HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04222014 - C.48RECOMMENDATION(S):
I: RECEIVE report from the Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee and ADOPT the following
legislative positions:
STATE LEGISLATION
A: "SUPPORT" on:
1: Assembly Bill 1811 (Buchanan) High-Occupancy Vehicle Lanes, a bill that would ensure that
high-occupancy vehicles would continue to have access to high-occupancy vehicle lanes, on specified
highway corridors, at all times.
2: Assembly Bill 2398 (Levine) Vehicles: Pedestrians and Bicyclists, a bill that would provide for
increased penalties for drivers who violate rules of the road, including violations involving pedestrians
and bicyclists.
3: Assembly Bill 1532 (Gatto) Vehicle Accidents: a bill that would increase penalties for drivers that
leave the scene of an accident.
B: "SUPPORT and REQUEST AMENDMENT" on:
1: Senate Bill 1151 (Cannella) Vehicles: School Zone Fines , a bill that would increase fines for specific
vehicle code violations if the violation occurred in the vicinity (as defined and posted) of a school
building/grounds and an amendment that would expand the size of the zone in statute.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/22/2014 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: John Cunningham, (925)
674-7833
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 22, 2014
David Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C. 48
To:Board of Supervisors
From:TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE
Date:April 22, 2014
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee Report and Recommendations on Transportation Legislation and
School Siting Reform
RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D)
C: "WATCH" on:
1: Assembly Bill 1724 (Frazier) Construction Manager/General Contractor method: regional
transportation agencies: A bill that would extend authorization for the "Construction
Manager/General Contractor" project delivery method to regional transportation agencies.
2: Assembly Bill 2235 (Buchanan) Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of
2014: This bill authorizes state general obligation bonds (amount TBD) to provide funds defined
educational entities to construct and modernize education facilities.
FEDERAL LEGISLATION
D: "SUPPORT" on:
1: House of Representatives 3494: (Blumenauer [OR])The Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Act: To
amend title 23, United States Code, with respect to the establishment of performance measures for the
highway safety improvement program, and for other purposes.
2: Senate 1708: (Merkley [OR]) The Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Act: To amend title 23, United
States Code, with respect to the establishment of performance measures for the highway safety
improvement program, and for other purposes.
E: AUTHORIZE the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to sign letters communicating the positions on each
bill above to their respective sponsors.
II: AUTHORIZE the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to sign letters regarding state school siting reform to the
California School Board Association and Assembly Member Joan Buchanan.
FISCAL IMPACT:
AB 1811 has not yet been reviewed by a fiscal committee.
AB 2398 has not yet been reviewed by a fiscal committee.
SB 1151 has not yet been reviewed by a fiscal committee.
AB 1532 has not yet been reviewed by a fiscal committee but is acknowledged to expand the scope of an existing
crime and would thus impose a state-mandated local program. The bill provides that no reimbursement is
required.
S. 1708/H.R. 3494 have not yet been reviewed by a fiscal committee.
As the legislative session proceeds, staff will report back on fiscal impacts as information becomes available.
BACKGROUND:
The Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure (TWI) Committee discussed the recommendations and issues in this
report and approved recommending it be forwarded to the full Board of Supervisors:
I: LEGISLATIVE POSITIONS - The complete text of state bills discussed below are included in Attachment
#5.
State: Legislation
A: "SUPPORT" on:
Assembly Bill 1811 (Buchanan) High-Occupancy Vehicle Lanes: Recommendation: Support. This
bill would ensure that high-occupancy vehicles would have access to high-occupancy vehicle lanes,
on specified highway corridors, at all times. The bill allows regional agencies (Metropolitan
Transportation Commission[MTC]/Bay Area Toll Authority[BATA]) to require the use of electronic
transponders (FasTrak) for single occupant vehicles. Current interpretation of the law would not
allow this. Expanding the use of transponders to single occupant vehicles is necessary for
MTC/BATA to continue to improve the efficiency of the Bay Area's high occupancy vehicle and high
occupancy toll lane program using rapidly improving technology. (Letter Attachment #1)
Assembly Bill 2398 (Levine) Vehicles: Pedestrians and Bicyclists: Recommendation: Support. This
bill would provide for increased penalties for drivers who violate rules of the road, including
violations involving pedestrians and bicyclists. The bill and recommended positions is consistent with
(1)(2)
the County's 2014 State Legislative Platform (1)(2) and supportive of a number of measures in the
draft School Siting and Safety Initiative (Attachment #11) which have been discussed at the TWI
Committee. (Letter Attachment #2)
Assembly Bill 1532 (Gatto) Vehicle Accidents: Recommendation: Support. This bill would increase
penalties for drivers that leave the scene of an accident. The bill and recommended positions is
consistent with the County's 2014 State Legislative Platform (1)(2) and supportive of a number of
measures in the draft School Siting and Safety Initiative (Attachment #11) which have been discussed
at the TWI Committee. (Letter Attachment #3)
B: "SUPPORT and REQUEST AMENDMENT" on:
Senate Bill 1151 (Cannella) Vehicles: School Zone Fines: Recommendation: Support and request
amendment. This bill would increase fines for specific vehicle code violations if the violation
occurred in the vicinity (as defined and posted) of a school building/grounds. The analogy used in the
Legislative Counsel’s Digest to describe this bill is the use of double fine zones (DFZ) for
construction. The comment being that, similar to how construction zones can be designated as a DFZ,
under this bill school zones would effectively have access to a similar designation.
