BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 906
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB
906 (Cooper)
As Amended July 16, 2015
Majority vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: | | (June 2, |SENATE: |38-0 | (August 24, |
| |57-17 |2015) | | |2015) |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: L. GOV.
SUMMARY: Deletes the proportionate share payment in existing
law that the City of Elk Grove must fulfill to maintain an
appointment of a director to Sacramento Regional Transit
District's (RT) Board of Directors.
The Senate amendments delete the Assembly version of this bill,
and instead, repeal the proportionate share payment in existing
law that the City of Elk Grove must fulfill to maintain an
appointment of a director to RT's Board of Directors.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Establishes the Sacramento Regional Transit District Act which
AB 906
Page 2
governs the powers and functions of RT, and establishes RT's
territory and board of directors (Board).
2)Authorizes RT to comprise of the Cities of Citrus Heights, Elk
Grove, Davis, Folsom, Rancho Cordova, Roseville, Sacramento,
West Sacramento, and Woodland, and specified territory in
Sacramento and Yolo Counties to the extent they are not
included in the above-mentioned cities.
3)Provides any city or county may annex to and become part of
RT, upon approval by the Board, following a written request by
that city or county and approval of the Sacramento Area
Council of Governments.
4)Authorizes a city or county that is not annexed to RT to
become a participating entity entitled to make at least one
appointment to the Board, if the participating entity enters
into an agreement with RT that provides for all of the
following:
a) The participating entity agrees to pay its proportionate
share of RT's cost to provide rail or other districtwide
transit services;
b) RT agrees to maintain a specified level of rail or other
districtwide transit services; and,
c) RT is not obligated to provide transit services to any
particular location or along any particular route.
5)Requires the City of Elk Grove's proportionate share, for the
purposes of 4) above, to be determined in the manner provided
in First Amendment, Section 4B(2) to Interim Agreement for Elk
Grove Bus Service, dated March 17, 2004, between RT and Elk
Grove.
AB 906
Page 3
6)Provides that a participating entity's seat on the Board shall
terminate upon termination or cancellation of the agreement in
4) above.
7)Establishes a weighted voting procedure for RT's Board.
8)Defines a member entity to mean a city or county that is
annexed to RT pursuant to 2) and 3), above.
9)Defines a participating entity to mean a city or county that
is not annexed to RT, but has entered into a specified
agreement pursuant to 4) above.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY, this bill:
1)Made changes to the proportionate share payment in existing
law that the City of Elk Grove must fulfill to become a
participating entity and maintain a seat on RT's governing
body.
2)Required the proportionate share for the City of Elk Grove to
be deemed fully satisfied through RT's receipt from the
Sacramento Transportation Authority of transaction and use tax
revenues from Measure A, as approved by the voters in November
2004, and effective as of April 2009.
3)Repealed existing law, which requires the City of Elk Grove's
proportionate share to be determined in the manner provided in
First Amendment, Section 4B(2) to Interim Agreement for Elk
Grove Bus Service, dated March 17, 2004, between RT and Elk
Grove.
AB 906
Page 4
4)Provided that no further agreement between the City of Elk
Grove and RT is required.
FISCAL EFFECT: None
COMMENTS:
1)RT. The Legislature authorized the creation of the Sacramento
Regional Transit District in 1971 to operate a comprehensive
public transportation system for the Sacramento region. RT
serves an area encompassing 418 square miles and 1.4 million
people; it operates 67 bus routes and 38.6 miles of light rail
service. RT is governed by an 11-member Board of Directors
comprised of eight directors that are appointed by the annexed
jurisdictions, which are "member entities," including
Sacramento County, and the Cities of Sacramento and Rancho
Cordova. Additionally, three directors are appointed by
non-annexed jurisdictions, which are "participating entities,"
including the Cities of Citrus Heights, Elk Grove, and Folsom.
2)City of Elk Grove. The City of Elk Grove incorporated as a
city in 2001; prior to that time, RT provided transit services
to areas within Sacramento County that were included within
Elk Grove's boundaries. Following incorporation, Elk Grove
opted to not activate membership as an annexed part of RT, and
instead, entered into a service agreement, from 2001 to 2004,
so that RT would continue providing transit services. Upon
further study, Elk Grove decided to operate its own bus
service within the city and to contract with RT for regional
transit services.
RT's enabling act did not allow Elk Grove to have a seat on
the Board, therefore, SB 466 (Steinberg), Chapter 620,
Statutes of 2004, made several changes to RT's governance
AB 906
Page 5
structure. SB 466 enabled Elk Grove to have a seat on the
Board to vote on regional matters and allowed RT to recover
operating costs from providing regional transit services to
Elk Grove. SB 466 required that the City of Elk Grove's
proportionate share be determined by First Amendment, Section
4B (2) to Interim Agreement for Elk Grove Bus Service, dated
March 17, 2004, an agreement that RT and Elk Grove entered
into.
AB 2137 (Niello), Chapter 227, Statutes of 2008, created a
weighted voting system for RT based on membership status and
each voting entity's financial contribution. AB 2137 was
supported by RT, Elk Grove, and several other cities,
including both member and participating entities.
3)Bill Summary. Current law allows a city or county that is not
annexed to RT to have a seat on RT's Board, if they enter into
a specified agreement with RT to pay their proportional share
of RT's costs to provide rail or other districtwide transit
services. Additionally, existing law requires that Elk
Grove's proportionate share is determined in the manner
provided by an Interim Agreement between the City of Elk Grove
and RT. This bill deletes the reference to the interim
agreement, and therefore, subjects the City of Elk Grove to
the provisions under existing law that require a city to enter
into a specified agreement with RT to pay a proportional
share.
This bill is sponsored by the City of Elk Grove.
4)Arguments in Support. Elk Grove argues, "Existing law
requires the City of Elk Grove to pay twice in order to have
one seat on the RT Board by having the City pay a
proportionate share payment determined solely by RT."
5)Arguments in Opposition. None on file.
AB 906
Page 6
Analysis Prepared by:
Misa Lennox / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958 FN:
0001305