BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1194
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 1, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
AB 1194 (Ammiano) - As Amended: April 1, 2013
Policy Committee:
TransportationVote:12-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill expands eligibility under the Safe Routes to School
(SR2S) program and requires a minimum funding level for the
program in the annual budget act. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires the SR2S program be funded with an annual
appropriation of at least $46 million in state and federal
transportation funds.
2)Expands eligible use of state funds under SR2S to include
noninfrastructure-related activities, such as public awareness
efforts and training in bicycle and pedestrian safety, and
requires 20% of total SR2S funding to be used for this
purpose, with at least 20% of this portion to be used for a
statewide technical assistance resource center.
3)Authorizes the Director of the Transportation Agency to
transfer responsibility for awarding grants from Caltrans to
the California Transportation Commission (CTC)
4)Requires Caltrans to employ a full-time SR2S coordinator to
administer the program.
FISCAL EFFECT
This bill establishes cost pressure by setting a minimum annual
allocation of $46 million in state and federal funds for SR2S,
including at least a $9.2 million annual set-aside from these
funds for non-infrastructure grants. Caltrans indicates that
annual administrative costs for the current state and federal
SR2S programs total almost $600,000.
AB 1194
Page 2
COMMENTS
1)Background . The goal of both the federal and state SR2S
programs is to remove barriers that prevent children from
walking or biking to school. The federal program provides
grants for infrastructure and non-infrastructure projects
(such as education and enforcement). The state program
provides grants only for infrastructure projects. In 1999,
California was the first state to enact its own SR2S program,
with dedicated funding from the State Highway Account, on the
premise that encouraging more children to walk and bicycle to
school would result in healthier children, improved air
quality, reduced fuel consumption and greenhouse gas
emissions, and less traffic congestion near schools. The state
SR2S program is to be funded at $46 million in the latest
annual cycle, and funds are distributed on a statewide,
competitive basis. Applications exceed available funds by a
6:1 ratio. Typical projects include installing curbs,
sidewalks, traffic signals, crosswalks, warning signs, and
bike paths.
With enactment of Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st
Century Act (MAP-21) last year, the federal SR2S program was
collapsed along with an array of other existing programs into
a more simplified, substantially consolidated program,
referred to as the federal Transportation Alternatives Program
(TAP). California anticipates receiving $72 million in TAP
funds over the two-year life cycle of MAP-21.
2)Administration's Proposal . In response to the new federal
funding flexibility, the Administration proposes to
consolidate five existing programs into an Active
Transportation Program (ATP) within Caltrans. The intent of
the ATP is to fund projects and programs that encourage
increased use of active modes of transportation, such as
walking and bicycling. The Administration proposes $138
million for the ATP in 2013-14. Under the proposal (contained
in a budget trailer bill), 50% of these funds would be awarded
through a statewide competitive program, 40% would be
allocated by formula to urban areas, and 10% would be
allocated on a competitive basis to small urban and rural
regions. Based on its review of this proposal, the Legislative
Analyst's Office has recommended approval albeit with a few
modifications.
AB 1194
Page 3
3)Purpose . The author introduced AB 1194 in response to concerns
that the Governor's proposal: (a) provides no minimum
guarantee for SR2S funding; (b) would be established after
existing programs are repealed (thereby impeding continuity of
the program); (c) does not provide adequate representation for
non-profit organizations in the ATP guideline development
process; (d) does not provide sufficient transparency with
regard to project awards; and, (e) would not adequately ensure
lower-income communities are appropriately considered in the
program's application process.
At the time of this analysis, the Assembly Budget Subcommittee
on Resources and Transportation had made no decision regarding
the Governor's proposal.
4)Minimum Statutory Funding Guarantee Ill-Advised . While those
with a focused interest on any state program would prefer a
minimum statutory funding guarantee for that program, such an
approach reduces the Legislature's flexibility to react to
changing needs, priorities and resources. Moreover, since
future federal funding levels are never guaranteed,
particularly in the current federal fiscal environment, it
would be imprudent to establish minimum funding requirements
in statute based on past fund levels. Finally, at a time when
the federal government is providing the state with new funding
flexibility, it would be inconsistent for the state to then
earmark a portion of those funds in statute for a specific
program.
The other programmatic issues raised by the author could be
considered within the context of the administration's trailer
bill proposal.
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081