cell program is an<br />
eligible applicant.<br />
2
AB 193 (Committee<br />
on Budget)<br />
E-09/10/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Transportation Signed Into Law <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
revenues.<br />
Chapter 313, Statutes<br />
<strong>of</strong> 20<strong>07</strong><br />
NOTE: As requested by the Governor, this bill makes the<br />
corrections to the budget trailer bill that redirected spill over funds<br />
to the Transportation Debt Service Fund, which is used to<br />
reimburse the general fund for debt service payments on<br />
transportation bonds. The Governor vetoed a portion <strong>of</strong> the fund<br />
transfer due to technical errors in the implementing language. AB<br />
193 restores the veto and corrects the errors.<br />
SB 193 also eliminates duplicative reporting requirements for the<br />
Local Street and Road program in Prop 1B. The implementation<br />
language in SB 88 required cities and counties to follow a more<br />
general reporting requirement as well as a reporting process that<br />
applied only to the local street and road program. SB 193<br />
eliminates the requirement for cities and counties to follow the<br />
general reporting requirements.<br />
AB 196 (Committee<br />
on Budget)<br />
E-09/10/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Transportation bond Signed Into Law <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
funds: cities and<br />
counties.<br />
Chapter 314, Statutes<br />
<strong>of</strong> 20<strong>07</strong><br />
NOTE: This bill cleans up the implementation language for the<br />
Local Street and Road program in Prop 1B. The budget<br />
appropriated $950 million for this program. AB 196 specifies that<br />
$400 million shall be allocated to counties and $550 million to<br />
cities, which is consistent with the original appropriation request<br />
for this program.<br />
With this appropriation, a total <strong>of</strong> $600 million will remain for<br />
future appropriation to counties and a total <strong>of</strong> $450 million will<br />
remain for future appropriation to cities.<br />
AB 490 (Hancock)<br />
C-09/11/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Local government: Signed Into Law<br />
public utility districts:<br />
Alameda-Contra Chapter 213, Statutes<br />
Costa Transit <strong>of</strong> 20<strong>07</strong><br />
District: San<br />
Francisco Bay Area<br />
Rapid Transit<br />
District:<br />
compensation <strong>of</strong><br />
directors.<br />
<strong>AC</strong> Transit-Sponsor<br />
3
NOTE: As you know, the Governor signed AB 490 into law. The<br />
provisions <strong>of</strong> this bill take affect on January 1, 2008.<br />
As signed into law, AB 490 increased the compensation rate for<br />
<strong>AC</strong> Transit’s board from $500 to $1,000 per month if specified<br />
attendance requirements are met. In addition, the bill allows the<br />
<strong>Board</strong> to adjust the compensation rate for inflation. The bill also<br />
allowed BART to make inflationary adjustments, and updated the<br />
compensation rate for Public Utility Districts.<br />
AB 574 (Torrico)<br />
E-09/11/20<strong>07</strong><br />
High-occupancy toll Signed Into Law <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
(HOT) lanes.<br />
Chapter 498, Statutes<br />
<strong>of</strong> 20<strong>07</strong><br />
NOTE: As sent to the Governor AB 574 would eliminate the fouryear<br />
sunset date for each <strong>of</strong> authorized high-occupancy toll lane<br />
(HOT) projects in the Counties <strong>of</strong> Alameda, San Diego, and Santa<br />
Clara. The bill also allows each entity authorized to operate the<br />
HOT lanes to bond <strong>of</strong>f <strong>of</strong> the revenue stream.<br />
So far, signals from the Governor’s <strong>of</strong>fice are positive for a<br />
signing. The Governor’s staff is carefully reviewing each word<br />
and every comma placement to make sure there are no hidden<br />
surprises.<br />
AB 665 (DeSaulnier)<br />
E-09/12/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Growth management. Vetoed<br />
<strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
NOTE: This bill requires the Department <strong>of</strong> Housing and<br />
Community Development, to the extent funds are available, to<br />
produce an annual Growth Management Information Report and<br />
requests the University <strong>of</strong> California to produce a study on land<br />
use planning and growth management strategies.<br />
In his veto message the Governor stated that, “some <strong>of</strong> the criteria<br />
called for in the report would require data which would be<br />
problematic, if not impossible, to gather. Also, while the bill<br />
provides that the report is only required to the extent funding is<br />
available, the bill requires HCD to make efforts to obtain the<br />
needed funding. This provision would place unnecessary pressure<br />
on HCD's general fund programs.”<br />
4
AB 945 (Carter)<br />
E-09/11/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Transportation needs Vetoed<br />
<strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
assessment.<br />
