BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING
Senator Jim Beall, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: SB 491 Hearing Date: 4/28/2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Committee on Transportation and Housing |
|----------+------------------------------------------------------|
|Version: |4/22/2015 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant|Alison Dinmore |
|: | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Transportation: omnibus bill
DIGEST: This bill makes non-controversial changes to sections
of law relating to transportation.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
According to the Legislative Analyst's Office, the cost of
producing a bill in 2001-2002 was $17,890. By combining
multiple matters into one bill, the Legislature can make minor
changes to law in the most cost-effective manner.
Proposals included in this transportation omnibus bill must
abide by the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee policy
on omnibus committee bills. The proponent of an item submits
proposed language and provides background materials to the
committee for the item to be described to legislative staff and
stakeholders. Committee staff provides a summary of the items
and the proposed statutory changes to all majority and minority
consultants in both the Senate and Assembly, as well as all
known or presumed interested parties. If an item encounters any
opposition and the proponent cannot work out a solution with the
opposition, the item is omitted from or amended out of the bill.
Proposals in the bill must reflect a consensus and be without
opposition from legislative members, agencies, and other
stakeholders.
SB 491 (Committee on Transportation and Housing) Page 2 of ?
This bill makes non-controversial changes to sections of law
relating to transportation. Specifically, the bill includes the
following provisions. The proponent of each provision is noted
in brackets.
1) California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
project delivery reports (Section 1). Senate Bill (SB) 486
(2014) was a transparency bill that sought to provide
greater visibility of Caltrans operations by requiring more
reporting of capital and support budgets for the State
Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP).
Caltrans' amendments were taken incorrectly and the bill
mistakenly required Caltrans to report the projected
delivery date of the construction phase of a project. It
is not feasible for Caltrans to report on the projected
delivery date of the construction phase of a SHOPP project
because this date is controlled by a contractor, not
Caltrans. This requirement would not provide a reflection
or improvement of Caltrans' operations. This bill removes
the requirement for the department to report the delivery
date of the construction phase of a project. [Submitted by
the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee]
2) State Transportation Improvement Plan (Sections 2,
5, and 6). State law contains an outdated title for the
Federal Statewide Transportation Improvement Program and an
incorrect reference to federal law relating to that
program. It also provides insufficient time for the state
to incorporate into the State Transportation Improvement
Plan and SHOPP all projects approved by the California
Transportation Commission. This bill ensures that state
statute is in conformity with federal statute and allows
adequate time to incorporate these changes into state
plans. [Submitted by the California Department of
Transportation]
3) Public meetings to adopt project-selection criteria
(Section 3). The Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) administers the $4 vehicle registration surcharge
for projects that reduce vehicle emissions. The California
Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 44241(d) requires the
BAAQMD to return 40% of the revenues to the county in which
the revenues are collected for allocation by a "program
manager." Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
(VTA) serves as the program manager for these funds in
SB 491 (Committee on Transportation and Housing) Page 3 of ?
Santa Clara County. HSC Section 44231(f) requires the
program manager to hold one or more public meetings at
least once a year for the purpose of: 1) adopting criteria
for expenditure of the funds, and 2) reviewing the projects
to be funded. VTA feels it is not necessary to hold public
hearings and adopt the same criteria again, year after
year, if the criteria for project selection has not
changed. This bill provides that hearings on project
selection criteria are only required if the criteria have
changed. [Submitted by Santa Clara Valley Transportation
Authority (VTA)]
4) California State Transportation Agency reference
(Section 4). Existing law, effective July 1, 2013,
replaces the Business, Transportation, and Housing Agency
with the California State Transportation Agency and the
California Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency.
This bill replaces an outdated reference to the Secretary
of the Business, Transportation, and Housing Agency with a
reference to the Secretary of Transportation. [Submitted
by the Assembly Transportation and Housing Committee]
5) Highway relinquishments (Section 7, 8). This bill
deletes state highway route segment descriptions from the
code given that the highway segments have been relinquished
by the California Transportation Commission to local
jurisdictions. [Submitted by the Office of Assemblymember
Ridley-Thomas]
6) Separated bikeways (Section 9). Caltrans worked
extensively with the author and sponsor of Assembly Bill
(AB) 1193 to shape the bill into something that technically
worked well for both Caltrans and local governments. One
of the technical amendments that Caltrans proposed was to
change the word "protected" in the definition of cycle
tracks to "separated" in Streets and Highways Code Section
890.4(d). While this change was accepted by the author's
office, the sponsor (California Bicycle Coalition), the
League of California Cities, the California State
Association of Counties, and the Consumer Attorneys of
California, it did not make it fully into the bill. This
bill changes the word "protected" to "separated" in the
Streets and Highway Code. [Submitted by the California
Department of Transportation]
SB 491 (Committee on Transportation and Housing) Page 4 of ?
7) Driver license suspensions (Section 10). Vehicle
Code Section1808(c) requires the DMV to make available or
disclose suspensions and revocations of the driving
privilege while the suspension or revocation is in effect,
and for three years following termination of the action or
reinstatement of the privilege. Driver license suspension
actions taken pursuant to Welfare and Institutions (WI)
Code Sections13202.6 and 13202.7, 256, or 11350.6 shall be
disclosed only during the actual time period in which the
suspension is in effect. WI Code Section 11350.6 requires
the DMV to suspend the driver license of an individual who
has failed to pay their required child support. In 1999,
WI Section 11350.6 was repealed and renumbered to Family
Code Section 17520. This bill adds the appropriate
reference to the Family Code. References to the repealed
WI sections should remain in Vehicle Code Section 1808, as
some drivers suspended in the past will continue to show
the repealed WI section as a conviction on their driver
license record. Additionally, it is possible for a driver
to continue to be suspended under WI Code Section 11350.6
because they did not reinstate their license for any number
of reasons, including incarceration. It is necessary for
the DMV to track and disclose both sections. [Submitted by
the Department of Motor Vehicles]
8) DMV Employer Pull Notice program (Section 11). The
Employer Pull Notice (EPN) program was established to
provide employers and regulatory agencies with a means to
ensure driver safety through the ongoing review of driver
records. As a result of a drafting error contained in AB
1047 (Linder, Chapter 649, Statutes of 2013), drivers of
buses with a gross vehicle weight rating of 26,000 pounds
or less were excluded from Vehicle Code Section 1808.1(k),
and therefore no longer required to be enrolled in the EPN
program. AB 1047 was intended to bring California's
commercial driver license program into compliance with
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration regulations to
ensure that California can continue to operate its
Commercial Driver License program, receive federal highway
funds, and be eligible for federal safety grants. This
bill clarifies that any driver license endorsement issued
pursuant to Vehicle Code Section 15278 is required to be
enrolled in the Department of Motor Vehicles Employer Pull
Notice program. [Submitted by the California Highway
Patrol]
SB 491 (Committee on Transportation and Housing) Page 5 of ?
9) Administrative hearings for suspension or
revocation (Section 12). Vehicle Code Section 13557
specifies the DMV's authority and requirements for
administrative hearings for drivers whose privileges are
suspended or revoked for driving under the influence and
other offenses. Vehicle Code Section 13558 authorizes any
person who has received a suspension or revocation notice
for specified offenses, including driving under the
influence offenders, to request an administrative hearing
within 10 days of receipt of the notice of suspension or
revocation. The 2011 maintenance of the codes bill (AB
1023, Wagner, Chapter 296, Statutes of 2011) made technical
changes to Vehicle Code Section 13557, which included the
renumbering of Vehicle Code Section 13357(b)(2) to Vehicle
Code Section 13557(b)(3). However, the bill did not make
necessary conforming changes to Vehicle Code Section 13558
to provide the new paragraph reference. This bill corrects
the code section reference error in Vehicle Code Section
13558, which incorrectly refers to Vehicle Code Section
13357(b)(2), when it should refer to Vehicle Code Section
13557(b)(3). [Submitted by the Department of Motor
Vehicles]
10) Low-Cost Auto Insurance (LCAI) program extension
(Sections 13 and 14). Vehicle Code Sections 16020.1 and
16020.2, beginning January 1, 2016, create an exemption for
drivers in the county of Los Angeles and the city and
county of San Francisco from providing proof of financial
responsibility as part of the vehicle registration renewal
process or to law enforcement. These sections were
developed as part of a conference committee compromise
during the establishment of the Department of Insurance's
LCAI program (SB 171, Escutia, Chapter 794, Statutes of
1999 and SB 527, Speier, Chapter 807, Statutes of 1999).
The operative date of Vehicle Code Sections 16020.1 and
16020.2 is the same as the sunset date of the LCAI program.
Generally, the operative date of these sections is
extended along with the sunset date of the LCAI program.
However, due to an oversight, the operative date of the
exemptions was not extended along with the sunset date
during the last legislative session (SB 1273, Lara, Chapter
487, Statutes of 2014). Failure to extend this date means
that unlike the rest of Californians, drivers in the county
SB 491 (Committee on Transportation and Housing) Page 6 of ?
of Los Angeles and the city and county of San Francisco
will not have to show proof of insurance to register their
vehicles or to law enforcement entities, beginning next
year. This bill rectifies the oversight of SB 1273 and
prevents any operational issues for DMV by extending the
operative dates of Vehicle Code Sections 16020.1 and
16020.2 from January 1, 2016 to January 1, 2020.
[Submitted by the Department of Motor Vehicles]
11) Federal conformity (Sections 15-22, 24, 25). The
state of California was audited by members of the United
States Department of Transportation's Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration (FMCSA) unit. The purpose of this
audit was to review California's Motor Carrier Safety
Assistance Program (MCSAP) for compliance with federal
mandates. During their audit, the FMCSA identified
specific sections of the Vehicle Code as lacking
consistency or compatibility with existing federal
regulations and recommended these sections be considered
for revision to gain uniformity with federal statute. This
bill brings California's statutes in line with those
required federally in Title 49 of the United States Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR). [Submitted by the California
Highway Patrol]
12) Earbud use (Section 23). Statute prohibits wearing
of headsets or earplugs while operating a motor vehicle or
bicycle, with specified exceptions such as emergency
responders or hearing aid wearers. Statute does not
explicitly prohibit wearing of earbuds, such as those used
with a smartphone or iPod. This bill explicitly prohibits
earbud use while operating a motor vehicle or bicycle.
[Submitted by the Senate Transportation and Housing
Committee]
COMMENTS:
1) Purpose of this bill. The purpose of omnibus bills is
to include technical and non-controversial changes to
various committee-related statutes into one bill. This
allows the legislature to make multiple, minor changes to
statutes in one bill in a cost-effective manner. The
SB 491 (Committee on Transportation and Housing) Page 7 of ?
Senate Committee on Transportation and Housing insists that
its transportation omnibus bill be a consensus measure. If
there is no consensus on a particular item, it cannot be
included. There is no known opposition to any item in this
bill.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.: Yes Local: Yes
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on
Wednesday,
April 22, 2015.)
SUPPORT:
None received
OPPOSITION:
None received
-- END --