The requested amendment addresses the fact that in the current vehicle code, the ability to define the
school zone (and thus the proposed DFZ) is limited to 500' and 1000'. These limits are not reflective
and/or supportive of actual pedestrian/bicycle access patterns at K-12 schools and inconsistent with
Safe Routes to School (SR2S) policies and practices which typically fund pedestrian and bicycle
facilities further out than 500' - 1000'. The requested amendment is that 1) the prescriptive figures in
the current code should be increased to 1320’ [1/4 mile] and 2) local agencies should be given the
discretion to further expand the zone based on local knowledge of attendance boundaries, travel
patterns, etc as established in a traffic study.
The bill and recommended positions is consistent with the County's 2014 State Legislative Platform
(1)(2) and supportive of a number of measures in the County's Draft School Siting and Safety
Initiative (Attachment #11) which have been discussed at the TWI Committee. (Letter Attachment #4)
C: "WATCH" on:
Assembly Bill 1724 (Frazier) Construction Manager/General Contractor method: Regional
transportation agencies: Recommendation: Watch: This bill that would extend authorization for the
"Construction Manager/General Contractor" project delivery method, also referred to as
"solicitation/bid evaluation and contract award" to regional transportation agencies. In Contra Costa
County the designated regional transportation agency is the Contra Costa Transportation Authority
(CCTA). Any benefit from expedited project delivery would benefit the County in that CCTA
delivers project on behalf of member agencies (which includes the County). The recommendation is
"watch" as the bill is still evolving.
Assembly Bill 2235 (Buchanan) Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of
2014: Recommendation: Watch: This bill authorizes state general obligation bonds (amount TBD) to
provide funds to defined educational entities to construct and modernize education facilities. Current
bond funding for school construction and modernization is nearly exhausted. This bond is necessary
to provide for continued construction and modernization of school facilities. The TWI Committee
recommendation is "watch" as it is this bill that could be a vehicle for school siting and design reform
which is a goal of the County (see additional information on school siting and recommended letters
below.
Positions on aforementioned legislation from other organizations (where available)
FEDERAL
D: "SUPPORT" on:
HR 3494 and S 1708: The Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Act: Recommendation: Support.
These bills and recommended positions/actions above were discussed at the Transportation, Water
and Infrastructure Committee in February. The two bills are identical and have bipartisan support. S.
1708 has 13 co-sponsors including Senator Diane Feinstein. H.R. 3494 has 73 co-sponsors including
Bay Area Representatives Jared Huffman (CA2), Zoe Lofgren (CA19), Mike Honda (CA17), Jackie
Speir (CA14), Barbara Lee (CA13), and John Garamendi (CA3).
Advocates and sponsors of the bills point out that:
1) while overall roadway deaths have a recent decreasing trend, bicyclists and pedestrians have seen
increases in deaths (9% and 3% respectively) in the same time frame,
2) bicyclists and pedestrians comprise 16% percent of roadway fatalities and less than 1% of safety
funding is directed to infrastructure that would protect these groups, and
3) bicycle commuters have increased 60% in the last 10 years.
The Unites States Department of Transportation (DOT) sets safety performance measures for
reducing fatalities/serious injuries. The sponsors goal with these bills are to compel the DOT to set a
national performance goal to reduce bicyclist/pedestrian fatalities (without directing state and local
agencies as to how/when to achieve the goals). The bill does not establish any requirement to address
any identified safety issue but is rather to establish that safety issues with all modes, motorized and
nonmotorized, are treated equitably in data collection.
(Letter Attachment #9)
The text of the bills and an advocacy group summary sheet are attached (Attachment #8).
