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