BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 755|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 755
Author: Ammiano (D)
Amended: 8/28/13 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE : 10-1, 7/2/13
AYES: DeSaulnier, Gaines, Beall, Cannella, Galgiani, Hueso,
Lara, Liu, Pavley, Roth
NOES: Wyland
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 57-10, 5/16/13 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Suicide barriers on bridges
SOURCE : The Bridge Rail Foundation
DIGEST : This bill requires planners in a bridges project
study report include a document demonstrating the consideration
of a suicide barrier.
ANALYSIS : Due to their size, transportation projects often
take many years to complete requiring the state and regional
transportation planning agencies to adopt multi-year funding
plans for projects in their jurisdictions. These agencies
estimate what resources will be available in the coming years,
and then plan projects in a way such that they will have the
funds necessary to complete the work. Regions adopt a plan
called a Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP),
CONTINUED
AB 755
Page
2
which the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) compiles into
a statewide plan called the State Transportation Improvement
Program (STIP). In the same manner, Caltrans develops a plan
for future reconstruction and rehabilitation of the state
highway system called the State Highway Operation and Protection
Program (SHOPP). These multi-year plans enable the state and
regional agencies to most efficiently and effectively utilize
available resources to deliver transportation projects.
Existing law requires state and local transportation planning
agencies to complete a number of assessments and reviews in
order for a transportation project to be included in these
multi-year plans and therefore be eligible for federal or state
funding. For example, projects cannot be included in an RTIP or
STIP without a completed preliminary design document, called a
project study report, which outlines the project's estimated
scope, cost, and timeline.
This bill:
1. Requires a project study report that is prepared for any new
project involving the construction or reconstruction of a
bridge included in a regional transportation improvement
program, interregional transportation improvement program, or
the state highway operation and protection program include a
document demonstrating that a suicide barrier was a feature
considered during the project's planning process.
2. Defines "bridge" to mean a publicly owned bridge on the
national highway system or the federal-aid highway system, or
off system, a publicly owned bridge classified as
non-federal-aid highway system.
3. Provides that a public entity and its employees are not
liable for an injury arising from the design, installation,
or maintenance of a suicide barrier, or lack thereof, on a
bridge.
Background
Bridge suicide barriers . A bridge suicide barrier is a physical
barrier designed to prevent people from attempting suicide by
deliberately jumping from a bridge. Many suicide barriers are
tall, fence-like structures that prevent people from easily
CONTINUED
AB 755
Page
3
jumping. They are, however, often unpopular due to aesthetic
concerns. Suicide nets extending horizontally below the bridge
to prevent suicidal jumps can be a popular, but costly,
alternative because they do not significantly impact the view
from the bridge. San Francisco Bay Area officials are proposing
a suicide net for the Golden Gate Bridge estimated to cost $50
million.
While suicide in any case is tragic, it is not clear whether a
bridge suicide barrier will actually save lives. Studies show
that a well-designed suicide barrier can stop people from
jumping at a particular site, but no study has shown that the
presence of a suicide barrier will actually lower the overall
suicide rate in the surrounding area. One recent study of the
effects of a recently installed bridge suicide barrier showed
that after the installation at the Bloor Street Viaduct in
Toronto, the rate of jumping from other bridges in the area
increased and there was no decrease in the overall jumping rate.
Suicide prevention advocates disagree with these findings and
further argue that it is the transportation officials'
responsibility to ensure that commuters using their highways,
bridges, tunnels, or overpasses are protected from safety
hazards. They further argue that if individuals are killing
themselves using structures for which these transportation
officials are responsible, then the officials need to consider
ways to address the problem.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/29/13)
The Bridge Rail Foundation (source)
American Foundation for Suicide Prevention
California Psychiatric Association
Mental Health America of California
National Alliance on Mental Illness
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/29/13)
California State Association of Counties
League of California Cities
Placer County Board of Supervisors
Rural County Representatives of California
CONTINUED
AB 755
Page
4
Sacramento County
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
restricting easy access to lethal bridge jumps can significantly
reduce the number of bridge suicides. Many people experience
episodes of depression or distress, but people are only acutely
suicidal for short periods. A key to preventing suicide is to
make it difficult for a person to access the most highly lethal
methods during these short periods of suicidal crisis. The
author's office contends that if suicide deterrents are
considered during the development of bridge projects, then
deaths can be avoided, as well as the high costs of adding a
deterrent or barrier after a bridge is constructed.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 57-10, 5/16/13
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Ammiano, Atkins, Bloom, Blumenfield,
Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian
Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chesbro, Cooley, Daly, Dickinson,
Fong, Fox, Frazier, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gordon, Gray,
Hagman, Hall, Roger Hern�ndez, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder,
Lowenthal, Maienschein, Medina, Mitchell, Mullin, Muratsuchi,
Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk,
Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas, Skinner, Ting, Torres, Weber,
Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. P�rez
NOES: Ch�vez, Dahle, Donnelly, Beth Gaines, Gorell, Jones,
Logue, Mansoor, Wagner, Waldron
NO VOTE RECORDED: Allen, Bigelow, Conway, Eggman, Grove,
Harkey, Holden, Melendez, Morrell, Patterson, Stone, Wilk,
Vacancy
JJA:d 8/29/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED