HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03241992 - TC.3 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Contra
Costa
FROM: TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE -
DATE: March 16, 1992 ia. s� County
SUBJECT: Report on Transportation-related Legislation
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS ,
1. Adopt the following positions on transportation-related
Measures and advise the County's Legislative delegation of
these positions:
ACA 1 Local Sales Tax Measures WATCH
AB 3093 Congestion Management Programs SUPPORT/AMEND
SB 1141 Bicycle Lane Account Funding OPPOSE/AMEND
SB 1700 Intercity Rail Commission WATCH
2 . Direct the Director of Public Works to work with the Contra
Costa Transportation Authority (Authority) to develop a joint
position on the implementation the Federal Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act . (ISTEA) of 1991.
FISCAL IMPACT
None directly.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
On March 3 , the Board referred ACA 1 to the Transportation
Committee. The Committee reviewed this proposed amendment and
several other bills and recommends that the Board adopt positions
as indicated. The Committee may propose additional positions on
transportation-related bills in the future..
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X. YES SIGNATURE
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNT ADMINISTRATOR X RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
Ap
SIGNATURE(S) : Robert I. Schroder Tom Torlakson
ACTION OF BOARD ON Murch 24, 1992 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED _X OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
XXUNANIMOUS (ABSENT - - - TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Orig: Community Development Department ATTESTED March 24, 1992
cc: Public Works PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
CAO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Smith and Ackler (via CDD) AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
R. McCleary, CCTA (via CDD) BY. .� , DEPUTY
Transportation Related Legislation
March 16, 1992
Page 2
Assembly Constitutional Amendment 1 WATCH
In the recent case of Rider v. San Diego County, the California
Supreme Court ruled that as a result of Proposition 13 , a proposed
countywide sales tax for criminal justice facilities required a 2/3
vote of the electorate. Although the Rider decision did not
invalidate local transportation sales tax measures, it created
ambiguity concerning the validity of Measure C, which was approved
by a majority of the County electorate in November 1988, and has
hampered the efforts of some local authorities to sell bonds backed
by local sales taxes. ACA 1 was prepared in response to that
decision and would affirm the right of the voters to approve local
transaction and use taxes upon approval by a simple majority vote.
However, it is not certain that the voters would approve this
constitutional amendment since it would make it easier to impose
new taxes. The Contra Costa Transportation Authority is exploring
other legislative remedies to address the impact of the Rider
decision. A position by the Board on this issue should be deferred
until these measures are introduced and evaluated.
AB 3093 (KATZ) SUPPORT and AMEND
This bill changes the requirement for preparation of congestion
management programs (CMP) from annual to biennial. This schedule
would be consistent with the schedule for both the regional and
state transportation improvement programs, which include projects
identified in the CMPs. The present requirement for an annual
update of the CMP is considered onerous, expensive and unnecessary
given the biennial nature of other transportation programming
documents. This bill is supported by a statewide task force of CMP
agencies established by Californians for Better Transportation.
An additional concern with current CMP legislation is the
requirement that CMPs are subject to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) , increasing the cost and time required to
complete these programs. Since each individual project proposed in
the CMP capital improvement program is subject to environmental
review, it is recommended that AB 3093 be amended to exempt CMPs
from the requirements of CEQA.
SB 1141 (KILLER) OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED
The Board adopted a position of support of this bill in April 1991.
As written at that time, the bill would have increased the annual
funding for non-motorized transportation in the State Bicycle Lane
Account from $360, 000 to $5, 000, 000, using state gas tax funds. As
presently amended, the bill would increase the allocation of gas
tax revenues to the Bicycle Lane Account to $2,400, 000 annually, by
transferring gas tax funds from cities and counties to the Account.
In return, the cities and counties would have the opportunity to
annually compete for $2 . 4 million in funds for bicycle projects
(less any amount needed by Caltrans to administer the grant
program) .
The Transportation Committee recommends the County oppose this
legislation unless amended. Although the amount of money
transferred from the County's Road Fund to the State Bicycle Lane
Account would be small, the likelihood of receiving funds from this
account is probably smaller. The bill does not identify a new
revenue source for bicycle projects, but uses existing funds from
cities and counties for a few bikeway projects that meet certain
state criteria.
An alternative approach would be to allow local jurisdictions to
use up to 1% of their local. gas tax monies for off-road
bicycle/pedestrian facilities. If the bill is amended to provide
this approach, a support position is recommended.
Transportation Legislation
March 16, 1992
Page 3
SB 1700 (KOPP, KILLEA, et. al. ) WATCH
This bill would create the Intercity Rail Commission, a state
entity to plan and implement intercity rail service. The bill also
encourages private investment in high speed intercity rail,
facilitates the integration of intercity rail with urban and
commuter transit services, and assures that all passenger rail
services are built and operated safely. It is recommended that
this bill be monitored to ensure that it would not adversely affect
local rail planning.
FEDERAL INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT (ISTEA)
In December, 1991, President Bush signed the 6 year federal surface
transportation authorization act commonly known as the ISTEA. This
new act completely overhauls the federal highway and mass transit
programs. The ISTEA requires that each state adopt a biannual
State Transportation Plan, something that California has not done
for over 25 years. It allows a great degree of flexibility in the
use of the funds and for the first time, provides urban areas with
direct grant funds.
Ever since the passage of the ISTEA, the state legislature,
Caltrans, regional transportation planning commissions, county
congestion management agencies, and recently, California State
Association of Counties and the League of Cities have been working
on legislation(s) to implement the ISTEA in California. Since this
new act will be the blueprint for federal transportation program
for the next several decades, it is important that Contra Costa
develop a unified position on the implementation of the Act.
Some of the issues that need to be resolved are listed below:
0 The State Transportation Plan process and its relationship
with local and regional plans.
0 The use of the 2 percent set aside for planning purposes;
would the cost of developing the County Transportation Plan
and the Congestion Management Plan be an eligible use of these
funds?
0 How much money should be set aside to replace the FAU and FAS
program?
0 Should there be a guarantee for rural counties and rural
regions in a suburban county?
0 What will be the process to develop the National Highway
System?
0 How should the bridge replacement funds, the safety funds, and
environmental enhancement funds be allocated?
0 What kind of modification on the county minimum formula will
be necessary to meet federal intent?
0 How will the funds allocated to the region be programmed?
Drafters of the state implementing legislation are moving rapidly.
The Transportation Committee recommends that the Board direct the
County staff to work with the Contra Costa Transportation Authority
to develop a county-wide position on how this legislation should
address Contra Costa's future transportation needs.