BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2170
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 4, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
Jim Frazier, Chair
AB 2170
(Frazier) - As Amended March 15, 2016
SUBJECT: Trade Corridors Improvement Fund: federal funds
SUMMARY: Requires federal freight revenues revenues apportioned
to California from the Fixing America's Surface Transportation
(FAST) Act be deposited into the Trade Corridor Improvement Fund
(TCIF) and apportioned to state, regional, and local
transportation entities by the California Transportation
Commission (Commission) in accordance with federal requirements
and TCIF program guidelines. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires that federal FAST Act freight funding be deposited
into the TCIF and allocated in accordance with TCIF program
guidelines as well as FAST Act requirements.
2)Updates the list of plans guiding TCIF investments by deleting
references to the outdated port master plan developed by the
California Marine and Intermodal Transportation System
Advisory (CALMITSAC) and the California Air Resources Board's
(ARB's) Sustainable Freight Strategy that will be superseded
by the California Sustainable Freight Action Plan later this
year.
AB 2170
Page 2
3)Makes related, clarifying amendments.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Established the TCIF, following the passage of the Highway
Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond
Act of 2006 (Proposition 1B) on November 7, 2006, for the
distribution of $2 billion of Proposition 1B bond funds by the
Commission in accordance with established criteria for
infrastructure improvements along federally designated "Trade
Corridors of National Significance" or along other corridors
with high volumes of freight movement.
2)Continued the existence of the TCIF, pursuant to SB 1228
(Hueso), Chapter 787, Statutes of 2014, and allowed TCIF to
receive funding from sources other than Proposition 1B.
3)Encouraged states, pursuant to the federal transportation
authorization of 2012 (Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st
Century or MAP-21), to prepare state freight plans, in
accordance with federal guidelines.
4)Provides, pursuant to the federal FAST Act, that approximately
$100-150 million annually be directed to states with state
freight plans in place to be used for projects identified
those plans.
5)Requires the California Transportation Agency, pursuant to AB
14 (Lowenthal), Chapter 223, Statutes of 2013, develop a state
freight plan (California Freight Mobility Plan or CFMP) in
accordance with MAP-21 guidelines and establish an advisory
committee made up of federal, state, local, and regional
representatives as well as private sector and specified
AB 2170
Page 3
interest groups, to guide CFMP development.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS: California's goods movement system is the bedrock of
our economy, providing hundreds of thousands of jobs across the
state and the nation. California's land, air, and sea ports of
entry serve as key commercial gateways for the movement of more
than $500 billion worth of products year. Despite the economic
benefits that goods movement represents, the industry also
places a heavy burden on the state in terms of the increased
demand on transportation infrastructure and increased
environmental impacts.
Although infrastructure needs have been well documented over the
last several decades, our state's investment in goods movement
has not kept pace with the demands of modern, trade-driven
supply chains. Growing volumes of freight that move along our
roads, rails, and waterways are increasingly choked by a lack of
adequate capacity. Simultaneously, communities alongside these
corridors choke on the resultant emissions. Without
improvements to key freight transportation corridors, our
ability to compete in the global marketplace will be hampered.
In order to remain at the highest competitive level in vying for
goods from other nations, our goods movement infrastructure must
remain competitive, particularly if the state wishes to attract
and sustain the trade business that will allow us to grow and
prosper.
The TCIF program was created after voters approved Proposition
1B in 2006 which authorized the sale of general obligation bonds
to fund transportation projects across the state to relieve
AB 2170
Page 4
congestion, improve goods movement flow, enhance the safety and
security of the transportation system, and improve the state's
air quality. Of the $19.9 billion approved by voters, $2
billion of bond proceeds were placed into the then-newly created
TCIF program to fund transportation corridor improvements. The
TCIF program, administered by the Commission in accordance with
the TCIF guidelines, was designated to fund projects identified
in specified transportation infrastructure planning documents.
The TCIF guidelines ensured that funds were equitably
distributed across the state, that the highest statewide
priority projects were funded, and that funds were leveraged to
ensure that the greatest number of projects were completed. The
Commission also successfully ensured that these projects were
completed on schedule and within budget.
Not only did TCIF achieve the goal of getting regions around the
state to work together to complete priority projects, it also
created jobs, reduced congestion, improved the state's air
quality, and helped the state achieve its emissions reduction
goals. Additionally, by requiring that projects receive
matching funds, the TCIF successfully leveraged the program's $2
billion in bond funds to complete $7.2 billion in projects. To
date, all of the Proposition 1B funds have been allocated and
projects utilizing TCIF monies are all nearly completed.
While the TCIF program was created to distribute Proposition 1B
funds specifically, in 2014,
SB 1228 continued the existence of the TCIF and allowed it to
receive funding from sources other than the general obligation
bonds originally authorized under Proposition 1B. In accordance
with SB 1228, revenues appropriated by the Legislature, such as
cap and trade revenues, can be transferred into the TCIF and
allocated by the Commission for specified projects in accordance
with TCIF.