OTHER FEDERAL:
Communication Regarding Highway Trust Fund Insolvency
The TWI Committee heard a request from MTC to sign a letter to the California Federal Delegation that
addresses the projected July 2014 depletion of the Highway Trust Fund (HTF). HTF programs include
highway construction, mass transit and other related activities. Declining revenues are largely due to
inflationary erosion and a side effect of fuel efficiency improvements. The letter is attached and was
distributed to the Bay Area legislative delegation. (Letter Attachment #10)
Bill ABAG BAAQMD CCTA CSAC LofC MTC Other -
Support
Other -
Oppose
Assembly Bill 1532: (Gatto)
Vehicle Accidents
Watch
Assembly Bill 2235
(Buchanan)
Kindergarten-University Public
Education Facilities Bond Act
of 2014
Watch
Assembly Bill 2398 (Levine)
Vehicles: Pedestrians and
Bicyclists
Watch
Assembly Bill 1811
(Buchanan) High-Occupancy
Vehicle Lanes
Watch Support
II: School Siting/Safety: The County has been working for several years to address issues related to school siting
with the state. Staff have developed a draft white paper on this issue (Attached #11) which has been reviewed by
the TWI Committee and is recommended for distribution with comment letters to provide context and promote
discussions on the issue. These efforts are consistent with the County's adopted 2014 Legislative Program (1)(2).
Attached to this report are two recommended letters which raise this issue with our delegation and the California
School Board Association. The State has communicated its intent to address the school siting issue this year. The
most likely mechanism to address the issue, as acknowledged by the State, is Assembly Member Joan Buchanan's
bill (AB2235) that establishes new bond authorization for school construction and modernization. The existing
authority is nearly exhausted.
The following two letters are recommended to communicate the Board's position on this issue:
Letter to Assembly Member Joan Buchanan (16th District): The recommended letter acknowledges AM
Buchanan's bill, the Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2014 (AB2235) and
communicates the Board's hope that school siting issues can be addressed by the legislation. Recognizing that 1)
existing school construction/modernization bonding authority is nearly expired and 2) the need to reconcile the
conflict between school siting practices and adopted state and local policies (safe routes to school, "Health in All
Policies", greenhouse gas reduction) both the California Department of Education and the Senate Select
Committee on Education have suggested that this bill will be the best vehicle for implementing school siting and
design reforms. (Letter Attachment #6)
Letter to the California School Boards Association on School Siting: As discussed at the TWI Committee, the
County's primary goal is to achieve improvements in school siting and design practices. However, the Committee
recognized that achieving these goals through the legislative process is not assured and directed staff to investigate
liability with current school siting practices and recommended action to ensure 1) the County's liability was
limited, consistent with our lack of authority on the issue, and 2) the most responsible parties were alerted to our
concerns. The attached letter is recommended by the TWI Committee following these investigations and found
that both the County and the State have limited exposure as it relates to the practice of siting and design of
schools. The letter communicates to the California School Boards Association the County's, 1) concerns with
school siting, 2) our understanding of responsible agencies, and 3) hope that the CSBA will be supportive of
school siting reform during this legislative session. (Letter Attachment #7)
(1) Contra Costa County 2014 State Legislative Platform: 141: SUPPORT efforts to improve safety throughout
the transportation system. The County supports new and expanded projects and programs to improve safety for
bicyclists, pedestrians and wheelchair users, as well as projects to improve safety on high-accident transportation
facilities such as Vasco Road. Data on transportation safety would be improved by including global positioning
system (GPS) location data for every reported accident to assist in safety analysis and planning. The County also
supports the expansion of school safety improvement programs such as crossing guards, revised school zone
references in the vehicle code, Safe Routes to Schools (SR2S) grants, efforts to improve the safety, expansion and
security of freight transportation system including public and private maritime ports, airports, rail yards, railroad
lines, rail bridges and sidings. The County also supports limits or elimination of public liability for installing
traffic-calming devices on residential neighborhood streets.
(2) Contra Costa County 2014 State Legislative Platform: 144: SUPPORT efforts to coordinate development of
state-funded or regulated facilities such as courts, schools, jails, roads and state offices with local planning. The
County supports preserving the authority of Public Works over County roads by way of ensuring the Board of
Supervisors’ control over County roads as established in the Streets & Highways Code (Ch2 §940) is not
undermined. This includes strongly opposing any action by a non-local entity that would ultimately dilute current
Board of Supervisors discretion relative to road design and land use.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
By not taking the recommended actions the County will forgo an opportunity to further its legislative platform.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
The following outcome areas in the Childrens Report Card; #14: Children are Healthy and Ready for School,
Physical Fitness and #24: Families and Communities are Safe: Injury Hospitalization are directly or indirectly
addressed by the following bills:
Senate Bill 1151 (Cannella) Vehicles: School Zone Fines and Assembly Bill 2398 (Levine) Vehicles: Pedestrians
and Bicyclists.
