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