BILL ANALYSIS
SB 205
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 19, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Kevin De Leon, Chair
SB 205 (Hancock) - As Amended: July 13, 2009
Policy Committee: Local
GovernmentVote:5-2
Transportation 9-5
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill allows county transportation planning agencies to
place a majority vote measure on the ballot to impose an annual
local vehicle registration fee of up to $10 for transportation
related purposes. Specifically, the bill:
1)Requires that the ballot measure resolution adopted by an
agency include a finding 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, and that the projects
are consistent with the applicable regional transportation
plan.
2)Requires the governing board of the agency to adopt an
expenditure plan allocating the revenue from the registration
fee to transportation-related programs that provide matching
funds for projects supported by state general obligation
bonds, or for programs that create or sustain congestion
mitigation and pollution mitigation programs.
3)Requires the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), if requested
by a countywide transportation planning agency, to collect the
voter-approved registration fee upon the registration or
renewal of registration of a motor vehicle registered in the
county, except those vehicles that are expressly exempted from
the payment of registration fees.
4)Requires the countywide transportation planning agency to pay
for the initial setup and programming costs identified by DMV
through a direct contract with the department.
SB 205
Page 2
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Startup costs to DMV would be paid through a contract with the
authorizing agency and ongoing collection related costs would
be reimbursed from the fees collected.
2)Local revenue impact would depend on the number of counties
that adopt the fee. As an illustration, if all counties
adopted a $10 fee, total local revenues would be about $314
million annually.
COMMENTS
1)Background . Existing law establishes a basic statewide vehicle
registration of $34, plus a $22 surcharge that supports the
California Highway Patrol. It also authorizes local agencies
to impose separate vehicle registration fee surcharges within
their jurisdictions for a variety of special programs,
including: one dollar for service authorities for freeway
emergencies; up to seven dollars for air quality programs; one
dollar for removing abandoned vehicles; and one dollar for
fingerprint identification programs.
Existing law also distinguishes a fee from a tax. A fee pays
for a specific service or project and cannot exceed the
reasonable costs of providing the service or projects that it
funds. In order for a levy to qualify as a fee rather than a
tax, there also must be a nexus between the fee and the
services it finances - that is, those paying the fee must
benefit from the services or facilities financed by the fee.
Fees can be approved by an agency's governing board, though
authorizing legislation often requires approval by a majority
of the voters in the local jurisdiction. General purpose taxes
require approval of a majority of voters in the local
jurisdiction, but taxes designated for specific purposes, such
as transportation, require approval of two-thirds of the local
electorate. This bill requires the local transportation
planning agency to make a finding that there will be nexus
between the surcharge and services received by the payers,
thereby enabling it to be approved by a majority of voters.
2)Rationale . This bill is sponsored by the Alameda County
Congestion Management Agency, which asserts that while
SB 205
Page 3
Proposition 1A and 1B provided a significant increase in
transportation spending, there remains a lack of local funding
options to pay for the ongoing operations and maintenance of
technology based improvements. The measure would also enhance
funding available for the local match requirement in the two
bond measures.
3)Prior legislation . A number of similar measures have been
introduced in recent years. 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 County for
programs to manage traffic congestion and stormwater
pollution. SB 116 (Simitian, 2006), which died in this
committee, would have allowed a county 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)Related legislation . SB 406 (DeSaulnier), also in this
committee, authorizes the imposition of a $1 or $2 fee on
vehicle registrations to pay for regional land use planning
activities.
Analysis Prepared by : Brad Williams / APPR. / (916) 319-2081