ATTACHMENTS
(1) Letter: BOS to AM Buchanan reAB1811 HOV Access
(2) Letter - BOS to AM Marc Levine re AB2398 Vehicles-Peds & Cyclists
(3) Letter - BOS to AM Gatto Re AB1532 Vehicles-Hit & Run
(4) Letter - BOS to Senator Anthony Cannella Re SB1151 SchoolZoneFines
(5) Text: State Legislation: AB1532, AB1811, AB2235, AB2398, SB1151, AB1724, AB2235
(6) Letter: BOS to AM Buchanan re-SchoolSiting & AB2235
(7) Letter - BOS to CSBA Re SchoolSiting & AB2235
(8) Text: Federal Legislation - H.R.3494, S.1708 AND Bicycle/Pedestrian Safety-Info Sheet
(9) Letter: BOS to Federal Delegation Re: S1708/HR3494 Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Act
(10) Letter: MTC to Bay Area Delegation Re: Highway Trust Fund Insolvency
(11) DRAFT California School Siting and Safety Initiative – Contra Costa County (rev: 4/7/14)
The Board of Supervisors
County Administration Building
651 Pine Street, Room 106
Martinez, California 94553
John Gioia, 1st District
Candace Andersen, 2nd District
Mary N. Piepho, 3rd District
Karen Mitchoff, 4th District
Federal D. Glover, 5th District
April 22, 2014
The Honorable Dianne Feinstein
United States Senate
331 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
The Honorable Barbara Boxer
United States Senate
112 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
The Honorable Mike Thompson
U.S. House of Representatives
231 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
The Honorable Gerald McNerney
U.S. House of Representatives
1210 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
The Honorable George Miller
U.S. House of Representatives
2205 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
The Honorable Eric Swalwell
U.S. House of Representatives
501 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
RE: Support for Senate Bill 1708 and House Resolution 3494:
The Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Act
Dear Senators Boxer and Feinstein and Representatives Garamendi, McNerney, Miller,
Swalwell, and Thompson:
We write to you in support of two recently introduced bills, Senate Bill 1708 and House
Resolution 3494, both The Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Act. We understand that either bill
would add the statement “for both motorized and nonmotorized transportation” to the
Performance Measures for Highway Safety Improvement Program, in Section 150(c) (4)(B) of
title 23, of the United States Code.
Nationwide, we have seen a trend of overall roadway deaths declining while pedestrian and
bicyclist deaths have risen in the same time period. In addition, while pedestrian and bicyclist
fatalities make up 15% of total roadway fatalities, less than 1% of safety funding is directed to
infrastructure that would address these problems.
We support this effort to establish accounting consistency between automobile related deaths and
injuries, and those injuries and deaths involving pedestrians and bicyclists. We also appreciate
that the legislation preserves flexibility to determine the best method to address safety issues for
both the United States Department of Transportation and state and local agencies.
David Twa
Clerk of the Board
and
County Administrator
(925) 335-1900
Contra
Costa
County
Letter to Congress
April 22, 2014
Page 2 of 2
G:\TRANSPORTATION\CUNNINGHAM\MEMO-LETTER\LETTER\2014\APR22NDLEGISLATION\HR3494-S1708-BOSLTRTOCONGR 4-22-14.DOCX
Thank you for your consideration on this matter. We ask that you to help move them forward as
appropriate in order that we may continue to progress towards a safer, more complete
transportation system. Please contact John Kopchik, Deputy Director with our Conservation and
Development Department, at (925) 674-7819 or john.kopchik@dcd.cccounty.us if you have any
questions or need any follow-up regarding this request.
Sincerely,
KAREN MITCHOFF
Chair, Board of Supervisors
cc: Board of Supervisors
David Twa, County Administrator
Paul Schlesinger, Alcalde & Fay
AUTHENTlCATE. c?T':: U.S, GOVHN,\.1i;t<T
INFORMATION '"
GPO
113TH COKGRESS
1ST SESSION S.l708
II
To amend title 23, United States Code, with respcet to the establishment
of performance measures for the highvvay safety improvement prOf:,l'l·am,
and for other purposes.
IN THE SENA'l'E OF THE UNITED S'l'ATES
)/OVEMBER 14, 201 i)
Mr. MERIG,EY (for himself, Ms. AYOT'rJC, and Mr. SCHATZ) introdueed the fol-
]ovving bill; which \vas read twice and referred to the Committee on Com-
merce, Scienee, and Transportation
A BILL
To amend title 23, United States Code, with respect to
the establishment of performance measures for the high-
way safety improvement program, and for other pur-
poses.
1 Be ·it enacted by the Senate and Honse of Representa-
2 t·ives of the United States of America ·in Congr·ess assembled,
2
1 SECTION l. ESTABLISHMENT OF PERFORMANCE MEAS·
2 URES FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT
3 PROGRAM.
4 Section 150(c)(4)(B) of title 23, United States Code,
5 1s amended by inserting "for both motorized and non-
6 motorized transportation" before the period at the end.
0
•S 1708 IS
AUTHfNTICATE[)!}
V.S GOV"RNMENT
INFORMATION
GPO
113TH CONGHESS
1ST SESSION H.R.3494
I
To amend title 23, United States Code, with respeet to the establishment
of performance measures for the highway safety improvement program,
and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTA'l'IVES
NOVEMBER 14, 2013
Mr. BLUMENAUER (for himself, Mr. CoBJ,E, Mr. McCAUl,, andlVIr. DEFAZIO)
introduced the follovving bill; which \Vas referred to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure
A BILL
'ro amend title 23, United States Code, with respect to
the establishment of performance measures for the high-
way safety improvement program, and for other pur-
poses.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2
1 SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF PERFORMANCE MEAS-
2 URES FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT
3 PROGRAM.
4 Section 150(c)(4)(B) of title 23, United States Code,
5 IS amended by inserting "for both motorized and non-
6 motorized transportation" before the period at the end.
0
•HR 3494 IH
Learn more at www.bikeLeague.org
Toward Zero deaThs: Fixing a saFeT y BlindspoT
will you supporT a naTional
goal To reduce Bicycle and
pedesTrian TraFFic deaThs?
Fatalities Vs. saFety spending
source For roadway Fatalities: Fars data 2008-2011 source For Hsip spent on b/p: FMis data 2008-2011
percent cHange in Fatalities 2010-2011
tHe probleM
The number of people killed on our nation’s roads
has fallen dramatically in recent years –37,423 in
2008 to 32,367 in 2011. But this movement Toward
Zero Deaths has a significant blindspot: The number
of bicyclist and pedestrian deaths is on the rise.
Pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities have increased from
12% of all roadway deaths in 2008 to almost 16% in 2011.
Even as the number of fatalities has increased, the
attention to bicycle and pedestrian safety has not. Less
than 0.5% of federal Highway Safety Funds are spent
improving bicyclist and pedestrian safety. Currently,
there is no incentive or guidance given to states to reduce
the annual toll of 5,000 pedestrian and cyclist deaths.
tHe solution
MAP-21, the new transportation law, provides a
solution. The U.S. Department of Transportation must
set safety performance measures for reducing fatalities
and serious injuries. We believe the U.S. Department
of Transportation should set a national performance
goal to reduce bicyclist and pedestrian fatalities. These
performance measures will allow maximum flexibility
to state and local governments to achieve those goals.
supporT hr 3494 and s 1708!
click here To Take acTion!
Tell your legislaTors To
voTe For The Bicycle and
pedesTrian saFeT y acT
Learn more at WWW.BIKELEAGUE.ORG
TOWARD ZERO DEATHS – FIXING A SAFETY BLINDSPOT
WILL YOU SUPPORT A NATIONAL
PERFORMANCE MEASURE
TO REDUCE BICYCLIST AND
PEDESTRIAN DEATHS?
FATALITIES VS. SAFETY SPENDING
SOURCE FOR ROADWAY FATALITIES: FARS DATA 2008-2011 SOURCE FOR HSIP SPENT ON B/P: FMIS DATA 2008-2011
PERCENT CHANGE IN FATALITIES 2010-2011
0%
2008 2009 2010 2011
3%
6%
9%
12%
15%
-6%
-2 %
2%
6%
10%
15.6%14%13%12%
Share of roadway fatalities that
are bicyclists and pedestrians
.37%.63%.14%.35%MotorcyclistsPedestriansBicyclistsLight TrucksCarsShare of HSIP spent on Bicycle
and Pedestrian Safety
-4.1%-5.2%
8.7%
3%2.1%
0%
2008 2009 2010 2011
3%
6%
9%
12%
15%
-6%
-2%
2%
6%
10%
15.6%14%13%12%
Share of roadway fatalities that
are bicyclists and pedestrians
.37%.63%.14%.35%MotorcyclistsPedestriansBicyclistsLight TrucksCarsShare of HSIP spent on Bicycle
and Pedestrian Safety
-4.1%-5.2%
8.7%
3%2.1%
THE PROBLEM
The number of people killed on our nation’s roads
has fallen dramatically in recent years –37,423 in
2008 to 32,367 in 2011. But this movement Toward
Zero Deaths has a significant blindspot: The number
of bicyclist and pedestrian deaths is on the rise.
Pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities have increased from
12% of all roadway deaths in 2008 to almost 16% in 2011.
Even as the number of fatalities has increased, the
attention to bicycle and pedestrian safety has not. Less
than 0.5% of federal Highway Safety Funds are spent
improving bicyclist and pedestrian safety. Currently,
there is no incentive or guidance given to states to reduce
the annual toll of 5,000 pedestrian and cyclist deaths.
THE SOLUTION
MAP-21, the new transportation law, provides a
solution. The U.S. Department of Transportation must
set safety performance measures for reducing fatalities
and serious injuries. We believe the U.S. Department
of Transportation should set a national performance
goal to reduce bicyclist and pedestrian fatalities. These
performance measures will allow maximum flexibility
to state and local governments to achieve those goals.
“There is now growing evidence
to suggest that cities with
higher bicycling rates also have
better road safety records.”
— Wesley E. Marshall, Department of Civil Engineering
at University of Colorado-Denver, and Norman
W. Garrick, Department of Civil & Environmental
Engineering at the University of Connecticut.
March 10, 2014
The Honorable Anna G. Eshoo
U.S. House of Representatives
241 Cannon House Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20515-0001
RE:Protecting the Highway Trust Fund from Insolvency
Dear Congresswoman Eshoo:
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the undersigned S.F. Bay
Area transportation partners request your help in enacting a solution to maintain the
long-term financial viability of the Highway Trust Fund (HTF). This is an urgent
matter that must be addressed within the next five months; the HTF may be in deficit
as soon as August 2014 according to U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary
Anthony R. Foxx.
In the absence of new funds, reimbursements will have to be rationed, putting a strain
on the construction industry which is already struggling in California due to the
winding down of bond funding. The most critical deadline will arrive on October 1,
2014, by which point MAP 21 expires and the HTF will need at least $19 billion just to
maintain current highway and transit spending according to the Congressional Budget
Office.
Transportation has traditionally relied upon federal excise taxes on gasoline and diesel
fuels as the primary funding mechanism for the Highway Trust Fund. Yet the current
18.4 cent per gallon gasoline excise tax has not been raised since 1993 and has lost
almost 40 percent of its purchasing power over that period. At the same time, the
number of miles driven per person each year is actually falling and many consumers
are choosing more fuel-efficient vehicles. These are positive trends but taken in
combination with a steadily eroding gas tax, they have driven the HTF to the brink of
insolvency.
We encourage you to send the attached letter to the House Ways and Means Chairman
David Camp urging him to begin the process of enacting a fix to the HTF problem as
soon as possible.Our preferred solution is to raise and index the federal excise tax on
motor fuels, along with other existing user fees. Barring that approach, all revenue
ideas should be considered.We pledge to collaborate and support your efforts and
those of your colleagues this election year.
Sincerely,
Attachment
Art Dao
Executive Director, Alameda County Transportation Commission
Osby Davis
Board Chair, Solano Transportation Authority
Steve Heminger
Executive Director, MTC
Mark Hughes
Chair, SolTrans
Randell Iwasaki
Executive Director, Contra Costa Transportation Authority
Ash Kalra, Chairperson
Board of Directors
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
Joel Keller
BART Board President
Jeanne Krieg
Chief Executive Ocer, Tri Delta Transit
Karen Mitcho
Chair, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Rick Ramacier
General Manager, County Connection
Nina Rannells
Executive Director, Water Emergency Transportation Authority
Dianne Steinhauser
Executive Director, Transportation Authority of Marin
Edward D. Reiskin
Director of Transportation, SFMTA
Sandy L. Wong
Executive Director, City/County Association of
Governments of San Mateo County
Jim Wunderman,
President and CEO, Bay Area Council
Jessica Zenk
Senior Director, Silicon Valley Leadership Group
March __, 2014
Chairman Dave Camp
House Ways and Means Committee
1102 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-6348
Dear Chairman Camp,
As you know, the Highway Trust Fund (HTF), our country’s primary source of federal surface
transportation funding, is expected to encounter a revenue shortfall beginning this August and
become bankrupt by the beginning of fiscal year 2015. The federal government’s investment in
surface transportation is critical to our economy. Not only does this investment support direct
jobs in the transportation industry, even more importantly, it lays the foundation for economic
growth, much of which depends on having a robust transportation infrastructure that enables the
efficient movement of people and goods across the nation.
