BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 1957 Page 1 ASSEMBLY THIRD READING AB 1957 (Dickinson) As Amended March 6, 2014 Majority vote TRANSPORTATION 15-0 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Ayes:|Lowenthal, Linder, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bigelow, | | |Achadjian, Ammiano, | |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian | | |Bloom, Bonta, Buchanan, | |Calderon, Campos, | | |Daly, Frazier, Gatto, | |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez, | | |Holden, Nazarian, | |Holden, Jones, Linder, | | |Patterson, Quirk-Silva, | |Pan, Quirk, | | |Waldron | |Ridley-Thomas, Wagner, | | | | |Weber | |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------| | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY : Authorizes the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to relinquish portions of State Route (SR) 16 to the City and County of Sacramento. Specifically this bill: 1)Relinquishes the portion SR 16 located within the city limits of Sacramento to the City of Sacramento. 2)Relinquishes the portion of SR 16 east of the City of Sacramento boundary and west of Watt Avenue to the County of Sacramento. EXISTING LAW : 1)Statutorily identifies state highway system routes. 2)Defines a "state highway" as any roadway that is acquired, laid out, constructed, improved, or maintained as a state highway pursuant to constitutional or legislative authorization. 3)Specifies that it is the intent of the Legislature that the prescribed routes of the state highway system connect the communities and regions of the state and that they serve the state's economy by connecting centers of commerce, industry, agriculture, mineral wealth, and recreation. AB 1957 Page 2 4)Provides for the expansion or deletion of the state highway system through a process whereby CTC makes a finding that it is in the best interest of the state to include or delete a specified portion of roadway to the system. 5)Provides for the relinquishment of a portion of the state highway to a city or county under an agreement between the local jurisdiction and the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) when an act of the Legislature has deleted the portion of highway from the state highway system. FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee: 1)Potentially moderate one-time costs (State Highway Account) depending on the outcome of negotiations between Caltrans and the city and county and a determination by Caltrans that the relinquishment is in the best interest of the state. 2)Moderate long-term maintenance and repair savings to Caltrans, if the CTC exercises its authority to relinquish the highway segment. COMMENTS : Each session, numerous bills authorizing CTC to relinquish segments of the state highway system to local jurisdictions are passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor. Relinquishment transactions are generally preceded by a negotiation of terms and conditions between the local jurisdiction and Caltrans. Once an agreement has been established, CTC typically approves the relinquishment and verifies its approval via a resolution. The final step is for the Legislature to delete these segments from current law. State highway relinquishments provide recipient agencies with greater control over a local transportation segment and relieve Caltrans of any further responsibility to improve, maintain, or repair it. The City and County of Sacramento are seeking relinquishment of portions of SR 16. The portion SR 16 within the City of Sacramento city limits would be relinquished to the City of Sacramento and the remainder (east of the City of Sacramento boundary and west of Watt Avenue) would be relinquished to the County of Sacramento. These entities believe that controlling AB 1957 Page 3 these segments will allow them to make improvements that better accommodate future development plans in the area. Analysis Prepared by : Victoria Alvarez / TRANS. / (916) 319- 2093 FN: 0003743