BILL ANALYSIS
SB 205
Page 1
Date of Hearing: July 8, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Anna Marie Caballero, Chair
SB 205 (Hancock) - As Amended: April 14, 2009
SENATE VOTE : 21-17
SUBJECT : Traffic congestion: motor vehicle registration fees.
SUMMARY : Authorizes a countywide transportation planning agency
to place a local measure on the ballot that would impose a fee
of up to $10 on each registered vehicle in that county.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Authorizes a countywide transportation planning agency to
place a majority vote ballot measure before the voters to
increase the motor vehicle registration fee up to $10.
2)Requires the governing board of the countywide transportation
planning agency to adopt a ballot measure resolution by
majority vote at a noticed public hearing.
3)Provides that the ballot measure resolution shall contain a
finding of fact that the projects and programs to be funded by
the fee increase have a relationship or benefit to the persons
who will be paying the fee.
4)Provides that the projects and programs must be consistent
with a regional transportation plan (RTP).
5)Requires the governing board to adopt an expenditure plan for
allocation of the revenue to transportation-related programs
and projects.
6)Specifies that the transportation-related programs and
projects include, but are not limited to:
a) Providing matching funds for funding made available for
transportation programs and projects from state general
obligation (GO) bonds;
b) Creating or sustaining congestion mitigation programs
and projects; or,
SB 205
Page 2
c) Creating or sustaining pollution mitigation programs and
projects.
7)Defines "congestion mitigation programs and projects" to
include, but not be limited to, programs and projects
identified in an adopted congestion management program or
county transportation plan; projects and programs to manage
congestion, including, for example, a high-occupancy vehicle
or high-occupancy toll lanes; improved transit services
through the use of technology and bicycle and pedestrian
improvements; improved signal coordination, traveler
information systems, highway operational improvements, and
local street and road rehabilitation; and transit service
expansion.
8)Defines "pollution mitigation programs and projects" to
include, but not be limited to, programs and projects carried
out by a congestion management agency (CMA), a regional water
quality control board, an air pollution control district, an
air quality management district, or another public agency that
is carrying out the adopted plan of one of those entities.
9)Defines "countywide transportation planning agency" to mean a
county's CMA or the agency designated to submit the county's
transportation plan.
10)Prohibits no more than 5% of the fees distributed to a
countywide transportation planning agency to be used for
administrative costs associated with programs and projects.
11)Provides that the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) shall
collect the fee, if requested by the countywide transportation
planning agency.
12)Makes other legislative findings and declarations.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires that county CMAs within urbanized areas prepare and
adopt congestion management programs.
2)Establishes a basic vehicle registration fee of $34, plus a
$22 surcharge for additional personnel for the California
Highway Patrol, and authorizes local agencies until January 1,
SB 205
Page 3
2012, to impose separate vehicle registration fee surcharges
in their respective jurisdictions for a variety of special
programs, including one dollar for service authorities for
freeway emergencies, one dollar for deterring and prosecuting
vehicle theft, up to seven dollars for air quality programs,
one dollar for removing abandoned vehicles, and one dollar for
fingerprint identification programs.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)The sponsor, the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency,
states that "to maximize the capacity and improve the
efficiency of the transportation network, local transportation
agencies are relying more on intelligent transportation
systems (ITS). These strategies include signal light
coordination, and monitoring real-time traffic conditions at
intersections and on freeways which allows the agency to
adjust signal times and update travel times on freeway message
signs. While Proposition 1B (the Highway Safety, Traffic
Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006)
dedicated $250 million for technology based on improvements to
local streets and roads and the Corridor Mobility Improvement
Account funds are also being used to implement intelligent
transportation systems, there is no funding source to pay for
the ongoing operations and maintenance of technology-based
improvements."
2)SB 205 provides for a funding mechanism to pay for these types
of improvements, which would be assessed on each registered
vehicle in the county, if voters approve it. The author
believes that motor vehicle registration fees are an
appropriate funding source for transportation system programs
because there is a direct benefit to motorists.
3)In previous legislative sessions there have been a number of
bills with a concept similar to SB 205. AB 444 (Hancock,
2008), which was held in the Senate Revenue & Taxation
Committee, would have allowed vehicle registration fees to be
imposed for congestion management programs in Alameda, Contra
Costa, Marin, Santa Clara, Solano and Santa Cruz Counties. SB
348 (Simitian), Chapter 377, Statutes of 2008, extended from
January 1, 2009 to January 1, 2013, the authority of the City
/County Association of Governments of San Mateo to assess up
to a $4 annual fee on vehicles registered within San Mateo
SB 205
Page 4
County for programs to manage traffic congestion and
stormwater pollution. SB 116 (Simitian, 2006), which died in
the Assembly Appropriations Committee, would have allowed a
county's CMA or board of supervisors to impose, subject to
majority vote approval of county voters, a maximum $25
surcharge on the annual renewal of vehicles registered in
their respective jurisdictions to fund transportation-related
projects and programs, including pollution prevention
programs.
4)TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS : The following technical amendment is
suggested:
Page 3, line 2, after "and" insert:
the projects and programs
5)This bill is double-referred to the Committees on
Transportation, where it passed with a
9-5 vote on June 29, 2009, and to Local Government.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Alameda County Congestion Management Agency [SPONSOR]
Alameda-Contra Costa Transportation District
California Transit Association
Contra Costa Transportation Authority
East Bay Municipal Utilities District
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
Santa Cruz Regional Transportation Commission
TransForm
Transportation Agency for Monterey County
Transportation Authority of Marin
Opposition
AAA of Northern California
Automobile Club of Southern CA
CA State Automobile Association
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
SB 205
Page 5
Analysis Prepared by : Debbie Michel / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958