Based on the latest financial examination of the HTF by the Congressional Budget Office, the
account will need an additional $19 billion in FY 2015 in order to maintain current federal
highway and transit funding levels. Cuts to these programs are completely untenable given the
multi-billion needs of our nation’s roadways, bridges and transit systems just to bring them into a
state-of-good repair.
We strongly recommend that the House Ways and Means Committee recognize the urgency of
this situation and report legislation that will stabilize the long-term financial condition of the
HTF before August 2014. Without Congressional action, 1.7 million jobs will be lost with an
estimated 163,000 jobs in California alone. As the Ways and Means Committee wrestles with
how to address the long-term solvency of the HTF, all revenue options should be considered,
including the federal excise taxes on motor fuels as proposed in H.R. 3636 (Blumenauer), a
fiscally responsible approach that avoids deficit spending and has served the nation well for the
last 82 years.
Sincerely,
The undersigned members of the San Francisco Bay Area Congressional Delegation
DRAFT California School Siting and Safety Initiative – Contra Costa County (rev: 4/7/14)
Schools have a large and enduring effect on the character and safety of the surrounding community due to the intensity of
activity at the site and the vulnerable nature of the population served. Currently, the process by which schools are located and
designed can result in adverse safety, community development, and public health outcomes. Related to this issue is the well-
known, often cited decline in K-12 walk/bike to school rates. The State has acknowledged some of these issues in recent
studies1 and intends on addressing them in 20142. Interested agencies and organizations will need to engage in the 2014
legislative and policy development process in order to ensure reforms are adequate. This paper provides an overview of the
issue, identifies existing processes, and potential reforms.
The current process of selecting and developing new school sites in California has substantial flaws. This flawed
process can result in poorly functioning school sites, some of which have been acknowledged by the state in recent
reports1. Examples of poor school site function are:
Inadequate or ill-conceived transportation infrastructure3 which causes avoidable congestion and/or chaotic circulation
patterns both of which ultimately result in unsafe conditions.
School locations that have limited or no access to critical municipal services (e.g., fire, sewer, water) and/or are too distant
from the population served to support walking & biking4.
School locations that undermine local/state policies such as sites that are outside urban limit line/urban growth boundary,
in agricultural areas, preclude access by walking and cycling, undermine AB32/SB375 goals, etc.
The safety and access issues mentioned above drain very limited Safe Routes to School (SR2S) funds, and
Certain sites are contentious and strain relations between City Councils, Boards of Supervisors, and School Boards.
The current process has local school districts largely responsible for school siting and design. Unfortunately, school
districts have limited policies, authority, and expertise that would ensure that school sites have positive outcomes
related to safe access and broader community development goals. It is the cities/counties, and the State that carry
out these duties. In more detail:
Although the state has substantial statutes and polices5 in place that should inform school siting and design school districts
are not currently compelled to comply those policies in their school siting and design decisions.
By statute, cities and counties have land use planning authority. Currently, cities & counties cannot influence the selection
and development of school sites as state law allows school districts to exempt themselves from this local authority6.
Local school districts develop and design school sites independent6 of the aforementioned state and local land
development policies. This disconnect is acknowledged by the state in their recent studies1.
This disconnect can be addressed through regulations tied to a state school construction and modernization bond
anticipated in 2014. This approach has been suggested by the State during their December 2012 Policy Symposium7
and in the Governors 2013‐14 Budget Proposal2. The following are draft concepts to be considered in addressing
school siting and design requirements attached to the proposed 2014 bond or with legislation developed in parallel:
Limit the ability of school districts to preempt local zoning ordinances6. This would bring schools under the influence of
SB375 given that the cities and counties ultimately implement the sustainable communities strategy. (next page)
1 2012 ‐ California’s K‐12 Educational Infrastructure Investments: Leveraging the State’s Role for Quality School Facilities in Sustainable
Communities, Report to the CA Dept of Education by UC Berkeley Center for Cities & Schools, and 2011 ‐ Schools of the Future Report, Tom
Torlakson/State Superintendent of Public Instruction
2 Governor’s 13‐14 Budget Report, “…now is an appropriate time to engage in a dialogue on the future of school facilities…”/“School districts and
their respective localities should have appropriate control of the school facilities construction process and priorities.”
3 Bicycle/pedestrian infrastructure is inadequate or not present, school sites in a cul‐de‐sac or with single points of access, safe roadway crossings
are not considered, and no necessary improvements being funded or constructed by the schools.
4 “…studies show that the distance between home and school is the strongest predictor of whether students walk/bike to school.” Institute of
Transportation Engineers, 2012 “School Site Selection and Off‐site Access”
5 AB32/SB375, The Complete Streets Act, Safe Routes to School concepts, and the Health in All Policies Initiative
6 Government Code §53091(a)‐53097.5: This section allows school district preemption from local zoning ordinances.
7 Partnering with K‐12 in Building Healthy, Sustainable, and Competitive Regions: Policy Symposium: Proceedings Summary & Next Steps: “These
efforts will inform the legislative debates over the possibility—and priorities—of a future statewide K‐12 school construction bond.”
