BILL NUMBER: SB 1662 CHAPTERED 09/26/00 CHAPTER 656 FILED WITH SECRETARY OF STATE SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 APPROVED BY GOVERNOR SEPTEMBER 24, 2000 PASSED THE SENATE SEPTEMBER 1, 2000 PASSED THE ASSEMBLY AUGUST 31, 2000 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 31, 2000 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 30, 2000 INTRODUCED BY Senator Burton FEBRUARY 22, 2000 An act to amend Sections 14556.5, 14556.26, 14556.40, 14556.50, and 14556.52 of, to add Section 14556.29 to, and to repeal Section 14556.40 of, the Government Code, to amend Section 7104 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, to amend Sections 2182 and 2182.1 of the Streets and Highways Code, and to repeal Section 21 of Chapter 91 of the Statutes of 2000, relating to transportation, making an appropriation therefor, and declaring the urgency thereof, to take effect immediately. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 1662, Burton. Transportation: finance. (1) Existing law establishes the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund (hereafter the TCRF) in the State Treasury and appropriates the money in the TCRF (a) to the Department of Transportation for allocation, as directed by the California Transportation Commission, to the department and certain regional and local transportation entities for certain listed transportation projects, (b) to the Controller for allocation to cities, counties, and cities and counties for street and road maintenance, rehabilitation, and reconstruction, (c) to the commission for the purposes of a specified funding exchange program, and (d) to the department for rehabilitation and repaving projects on state highways. Existing law establishes a list of transportation projects eligible for funding with money from the TCRF, specifies the lead applicant for each project, and establishes a procedure for the lead applicant to apply to the commission for funds for each project. Existing law requires the Controller to transfer specified amounts on a quarterly basis from the General Fund to the Transportation Investment Fund (hereafter the TIF) in the State Treasury. The Controller, for each quarter during the period commencing on July 1, 2001, and ending on June 30, 2006, is required to transfer specified amounts from the TIF to the TCRF, to the Public Transportation Account, a trust fund in the State Transportation Fund, to the Department of Transportation, to the counties, including a city and county, and to the cities, including a city and county, for specified transportation purposes. Funds transferred to counties, cities, and cities and counties are required to be deposited in certain local accounts, as specified, in order to avoid the commingling of those funds with other local funds and may be used only for street and highway maintenance, rehabilitation, reconstruction, and storm damage repair, as defined. Cities, counties, and cities and counties are required to maintain their existing commitment of local funds for street and highway maintenance, rehabilitation, reconstruction, and storm damage repair in order to remain eligible for allocation of the specified funds. This bill would make technical and clarifying corrections in these provisions, including changing the lead agency for certain transportation projects on the specified project list. The bill would require the Controller to develop a system that provides access to funds allocated by the commission from the TCRF by electronic transfer of funds. The bill would make an appropriation by adding a project to the transportation project list and specifying the amount to be allocated to that project. The bill would appropriate $13,900,000 from the Public Transportation Account in the State Transportation Fund to the Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority and the Bay Area Water Transit Authority, in specified scheduled amounts and for specific purposes. The bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute. Appropriation: yes. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 14556.5 of the Government Code is amended to read: 14556.5. The Traffic Congestion Relief Fund is hereby created in the State Treasury. The fund shall include deposits of funds provided in the annual Budget Act, provided from the Transportation Investment Fund established under Section 7104 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, or provided under any other statute. Notwithstanding Section 13340, the money in the fund is hereby continuously appropriated to the department, without regard to fiscal years, as follows: (a) For allocation by the department, as directed by the commission pursuant to Section 14556.20, to the department and other regional and local transportation entities for the projects listed in Article 5 (commencing with Section 