BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1002
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 22, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
Bonnie Lowenthal, Chair
AB 1002 (Bloom) - As Amended: April 16, 2013
SUBJECT : Vehicle registration tax: sustainable communities
strategies
SUMMARY : Increases the tax on vehicle registrations by $6.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Imposes a tax of $6 upon vehicle registration or renewal of
the registration.
2)Restricts the imposition of the fee to those counties that are
within a metropolitan planning organization (MPO) that is
required to prepare a sustainable communities strategy (SCS).
3)Requires the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV),
after deducting all reasonable costs to administer the tax, to
remit all the revenue generated into the Sustainable
Communities Strategy Subaccount to be created in the Motor
Vehicle Account. Funds from the account are to be available
upon appropriation by the Legislature.
4)Establishes an allocation of the revenues in accordance with
the following:
a) 50% appropriated to cities and counties on a per capita
basis for planning and implementation of projects
consistent with the purposes of a SCS and approved
sustainable communities plans, including, but not limited
to, first-mile-last-mile bicycle and pedestrian
infrastructure projects that are intended to improve
transit access in transit priority zones, bicycle and
pedestrian infrastructure as part of complete streets
projects, and road and highway maintenance and repair that
also facilitates transit and bicycle use.
b) 40% appropriated to transportation commissions and
transit operators to support transit operations and
maintain and expand reduced fare programs, including, but
not limited to, transit passes for students, low-income
AB 1002
Page 2
youth, seniors, and persons with disabilities.
c) 10% appropriated to MPOs and regional transportation
planning agencies for competitive grants for implementation
of their SCS, including, but not limited to, competitive
planning and implementation grants to cities and counties
on a per capita basis for planning and implementing livable
communities and transit-oriented development and urban
infill projects, and to complete streets, and bicycle or
pedestrian projects, consistent with an approved
sustainable communities plan.
1)Requires a 2/3rd vote.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires a vehicle registration fee of $46 to be paid for the
registration of every motor vehicle, except those expressly
exempt.
2)Authorizes a variety of additional fees that are to be paid
with the vehicle registration, most particularly to address
certain air quality and law enforcement issues. These fees
support, among other things, service authorities for freeway
emergencies, California Highway Patrol (CHP) staffing, and
fingerprint identification programs.
3)Authorizes local agencies to impose separate vehicle
registration fee surcharges in their respective jurisdictions
for a variety of special programs, including:
a) $1 for deterring and prosecuting vehicle theft;
b) $1 for service authorities for freeway emergencies;
c) Up to $7 for air quality programs;
d) Up to $4 for stormwater and congestion management relief
purposes for San Mateo County;
e) Up to $6 for the Sacramento Air Quality Management
District;
f) Up to $30 to fund programs to reduce vehicle emissions
in San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Kings,
AB 1002
Page 3
and Tulare Counties and the valley portions of Kern County;
g) Up to $1 for the South Coast Air Quality Management
District;
h) A fee of $4 for public transit in the City and County of
San Francisco;
i) $1 for removing abandoned vehicles; and,
j) $1 for fingerprint identification programs.
1)Until January 1, 2016, imposes a $3 increase, $2 of which is
to be deposited into the Alternative and Renewable Fuel and
Vehicle Technology Fund and $1 of which is to be deposited
into the Enhanced Fleet Modernization Subaccount.
2)Requires MPOs to adopt regional transportation plans directed
at achieving a coordinated and balanced regional
transportation system, including, but not limited to, mass
transportation, highway, railroad, maritime, bicycle,
pedestrian, goods movement, and aviation facilities and
services.
3)Requires each MPO to include within its regional
transportation plan an SCS, designed to achieve specified
targets for greenhouse gas emission reduction. If the SCS
does not achieve the reduction target, the MPO must prepare an
alternative planning strategy.
4)Distinguishes a fee from a tax in that a fee pays for a
specific service or project and cannot exceed the reasonable
costs of providing the service or projects that it funds.
Unlike a tax, which benefits the general public, the payer of
the fee is the beneficiary.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown.
COMMENTS : Existing law establishes a basic vehicle registration
fee of $46, plus an additional $23 fee for additional personnel
for the CHP, for the new or renewal registration of most
vehicles or trailer coaches. Existing law also authorizes local
agencies to impose separate vehicle registration fees in their
respective jurisdictions for a variety of special programs, such
AB 1002
Page 4
as abating abandoned vehicles and deterring, investigating, and
prosecuting vehicle theft.
