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