In recent years, the federal government has placed a greater
emphasis on planning for and funding goods movement projects.
For example, MAP-21 specifically directed the states to create
AB 2170
Page 5
state freight plans in order to be able to be eligible for
future freight funding. In response, the Legislature passed AB
14 (Lowenthal), Chapter 233, Statutes of 2013, which directed
the development of a state freight plan in accordance with
MAP-21 requirements, no later than December, 2014. AB 14 also
directed that a freight advisory committee be developed from a
broad cross section of state, regional, local, business, and
community interests involved in freight and goods movement and
that their input be solicited in the development of the state
freight plan. CFMP addressed the state's strategic goals for
freight transportation and identified a total of $138 billion
worth of freight system projects across the state with a total
of 94 projects, totaling nearly $31 billion, identified as Tier
1 projects.
On December 4, 2015, the FAST Act was signed into law and
becoming the first federal transportation bill to emphasize
goods movement projects by dedicating up to $6.2 billion
nationally for freight-related projects over 5 years. Of this
total, California expects to receive an annual average of $116
million per year over five years for freight projects identified
the CFMP.
Beyond the requirement that projects be included in a state
freight plan, however, the FAST Act did specifically outline how
the federal freight funding should be distributed. Recently,
Caltrans indicated their intent to distribute the funds using,
what they describe as a historic, formulaic division where 60%
of the funds be allocated to the state for allocation and 40% to
the regions. The author firmly believes, that dividing
designated federal freight funding in this manner would dilute
the capacity to use the funds to their fullest advantage.
Specifically, he notes that the TCIF provides a proven model of
collaboration between the region with an equitable distribution
of transportation funds across the state, that the Commission
has proven itself to successfully hold TCIF program
participants to tight project schedules and budget, and, most
AB 2170
Page 6
importantly, that the TCIF is a proven mechanism to leverage
funds.
Writing in support of AB 2170, the sponsor (Southern California
Association of Governments or SCAG) correctly points out the
Proposition 1B bond funds, for which the TCIF was created,
barely scratched the surface of meeting future investment need
in the state's trade corridor infrastructure but that the state
has the opportunity to continue the program's efforts by moving
federal freight funds through the TCIF. By utilizing the TCIF
process, SCAG notes that both the state and regions will be able
to act quickly and efficiently to develop priority projects
identified in the CFMP, without needing to "reinvent the wheel"
and that the leveraging power provided by program will ensure
that the greatest numbers of projects are developed.
Committee comment: This year, a number of bills, including AB
2170, make use of the authority provided in SB 1228, and seek to
move funds into the TCIF program for allocation by the
Commission to priority freight projects identified in the CFMP.
For example, AB 1591 (Frazier) as well as AB 1780 (Medina) would
each continuously appropriate 20% of Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Fund (cap and trade) monies into the TCIF for allocation by the
Commission in accordance with TCIF guidelines and state emission
reduction program goals set forth by AB 32 (Núñez), Chapter 488,
Statutes of 2006. Should both AB 1591 and AB 1780 complete the
legislative process, the bills will be reconciled such that a
total of 20% of Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) funds (not
40%) be directed to the TCIF.
Related legislation: AB 1591 (Frazier), continuously
appropriates 20% of annual GGRF proceeds to the TCIF to be
distributed by the Commission in accordance with established
TCIF guidelines. AB 1591 is scheduled to be heard by this
committee on April 4, 2016.
AB 2170
Page 7
AB 1780 (Medina) would continuously appropriates 20% of annual
GGRF proceeds to the TCIF to be distributed by the Commission in
accordance with established TCIF guidelines. AB 1780 is
scheduled to be heard by this committee on April 4, 2016.
Previous legislation: SB 1228 (Hueso), Chapter 787, Statutes of
2014, continued the existence of the TCIF to receive funding
from sources including transfers from the GGRF for specified
trade corridor infrastructure improvements.
AB 14 (Lowenthal), Chapter 223, Statutes of 2013, required the
California State Transportation Agency to prepare a state
freight plan to govern the immediate and long-range planning
activities and capital investments of the state with respect to
the movement of freight.
AB 32 (Núñez), Chapter 488, Statutes of 2006, set the goal of
reducing GHGs to 1990 levels by 2020 and allowed ARB to
establish, by regulation, market-based compliance mechanisms to
help achieve that goal.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
AB 2170
Page 8
Southern California Association of Governments (Sponsor)
Automobile Club of Southern California
Alameda Corridor-East Construction Authority
California Association of Port Authorities
California Transportation Commission
Imperial County Transportation Commission
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority
Orange County Transportation Authority
Pacific Marine Shipping Association
Port of Long Beach
Port of Los Angeles
Riverside County Transportation Commission
San Bernardino Associated Governments
San Diego Association of Governments
San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments
Ventura County Transportation Commission
Opposition
AB 2170
Page 9
None on file
Analysis Prepared by:Victoria Alvarez / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093