This bill would impose an additional $6 vehicle registration tax
for local and regional agency implementation of SB 375
(Steinberg) Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008. According to the
author, "to successfully implement SB 375 and its required
regional transportation plans to address greenhouse gases,
regional and local governments need resources for strategic
planning and opportunities for coordination with the efforts of
the Governor's Strategic Growth Council and other state agencies
as required by the enactment of SB 732 (Steinberg) Chapter 729,
Statutes of 2008. This bill would provide for greater
collaboration between state and local planning bodies to support
plans and projects which implement regional blueprints and
sustainable communities strategies."
Revenue generated by the added tax would complement other
potential sources of regional, subregional, or local funding for
environmental sustainability planning. For example, Proposition
84, as approved by the statewide voters in 2006, provided bond
revenues for projects relating to safe drinking water, water
quality and supply, flood control, waterway and natural resource
protection, water pollution and contamination control, state and
local park improvements, public access to natural resources, and
water conservation efforts. Among its funded programs, it
provided $580 million for sustainable communities and climate
change reduction efforts. Further, current federal
transportation funding allows for the funding to MPOs to conduct
livability and environmental sustainability planning. Federal
and state transportation funds are also used to build
multimodal, sustainable projects ranging from bus and rail
passenger transit, bicycle and pedestrian projects, and safe
routes to school program activities.
There are a number of other bills being considered this year
that would either raise or continue the vehicle registration
tax: AB 8 (Perea and Skinner) - would extend the tax for an
additional eight years for air quality mitigation programs; AB
767 (Levine) - would authorize every county to increase the tax
for county vehicle theft crime prevention programs; AB 1324
(Skinner) - would authorize Alameda County to increase the tax
for county vehicle theft crime prevention programs; and SB 11
(Pavley) - similar to AB 8 as previous mentioned. Additionally,
AB 431 (Mullin) would authorize a transportation planning agency
AB 1002
Page 5
that is designated as an MPO to impose a local or regional sales
tax increase of not more than 0.5% for similar purposes as AB
1002. These bills, at some point in the legislative process,
should be considered on a broader, overarching level and
reconciled as appropriate.
Writing in opposition to this bill, the Automobile Club of
Southern California believes that the bill would fund activities
that would otherwise be prohibited by the California
Constitution. They contend that the new tax imposed by the bill
is redundant to other charges motorists already pay for
emissions, greenhouse gases and other related environmental
programs. They further indicate that the current charges total
approximately $30 in Los Angeles and approximately $40 in the
Bay Area and San Joaquin Valley and that "motorists already pay
well over half a billion dollars a year in environmental
mitigation just through annual registration fees."
The California New Car Dealers Association, also opposed to the
bill, indicates that the bill should be amended to require that
the taxes be put to the voters for their approval. They further
contend that vehicle owners should not be exclusively targeted
with a tax that benefits "another subgroup of the population" in
reference to bicyclists and pedestrians.
Previous legislation : AB 406 (DeSaulnier) of 2009, would have
authorized an additional fee of either $1 or $2 on vehicle
registration to be used for planning purposes related to SB 375.
In his veto message, Governor Schwarzenegger indicated that the
fee increase should be subject to voter approval.
Related legislation : AB 574 (Lowenthal) would require the
California Air Resources Board, in consultation with the
California Transportation Commission and the Strategic Growth
Council, to establish standards for the use of cap-and-trade
auction revenues for SB 375 projects. That bill is being heard
in this committee today.
AB 1051 (Bocanegra) would create the Sustainable Communities for
All Program to fund, via cap-and-trade auction revenues, the
equitable implementation of SB 375. That bill passed the
Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee and will be
heard in this committee next week.
Double referred : This bill is also referred to the Assembly
AB 1002
Page 6
Local Government Committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Move LA (sponsor)
American Lung Association in California
California Bicycle Coalition
FAST (Fixing Angelenos Stuck in Traffic)
LA Walks
Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition
Natural Resources Defense Council
Safe Routes to School National Partnership
Sierra Club
Sustainable Transportation Solutions for California's Inland
Empire
The Transit Coalition
TransForm
Opposition
Association of California Car Clubs
Automobile Club of Southern California
California New Car Dealers Association (oppose unless amended)
California Vintage Rods
CalTax
Capitol Auto Club "Thunderbolts"
Capital City Cruisers
Capital City Mopars
Cappuccino Cruisers Classic Car Club
El Dorado Early Ford V8 Car Club
Hot Rodders of San Diego
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
Huntington Beachcruisers
Mojave Desert Classics
Northern California GTO Club
Northern California Kit Car Club
Over the Hill Gang
Pickups Ltd
Rods and Relics of Lincoln Hills
San Jose Classic Chevy Club
Woodland Street Cruisers
AB 1002
Page 7
Analysis Prepared by : Ed Imai / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093