BILL ANALYSIS AB 2971 Page 1 ASSEMBLY THIRD READING AB 2971 (DeSaulnier) As Amended May 23, 2008 Majority vote LOCAL GOVERNMENT 5-1 TRANSPORTATION 8-4 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Ayes:|Caballero, De La Torre, |Ayes:|DeSaulnier, Carter, | | |Lieber, Saldana, Evans | |Furutani, Karnette, Nava, | | | | |Portantino, Ruskin, | | | | |Solorio | |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------| |Nays:|Houston |Nays:|Duvall, Garrick, Horton, | | | | |Huff | ----------------------------------------------------------------- APPROPRIATIONS 12-5 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Ayes:|Leno, Caballero, Davis, | | | | |DeSaulnier, Eng, Huffman, | | | | |Berg, Krekorian, Lieu, | | | | |Ma, Nava, Solorio | | | | | | | | |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------| |Nays:|Walters, Emmerson, La | | | | |Malfa, Nakanishi, Sharon | | | | |Runner | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY : Authorizes a local agency to require the payment of a fee as a condition of issuing a building permit for purposes of defraying the actual or estimated cost of constructing transportation facilities, including pedestrian, bicycle, transit and traffic-calming facilities and creates the Fair Share for Safety program. Specifically, this bill : 1)Authorizes a local ordinance to require the payment of a fee as a condition of approval of a final map or as a condition of issuing a building permit for purposes of defraying the actual or estimated costs of constructing other transportation facilities, including pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and traffic-calming facilities. AB 2971 Page 2 2)States that the ordinance may require the payment of the fees if the ordinance refers to the circulation element of the general plan to the provisions in that plan that identify the pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and traffic-calming facilities that are required to minimize the use of automobiles and minimize the traffic impacts of new developments on existing roads. 3)States that the ordinance may require the payment of the fees if the ordinance provides that the payment of fees shall not be required unless the other transportation facilities are in addition to, or a reconstruction of, any existing pedestrian facilities, bicycle facilities, transit facilities, or traffic-calming devices serving the area at the time of the adoption of the boundaries of the area of benefit. 4)Requires that fees collected pursuant to the ordinance for pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and traffic-calming facilities be deposited in a multimodal fund. 5)States that a local agency imposing the fee may advance money from its general fund or road fund to pay the cost of constructing the improvements and may reimburse these funds for any advances from the multimodal fund. 6)States that a local agency imposing the fee may incur an interest-bearing indebtedness for the construction of the transportation facilities and the sole security for repayment shall come from moneys in the multimodal fund. 7)Establishes the Fair Share for Safety program. 8)Requires the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to periodically conduct an annual analysis for fatality rates of all modes of travel. 9)Encourages Caltrans to apportion federal transportation safety funds in a manner that is proportionate to the rate of fatalities for each mode of travel. 10)States that in apportioning funds pursuant to this measure, Caltrans shall, to the extent possible, fund projects that provide safety benefits to both bicycle and pedestrian travel. AB 2971 Page 3 EXISTING LAW : 1)Provides that a local ordinance may require the payment of a fee as a condition of approval of a final map or as a condition of issuing a building permit for purposes of defraying the actual or estimated cost of constructing bridges over waterways, railways, freeways, and canyons, or constructing major thoroughfares. 2)States that the ordinance may require payment of the fees if all of the following requirements are satisfied: a) The ordinance refers to the circulation element of the general plan and, in the case of bridges, to the transportation or flood control provisions thereof which identify railways, freeways, streams, or canyons for which bridge crossings are required on the general plan or local roads and in the case of major thoroughfares, to the provisions of the circulation element which identify those major thoroughfares whose primary purpose is to carry through traffic and provide a network connecting to the state highway system; b) The ordinance provides that there will be a public hearing held by the governing body for each area benefited; c) The ordinance provides that at the public hearing, the boundaries of the area of benefit, the costs, whether actual or estimated, and a fair method of allocation of costs to the area of benefit and fee apportionment are established; d) The ordinance provides that payment