NOTE: This bill requires the California Transportation<br />
Commission to prepare transportation needs assessment every five<br />
years. The Governor’s veto message stated that in addition to the<br />
STIP and 20 year regional transportation plans, “Californians do<br />
not need another report to tell them that the state's transportation<br />
needs are great.”<br />
The bill directs the CTC to work with regional transportation<br />
planning agencies, and statewide associations such as the League<br />
<strong>of</strong> Cities, CS<strong>AC</strong>, and the California Transit Association.<br />
Unfortunately, the bill was not amended to specifically require<br />
consultation with transportation authorities and congestion<br />
management agencies.<br />
AB 1091 (Bass)<br />
E-09/12/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Transit-Oriented Vetoed<br />
<strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
Development<br />
Implementation<br />
Program.<br />
NOTE: For projects funded by the Transit-Oriented Development<br />
Implementation Program in Prop 1C, this bill expands the radius<br />
between an eligible project and a transit station from one-quarter<br />
mile to one-half mile. The also specifies that the distance must be<br />
readily walkable, but the bill does not define the term “readily<br />
walkable.”<br />
According to the Governor, “This bill could substantially reduce<br />
the effectiveness <strong>of</strong> (the Prop 1C TOD) program by allowing for<br />
developments one-half mile in distance from a transit station. This<br />
half-mile measurement could be taken from the outer edge <strong>of</strong> the<br />
development, and could result in a walking distance substantially<br />
greater than one-half mile, which could discourage many residents<br />
from utilizing public transit. This bill is inconsistent with the<br />
State's goals to reduce vehicle emissions and encourage<br />
alternative methods <strong>of</strong> transportation.”<br />
5
AB 1492 (Laird)<br />
E-09/28/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Vehicles: transit Signed Into Law <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Support<br />
buses: right-<strong>of</strong>-way.<br />
Chapter 451, Statutes<br />
<strong>of</strong> 20<strong>07</strong><br />
NOTE: This bill allows the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit<br />
District (SCMTD) and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation<br />
Authority (VTA) to resume a pilot project that requires motorists<br />
to yield to a transit bus that is equipped with a right-<strong>of</strong>-way yield<br />
sign on the left rear <strong>of</strong> the bus.<br />
AB 1543 (Leno)<br />
E-09/12/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Treasure Island Vetoed<br />
<strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
Transportation<br />
Management.<br />
NOTE: This bill creates the Treasure Island Transportation<br />
Management Act to develop and fund an innovative and<br />
sustainable transportation plan for Treasure Island and Yerba<br />
Buena Island in San Francisco Bay.<br />
The bill allows the San Francisco <strong>Board</strong> <strong>of</strong> Supervisors to create an<br />
administrative entity that would be in charge <strong>of</strong> administering<br />
congestion pricing fees, on- and <strong>of</strong>f-street parking fees, and a<br />
transit pass fee on residents and other users <strong>of</strong> Treasure Island.<br />
The revenue would be used to fund ferry, bus and other<br />
transportation services on and to the island.<br />
The veto message included the following statement, “The bill<br />
provides an exemption to existing law that prohibits local agencies<br />
from imposing new taxes, permit fees, or other charges for the<br />
privilege <strong>of</strong> using its streets and roads. This exemption would<br />
allow the imposition <strong>of</strong> automobile congestion fees, on- and <strong>of</strong>fstreet<br />
parking fees, and transit pass fees on both residents and<br />
other users. While such an exemption may be appropriate for the<br />
islands, any new fees proposed as a result <strong>of</strong> this exemption should<br />
be approved by a vote <strong>of</strong> the people. On numerous bills attempting<br />
to raise fees for local purposes, I have held that such fees should<br />
be approved by a vote <strong>of</strong> the people. This measure does not include<br />
such a provision. For this reason, I am returning this bill without<br />
my signature.”<br />
6
AB 1581 (Fuller)<br />
E-09/06/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Traffic-actuated Signed Into Law <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
signals: bicycles:<br />
motorcycles. Chapter 337, Statutes<br />
<strong>of</strong> 20<strong>07</strong><br />
NOTE: This bill requires cities and counties, upon first placement<br />
<strong>of</strong> a traffic-actuated signal or replacement <strong>of</strong> the loop detector <strong>of</strong> a<br />
traffic-actuated signal, to install those signals that detect<br />
motorcycle and bicycle traffic on the roadway.<br />
AB 1672 (Nunez)<br />
E-09/11/20<strong>07</strong><br />
