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