BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                            



           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                        SB 203|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           
                                           
                                    THIRD READING


          Bill No:  SB 203
          Author:   Pavley (D)
          Amended:  5/14/13
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE  :  11-0, 4/23/13
          AYES:  DeSaulnier, Gaines, Beall, Cannella, Galgiani, Hueso,  
            Lara, Liu, Pavley, Roth, Wyland

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  Senate Rule 28.8


           SUBJECT  :    Local transportation funds in Ventura County

          SOURCE  :     Ventura County Transportation Commission


           DIGEST  :    This bill eliminates a special provision of the  
          Transportation Development Act for Ventura County and instead  
          aligns Ventura County with the way existing law treats all other  
          California counties, and requires the Ventura County  
          Transportation Commission (VCTC), until 2018, report to the  
          Legislature annually on transit services within Ventura County  
          as specified.

           ANALYSIS  :    In 1971, the Legislature enacted the Transportation  
          Development Act (TDA), SB 325 (Mills, Chapter 1400, Statutes of  
          1971) which dedicated a statewide 0.25% sales tax to local  
          transportation in order to ensure "the efficient and orderly  
          movement of people and goods in the urban areas of the state."   
          Although the focus of the law is the provision of transit  
          services in urban areas, it recognizes that rural areas have a  
                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                     SB 203
                                                                     Page  
          2

          different mix of transportation needs.  To this end, TDA  
          required revenues collected in counties with a population  
          greater than 500,000 as of the 1970 census to be used  
          exclusively for public transit purposes.  Alternatively, a  
          community in any county with a population under 500,000 as of  
          1970 could use the revenues for local streets and roads if able  
          to demonstrate through a prescribed process that all transit  
          needs in that community are met. 

          In 2010, TDA generated $1.1 billion for transportation, about 6%  
          of which was used for local street and road purposes in  
          non-urbanized areas. 

          SB 716 (Wolk, Chapter 609, Statutes of 2009) applied alternative  
          restrictions on TDA funds in all counties not considered urban  
          in the original TDA statute but with populations over 500,000 as  
          of the 2000 decennial census and each subsequent decennial  
          census.  Urbanized areas within these counties must now use TDA  
          funds exclusively for public transit, while non-urbanized areas  
          may use TDA funds for either public transit or local roads.  In  
          addition, a city in an urbanized area but not within a transit  
          district that has a population of less than 100,000 may use its  
          funds for either transit or roads.  SB 716 requires affected  
          counties to comply by July 1, 2014.  

          In the case of Ventura County, SB 716 granted a temporary  
          exemption to the new restrictions and required that VCTC prepare  
          a report analyzing options for organizing Ventura's public  
          transit services and then recommend a legislative proposal to  
          implement the plan.  SB 716 required VCTC to submit a report to  
          the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee and the Assembly  
          Transportation Committee by December 31, 2011.  If the  
          Legislature did not enact the recommended proposal during the  
          2011-12 Session, then SB 716 dedicated all TDA funds in Ventura  
          County exclusively to public mass transit purposes.  While VCTC  
          submitted the required report, the Legislature did not enact a  
          solution within the 2011-12 Session.

          This bill:

          1. Eliminates the requirement that all TDA funds in Ventura  
             County be used exclusively for public mass transit purposes,  
             in effect aligning Ventura with the way existing law treats  
             all other California counties.

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                     SB 203
                                                                     Page  
          3


          2. Requires the VCTC, beginning September 1, 2014 and annually  
             for the next four years, report to the Legislature on transit  
             services within Ventura County.  

          3. Requires the report include a description of changes to  
             transit routes, service levels, and ridership numbers for all  
             transit routes within the county, and include annual budget  
             numbers for transit services provided by VCTC, Gold Coast  
             Transit, other multiagency operators, and individual  
             municipal operators.

           Background
           
          When the TDA was enacted in 1971, 10 urban counties in  
          California exceeded the 500,000 population threshold:  Alameda,  
          Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Orange, Sacramento, San Bernardino,  
          San Diego, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara.  Existing  
          law requires these counties to use TDA funds exclusively for  
          public transportation.  California has become substantially more  
          urbanized since 1970, and by the 2000 census, five additional  
          counties exceeded 500,000 in population:  Fresno, Kern, San  
          Joaquin, Riverside, and Ventura.  By 2020, another six or seven  
          counties will exceed 500,000 people according to state  
          estimates.  As stated above, SB 716 updated existing law to  
          apply TDA transit provisions to counties as they become more  
          urban.
            
          Of all the counties affected by SB 716, only Ventura County  
          strongly opposed its provisions.  Ventura faces myriad  
          transportation challenges with both very urban and very rural  
          communities as well as a varied geography.  On one hand, 10  
          different agencies provide public transportation in Ventura  
          County and, based on local funding policies and perceived needs,  
          operators offer different hours and levels of service.  This  
          discontinuity creates challenges for the public trying to  
          navigate the fragmented system.  In addition, some communities  
          in the county prefer to continue to use TDA funds for local  
          streets and roads as was allowed before SB 716 and are resistant  
          to any increased public transportation.  The tension between  
          using TDA funding for transit or roads has created conflict  
          between communities within Ventura County.

          While VCTC has attempted to improve connections and mobility in  

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                     SB 203
                                                                     Page  
          4

          the county, progress toward truly integrated transit service and  
          consensus around the use of TDA funding has been minimal.  In  
          response to Ventura's opposition, SB 716 allowed VCTC to prepare  
          an analysis of organizational options for expending TDA and  
          providing public transit in the county that was submitted to the  
          Legislature in 2012.  In summary, the report recommends:

             That transit services currently being provided by a joint  
             powers agency in western Ventura County, including the cities  
             of Oxnard, Port Hueneme, and Ventura, be recreated as a  
             special transit district.  All TDA funds generated in the  
             district's area of jurisdiction would be committed to public  
             transit.

             That the east county cities, including Simi Valley,  
             Moorpark, and Thousand Oaks, continue to use TDA funds for  
             either transit or streets and roads.  
           
          In March 2013, VCTC further refined its recommendations to,  
          among other things, seek parity with other counties pursuant to  
          SB 716.  While retaining the SB 716 requirement that cities with  
          populations over 100,000 be required to use all TDA funds for  
          transit purposes, this would allow cities in the county under  
          100,000 in population to use TDA funds for local streets and  
          roads as long as transit needs were addressed.  

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  Yes

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  5/13/13)

          Ventura County Transportation Commission (source)
          Cities of Moorpark, Thousand Oaks, and Camarillo


           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    According to the author's office, this  
          bill is necessary to give Ventura County the same local funding  
          flexibility afforded other counties in the state.  Existing law  
          includes a temporary exemption to recent changes to the TDA for  
          Ventura County in order to give the county additional time to  
          address current transportation challenges and develop its  
          Countywide Transit Plan.  VCTC has since adopted the required  
          transit plan; this bill aligns with that plan's recommendations  
          and grants Ventura County parity with the rest of the state.

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                     SB 203
                                                                     Page  
          5



          JA:k  5/13/13   Senate Floor Analyses 

                           SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                   ****  END  ****






































                                                                CONTINUED