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