of fees shall not be required unless the major thoroughfares are in addition to, or a reconstruction of, any existing major thoroughfares serving the area at the time of the adoption of the boundaries of the area of benefit; e) The ordinance provides that payment of fees shall not be required unless the planned bridge facility is an original bridge serving the area or an addition to any existing bridge facility serving the area at the time of the adoption of the boundaries of the area of benefit. The AB 2971 Page 4 fees shall not be expended to reimburse the cost of existing bridge facility construction; and, f) The ordinance provides that if, within the time when protests may be filed under the provisions of the ordinance, there is a written protest, filed with the clerk of the legislative body, by the owners of more than one-half of the area of the property to be benefited by the improvement, and sufficient protests are not withdrawn so as to reduce the area represented to less than one-half of that to be benefited, then the proposed proceedings shall be abandoned, and the legislative body shall not, for one year from the filing of that written protest, commence or carry on any proceedings for the same improvement or acquisition. 3)States that fees paid pursuant to an ordinance adopted shall be deposited in a planned bridge facility or major thoroughfare fund. 4)Requires a fund to be established for each planned bridge facility project or each planned major thoroughfare project. 5)States that a local agency imposing the fees may advance money from its general fund or road fund to pay the cost of constructing the improvements and may reimburse the general fund or road fund for any advances from planned bridge facility or major thoroughfares funds established to finance the construction of those improvements. 6)States that a local agency imposing the fee may incur an interest-bearing indebtedness for the construction of bridge facilities or major thoroughfares and the sole security for repayment shall come from moneys in planned bridge facility or major thoroughfares funds. FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee: 1)Although Caltrans already collects some fatality data, the analyses required by the bill would likely result in minor additional costs. 2)The allocation of $100 million in federal safety funds could AB 2971 Page 5 be affected, to the extent that the bill results in Caltrans giving greater priority to projects related to bicycle and pedestrian safety. 3)Potential fee-supported increases in local spending on bicycle, transit, and traffic-calming facilities. COMMENTS : According to the sponsor, Contra Costa County (County), the circulation element in its general plan provides for a balanced transportation system that helps to reduce cumulative traffic impacts, harmful air emissions and single-occupant commuting, and encourages use of transit. For some time the County has wanted to update its transportation fees for new development to fund off-site pedestrian, bicycle, transit and traffic calming facilities. However, existing law authorizing local agencies to adopt ordinances to require the payment of fees for transportation facilities is limited to bridges and major thoroughfares. According to the author's office, the public's concern over greenhouse gas emissions and the impact of auto-oriented development on public health has spurred Contra Costa County's efforts to secure additional funding for transportation facilities that can help encourage more walking, bicycling and transit use. In addition, the County's successful efforts to reduce sprawl through infill development has increased the need for traffic calming devices to help minimize the traffic impacts from new development on existing roads. The author believes that revising the Subdivision Map Act to allow fees for these transportation facilities would support the County's public policy goals, consistent with its general plan circulation element. According to the author, "this bill seeks to address the imbalance that exists between the number of pedestrian and bicycle related fatalities and the funding available to address these types of fatalities. The funding directed by this bill will not only improve bicycle and pedestrian safety, but also assist in underwriting projects that reduce greenhouse gas emission through an expanded state non-motorized transportation network that will serve to increase the "walkability" and "bikability" of communities throughout the state." Projects in the Strategic Highway Safety Implementation Plan AB 2971 Page 6 (SHSIP) are supposed to be strategically prioritized - that is, the SHSIP directs priority to funding projects that deliver the greatest safety for the price. Consequently, provisions in this bill intended to direct safety funds proportional to the needs may already be consistent with the existing SHSIP process. Analysis Prepared by : Katie Kolitsos / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958 FN: 0004983