California Signed Into Law <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
Transportation<br />
Commission. Chapter 717, Statutes<br />
<strong>of</strong> 20<strong>07</strong><br />
NOTE: This bill would require the CTC to consult with the chairs<br />
<strong>of</strong> the appropriate policy and budget committees 60 days prior to<br />
adopting changes to guidelines for the expenditure <strong>of</strong> Proposition<br />
1B funds.<br />
In addition, AB 1672 would increase the voting members on the<br />
CTC from 9 to 11 members. One new member would be<br />
appointed by the Senate Rules Committee and one by the Speaker<br />
<strong>of</strong> the Assembly<br />
SB 70 (Florez)<br />
E-09/19/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Biodiesel. Vetoed <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Support<br />
NOTE: This bill authorizes the State <strong>of</strong> California, cities, counties,<br />
mass transit districts, and school districts to use a biodiesel fuel<br />
blend <strong>of</strong> greater than 20 percent biodiesel to operate all their<br />
diesel-powered vehicles if certain conditions are met. In addition,<br />
SB 70 defines and specifies standards for biodiesel, biodiesel<br />
blends, renewable diesel, and renewable diesel blends.<br />
The Governor’s veto message contained the following statement:<br />
“I support the goal to increase the use <strong>of</strong> biodiesel fuels, but this<br />
bill is a piecemeal approach to transportation fuels standards.<br />
Pursuant to AB 10<strong>07</strong> (Chapter 371, Statutes <strong>of</strong> 2005), the<br />
California Energy Commission, in partnership with the Air<br />
Resources <strong>Board</strong>, will shortly release the State Alternative Fuels<br />
Plan to increase the use <strong>of</strong> alternative transportation fuels in<br />
California. This effort will identify the most effective strategies for<br />
the State to use to increase the level <strong>of</strong> alternative fuel use in the<br />
California market. Until the AB 10<strong>07</strong> report's findings are known<br />
7
and reviewed, I believe it is at best premature to consider this<br />
measure at this time. Finally, this bill only encourages the use <strong>of</strong><br />
biodiesel blend fuels in school and transit buses, excluding<br />
renewable diesel fuels which are potentially higher quality than<br />
biodiesel and which could greatly expand the supply <strong>of</strong> attractive<br />
diesel fuels.”<br />
SB 717 (Perata)<br />
E-09/17/20<strong>07</strong><br />
Transportation Signed Into Law <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Support<br />
Investment Fund.<br />
Chapter<br />
NOTE: This bill would continue the transfer <strong>of</strong> Prop 42 sales tax<br />
revenue to the Transportation Investment Fund (TIF) beginning in<br />
fiscal year 2008-09 according to the existing 40-40-20 formula.<br />
The bill also alters the division <strong>of</strong> the 20% allocated to the Public<br />
Transportation Account. As amended the transit share would be<br />
split with 75% allocated pursuant to the State Transit Assistance<br />
formula and 25% allocated to transit capital projects programmed<br />
through the STIP.<br />
SB 976 (Torlakson)<br />
E-09/17/20<strong>07</strong><br />
San Francisco Bay Signed Into Law <strong>AC</strong> Transit-Watch<br />
Area Water<br />
Emergency<br />
Transportation<br />
Authority.<br />
Chapter<br />
NOTE: This bill would overhaul the authorizing statute for the<br />
Water Transit Authority, and would create the San Francisco Bay<br />
Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority.<br />
The Governor issued the following statement in signing this bill:<br />
“While I support this bill and its goals, many issues remain to be<br />
concluded to their ultimate resolution including implementation,<br />
scope <strong>of</strong> authority, and operations. These issues must be resolved<br />
in an equitable manner for the operators and passengers, both<br />
current and future. The Legislature has committed to providing<br />
that equity and I am signing this bill based on that commitment to<br />
the Bay Area. I urge the Legislature and the new created authority<br />
to work with Bay Area cities, ferry operators, commuters, and all<br />
other interested parties to ensure that equity is provided in the<br />
appropriate manner.”<br />
In summary, SB 976 makes the following changes:<br />
8
♦ Renames the WTA the San Francisco Bay Area Water<br />
Emergency Transportation Authority.<br />
♦ Reduces its board from 11 to 5 members. The Governor<br />
appoints three members, the Speaker one member, and<br />
Senate Rules Committee appoints one member. The board<br />
members must be Bay Area residents<br />
♦ Authorizes the WETA to operate ferry service in the Bay<br />
Area.<br />
♦ Consolidates the operation <strong>of</strong> all ferry service, except for<br />
Golden Gate Ferry service, under the control <strong>of</strong> WETA.<br />
♦ Repeals existing law prohibiting the WETA to receive STA<br />
and TDA funds, as well as seek tax revenue.<br />
♦ Makes conforming changes in statute regarding RM 2<br />
funded ferry projects.<br />
9