Contact: John Cunningham, Principal Planner | Contra Costa County‐Dept. of Conservation and Development|john.cunningham@dcd.cccounty.us
Whether new school siting policies are advisory or prescriptive is critical. Considering that there are existing advisory
documents that should result in high quality school sites it suggests that new policies will need to be compulsory in order to be
effective. Revised language could be implemented with revisions to the California Code of Regulations, Title 5.
Coordination of attendance boundaries between school districts, cities/counties should be compulsory.
Statutes for Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCOs) provide a role for LAFCOs in school site development8
and could be expanded. At a minimum, 1) school districts should be required to consult with LAFCO when a new school
site is being proposed, and 2) LAFCO should discourage the extension of municipal services to school sites located in
agricultural and open space areas pursuant to LAFCO law. More prescriptive restrictions related to the extension of
municipal services should be considered in areas with an adopted Urban Limit Line or Urban Growth Boundary.
Legislation should require revised School Site Selection and Approval Guide and Guide to School Site Analysis and Development.
Critical revisions should be moved from guidance to statutes. [revisions are too voluminous to list in this paper]
School districts, when approving a new site must 1) make findings, w/evidence, that the decision is consistent with
relevant requirements in statute, 2) provide a full-cost accounting (construction, land, off-site infrastructure
[utility/transportation] of facility development, costs borne by other agencies, community, etc.), of site options, and 3) the
approval must include a comprehensive (auto & active modes) circulation plan signed and stamped by a traffic engineer.
The State acknowledges a greater share of funds should be directed to modernization programs than to new construction7.
Any 2014 school construction and modernization bond should be linked to a comprehensive, systematic effort to
reverse the well-known decline in K-12 walking/bike rates which would include the following:
Redefinition of School Zone in state law: Currently, in the vehicle code, school zone signage is limited to 500’ and
1000’. These limits are not reflective of actual pedestrian/bicycle access patterns at K-12 schools and inconsistent with
SR2S funding/projects/concepts and the State’s Health in All Policies Initiative. The prescriptive figures should be
increased (1320’ minimum) and local agencies should have discretion to further expand the zone based on knowledge of
attendance boundaries, travel sheds, as established in a traffic study.
Reauthorize and fund implementation of Double Fine School Zone (DFSZ) statute: In 2002 AB 1886 was
passed which implemented a DFSZ as a pilot in specified areas9. The statute was allowed to sunset in 2007.
Implement a Vulnerable Road User (VRU) Protection Law: VRU protection laws establish the concept “whoever
can do the most damage has an obligation to be the most careful”. Oregon has such a statute and the League of
American Bicyclists has drafted model legislation10.
Implement K-12 bicycle and pedestrian transportation safety curriculum: Class material would meet
Common Core Standards and include in-class and in-field lessons with a dual benefit of decreased injuries/deaths and
increased walking/biking. California already has numerous communities implementing this and would be a natural
leader to implement a statewide effort. Bike/ped safety awareness with driver training should also be included.
SR2S11 Funding Eligibility: SR2S projects/programs at existing schools should be an eligible use of bond funds.
The State and Caltrans to conduct a study on auto speeds: In an effort to understand the decline in K-12
walk/bike rates, this study would 1) document the change in automobile speeds over the past four decades due to
improvements in vehicle technology, and 2) document how that change in speed has impacted other road users.
The concepts in this paper are for discussion purposes; they do not necessarily reflect adopted policy positions.
8 LAFCO mandate: 1) encourage orderly formation of local governmental agencies, 2) preserve agricultural land, 3) discourage urban sprawl.
9 The post‐mortem report to the legislature on the program (by CHP) did not endorse it and gave a negative review of the program. The lack of
success was likely related to the fact that little to no resources were devoted to implementation.
10 801.608 “Vulnerable user of a public way”: http://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/lawsstatutes/2011ors801.html
http://www.bikeleague.org/sites/bikeleague.org/files/bikeleague/bikeleague.org/action/images/vru_story.pdf
11 Safe Routes to School (SR2S) is typically a program that has a goal of making it safe and convenient children (K‐12) to bicycle and walk to school.
Strategies typically fall in to the “Five E’s”; evaluation, education, encouragement, engineering and enforcement and can include capital projects
(sidewalks/paths), bicycle safety/rules of the road training, increased police presence, crossing guards, etc.