BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 652
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 6, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
AB
652 (Cooley) - As Introduced February 24, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Transportation |Vote:|11 - 0 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: NoReimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill:
1)Expands a highway relinquishment authorized last year,
AB 652
Page 2
allowing the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to
relinquish the portion of State Route (SR) 16 east of Watt
Avenue and west of Grant Line Road to Sacramento County.
2)Declares legislative intent that the County notify and consult
with the Amador County Transportation Commission (ACTC), the
Counties of Amador, Calaveras, and Alpine, and the Cities of
Plymouth, Amador City, Sutter Creek, and Jackson and other
relevant parties about the proposed relinquishment.
FISCAL EFFECT:
1)Potentially moderate one-time costs (State Highway Account
[SHA]) depending on the outcome of negotiations between
Caltrans and the County and a determination by Caltrans that
the relinquishment is in the best interest of the state. (See
Comment #1)
2)Moderate long-term maintenance and repair savings to Caltrans,
if the CTC exercises its authority to relinquish the highway
segment.
COMMENTS:
1)Background. Legislation is required before any segment of
state highway can be relinquished to another governmental
entity. Relinquishment provides the recipient agency with
more control over a local transportation project and relieves
Caltrans of further responsibility to improve, maintain, or
repair infrastructure related to the relinquished state
highway segment.
According to Caltrans, in recent years the initial cost of
AB 652
Page 3
relinquishments has ranged from $0 to over $1 million per
centerline mile. These costs are driven by a number of
factors, including roadway condition, projected maintenance
costs and any planned capital projects. The actual cost of a
particular relinquishment is negotiated directly with the
local agency, but must be based on a cost-benefit analysis
using a 10-year analysis period. Prior to this analysis, the
baseline cost is assumed to be $0. All proposed costs beyond
the baseline are subject to review and approval by the
Department's Relinquishment Advisory Committee to ensure
statewide consistency in application of the established
evaluation criteria.
2)Purpose. AB 1957 (Dickinson), Chapter 335, Statutes of 2014,
authorized the CTC to relinquish segments of SR 16 in the City
of Sacramento as well as in the unincorporated portion of
Sacramento County. Earlier versions of AB 1957 included the
segment of SR 16 (east of Watt Avenue to Grant Line Road)
addressed in this bill, however that segment, which is the
subject of this bill, was deleted from AB 1957 to address
concerns, raised by ACTA, that Sacramento County's planned
development of the area, including the planned improvements to
SR 16, will adversely affect drivers traveling to and from
Amador County.
Caltrans indicates it has no plans to improve this segment of
SR 16 in the foreseeable future. Furthermore, the department
contends that, since developments alongside the route will
inevitably increase, it is appropriate to relinquish the route
segment so that the Sacramento County can proactively improve
the roadway in advance of the planned developments. If the
route is not relinquished, Caltrans expects that it would be
difficult and costly to retroactively complete improvements
needed to serve the development.
Analysis Prepared by:Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916)
AB 652
Page 4
319-2081