14556.40). (b) For allocation by the Controller, the sum of four hundred million dollars ($400,000,000), for allocation during the 2000-01 fiscal year to cities, counties, and cities and counties pursuant to Section 2182 of the Streets and Highways Code. (c) For allocation by the commission to the funding exchange program authorized by Section 182.8 of the Streets and Highways Code. SEC. 2. Section 14556.26 of the Government Code is amended to read: 14556.26. A regional or local agency receiving an allocation from this program shall certify, by resolution of its governing board, before final execution of the cooperative agreement, that it will sustain its level of expenditures for transportation purposes at a level that is consistent with the average of its annual expenditures during the 1997-98, 1998-99, and 1999-2000 fiscal years, including funds reserved for transportation purposes, during the fiscal years that the allocation provided under this chapter is available for use. The certification is subject to audit by the state. SEC. 3. Section 14556.29 is added to the Government Code, to read: 14556.29. The Controller shall develop a system that provides access to funds allocated by the commission under this article from the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund by electronic transfer of funds. SEC. 4. Section 14556.40 of the Government Code, as added by Section 1 of Chapter 92 of the Statutes of 2000, is repealed. SEC. 5. Section 14556.40 of the Government Code, as added by Section 6 of Chapter 91 of the Statutes of 2000, is amended to read: 14556.40. (a) The following projects are eligible for grants from the fund for the purposes and amounts specified: (1) BART to San Jose; extend BART from Fremont to Downtown San Jose in Santa Clara and Alameda Counties. Seven hundred twenty-five million dollars ($725,000,000). The lead applicant is the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. (2) Fremont-South Bay Commuter Rail; acquire rail line and start commuter rail service between Fremont and San Jose in Santa Clara and Alameda Counties. Thirty-five million dollars ($35,000,000). The lead applicant is the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. (3) Route 101; widen freeway from four to eight lanes south of San Jose, Bernal Road to Burnett Avenue in Santa Clara County. Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. (4) Route 680; add northbound HOV lane over Sunol Grade, Milpitas to Route 84 in Santa Clara and Alameda Counties. Sixty million dollars ($60,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency. (5) Route 101; add northbound lane to freeway through San Jose, Route 87 to Trimble Road in Santa Clara County. Five million dollars ($5,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. (6) Route 262; major investment study for cross connector freeway, Route 680 to Route 880 near Warm Springs in Santa Clara County. One million dollars ($1,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. (7) CalTrain; expand service to Gilroy; improve parking, stations, and platforms along UPRR line in Santa Clara County. Fifty-five million dollars ($55,000,000). The lead applicant is Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. (8) Route 880; reconstruct Coleman Avenue Interchange near San Jose Airport in Santa Clara County. Five million dollars ($5,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. (9) Capitol Corridor; improve intercity rail line between Oakland and San Jose, and at Jack London Square and Emeryville stations in Alameda and Santa Clara Counties. Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority. (10) Regional Express Bus; acquire low-emission buses for new express service on HOV lanes regionwide. In nine counties. Forty million dollars ($40,000,000). The lead applicant is the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. (11) San Francisco Bay Southern Crossing; complete feasibility and financial studies for new San Francisco Bay crossing (new bridge, HOV/transit bridge, terminal connection, or second BART tube) in Alameda and San Francisco or San Mateo Counties. Five million dollars ($5,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. (12) Bay Area Transit Connectivity; complete studies of, and fund related improvements for, the I-580 Livermore Corridor; the Hercules Rail Station and related improvements, West Contra Costa County and Route 4 Corridors in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. Seventeen million dollars ($17,000,000). Of the amount specified, seven million dollars ($7,000,000) shall be made available for the Route 4 Corridor study and improvements, seven million dollars ($7,000,000) shall be made available for the I-580 Corridor study and improvements, and three million dollars ($3,000,000) shall be made available for the Hercules Rail Station study and improvements. The lead applicant for the Hercules Rail Station and related improvements in west Contra Costa County is the Contra Costa County Transportation Authority. The lead applicants, for the I-580 Livermore Study and improvements are the Alameda County Congestion Management Authority and the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District. The lead applicants for the Route 4 Corridor study and improvements are the Contra Costa County Transportation Authority and the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District. (13) CalTrain Peninsula Corridor; acquire rolling stock, add passing tracks, and construct pedestrian access structure at stations between San Francisco and San Jose in San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara Counties. One hundred twenty-seven million dollars ($127,000,000). The lead applicant is the Peninsula Joint Powers Board. (14) CalTrain; extension to Salinas in Monterey County. Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). The lead applicant is the Transportation Agency for Monterey County. (15) Route 24; Caldecott Tunnel; add fourth bore tunnel with additional lanes in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. (16) Route 4; construct one or more phases of improvements to widen freeway to eight lanes from Railroad through Loveridge Road, including two high-occupancy vehicle lanes, and to six or more lanes from east of Loveridge Road through Hillcrest. Thirty-nine million dollars ($39,000,000). The lead applicant is the Contra Costa Transportation Authority. (17) Route 101; add reversible HOV lane through San Rafael, Sir Francis Drake Boulevard to North San Pedro Road in Marin County. Fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Marin Congestion Management Agency. (18) Route 101; widen eight miles of freeway to six lanes, Novato to Petaluma (Novato Narrows) in Marin and Sonoma Counties. Twenty-one million dollars ($21,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Sonoma County Transportation Authority. (19) Bay Area Water Transit Authority; establish a regional water transit system beginning with Treasure Island in the City and County of San Francisco. Two million dollars ($2,000,000). The lead applicant is the Bay Area Water Transit Authority. (20) San Francisco Muni Third Street Light Rail; extend Third Street line to Chinatown (tunnel) in the City and County of San Francisco. One hundred forty million dollars ($140,000,000). The lead applicant is the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency. (21) San Francisco Muni Ocean Avenue Light Rail; reconstruct Ocean Avenue light rail line to Route 1 near California State University, San Francisco, in the City and County of San Francisco. Seven million dollars ($7,000,000). The lead applicant is the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency. (22) Route 101; environmental study for reconstruction of Doyle Drive, from Lombard St./Richardson Avenue to Route 1 Interchange in City and County of San Francisco. Fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the San Francisco County Transportation Authority. (23) CalTrain Peninsula Corridor; complete grade separations at Poplar Avenue in (San Mateo), 25th Avenue or vicinity (San Mateo), and Linden Avenue (South San Francisco) in San Mateo County. Fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000). The lead applicant is the San Mateo County Transportation Authority. (24) Vallejo Baylink Ferry; acquire low-emission ferryboats to expand Baylink Vallejo-San Francisco service in Solano County. Five million dollars ($5,000,000). The lead applicant is the City of Vallejo. (25) I-80/I-680/Route 12 Interchange in Fairfield in Solano County; 12 interchange complex in seven stages (Stage 1). Thirteen million dollars ($13,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Solano Transportation Authority. (26) ACE Commuter Rail; add siding on UPRR line in Livermore Valley in Alameda County. One million dollars ($1,000,000). The lead applicant is the Alameda County Congestion Management Authority. (27) Vasco Road Safety and Transit Enhancement Project in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. Eleven million dollars ($11,000,000). The lead applicant is Alameda County Congestion Management Authority. (28) Parking Structure at Transit Village at Richmond BART Station in Contra Costa County. Five million dollars ($5,000,000). The lead applicant is the City of Richmond. (29) AC Transit; buy two fuel cell buses and fueling facility for demonstration project in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. Eight million dollars ($8,000,000). The lead applicant is the Alameda Contra Costa Transit District. (30) Implementation of commuter rail passenger service from Cloverdale south to San Rafael and Larkspur in Marin and Sonoma Counties. Thirty-seven million dollars ($37,000,000). The lead applicant is the Sonoma-Marin Area Transit Authority. (31) Route 580; construct eastbound and westbound HOV lanes from Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road to Vasco Road in Alameda County. Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Alameda County Congestion Management Authority. (32) North Coast Railroad; repair and upgrade track to meet Class II (freight) standards in Napa, Sonoma, Marin, Mendocino and Humboldt Counties. Sixty million dollars ($60,000,000). The lead applicant is the North Coast Rail Authority. Except for the amounts specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) and subdivision (b) of Section 14456.50, no part of the specified amount may be made available to the authority until it has made a full accounting to the commission demonstrating that the expenditure of funds provided to the authority in the Budget Act of 2000 (Chapter 52 of the Statutes of 2000) was consistent with the limitations placed on those funds in that Budget Act. (33) Bus Transit; acquire low-emission buses for Los Angeles County MTA bus transit service. One hundred fifty million dollars ($150,000,000). The lead applicant is the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (34) Blue Line to Los Angeles; new rail line Pasadena to Los Angeles in Los Angeles County. Forty million dollars ($40,000,000). The lead applicant is the Pasadena Metro Blue Line Construction Authority. (35) Pacific Surfliner; triple track intercity rail line within Los Angeles County and add run-through-tracks through Los Angeles Union Station in Los Angeles County. One hundred million dollars ($100,000,000). The lead applicant is the department. (36) Los Angeles Eastside Transit Extension; build new light rail line in East Los Angeles, from Union Station to Atlantic via 1st Street to Lorena in Los Angeles County. Two hundred thirty-six million dollars ($236,000,000). The lead applicant is the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (37) Los Angeles Mid-City Transit Improvements; build Bus Rapid Transit system or Light Rail Transit in Mid-City/Westside/Exposition Corridors in Los Angeles County. Two hundred fifty-six million dollars ($256,000,000). The lead applicant is the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (38) Los Angeles-San Fernando Valley Transit Extension; (A) build an East-West Bus Rapid Transit system in the Burbank-Chandler corridor, from North Hollywood to Warner Center. One hundred forty-five million dollars ($145,000,000). (B) Build a North-South corridor bus transit project that interfaces with the foregoing East-West Burbank-Chandler Corridor project and with the Ventura Boulevard Rapid Bus project. One hundred million dollars ($100,000,000). The lead applicant for both extension projects is the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (39) Route 405; add northbound HOV lane over Sepulveda Pass, Route 10 to Route 101 in Los Angeles County. Ninety million dollars ($90,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (40) Route 10; add HOV lanes on San Bernardino Freeway over Kellogg Hill, near Pomona, Route 605 to Route 57 in Los Angeles County. Ninety million dollars ($90,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (41) Route 5; add HOV lanes on Golden State Freeway through San Fernando Valley, Route 170 (Hollywood Freeway) to Route 14 (Antelope Valley Freeway) in Los Angeles County. Fifty million dollars ($50,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (42) Route 5; widen Santa Ana Freeway to 10 lanes (two HOV + two mixed flow), Orange County line to Route 710, with related major arterial improvements, in Los Angeles County. One hundred twenty-five million dollars ($125,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (43) Route 5; improve Carmenita Road Interchange in Norwalk in Los Angeles County. Seventy-one million dollars ($71,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (44) Route 47 (Terminal Island Freeway); construct interchange at Ocean Boulevard Overpass in the City of Long Beach in Los Angeles County. Eighteen million four hundred thousand dollars ($18,400,000). The lead applicant is the Port of Long Beach. (45) Route 710; complete Gateway Corridor study, Los Angeles/Long Beach ports to Route 5 in Los Angeles County. Two million dollars ($2,000,000). The lead applicant is the department. (46) Route 1; reconstruct intersection at Route 107 in Torrance in Los Angeles County. Two million dollars ($2,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (47) Route 101; California Street off-ramp in Ventura County. Fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the City of San Buenaventura. (48) Route 101; corridor analysis and PSR to improve corridor from Route 170 (North Hollywood Freeway) to Route 23 in Thousand Oaks (Ventura County) in Los Angeles and Ventura Counties. Three million dollars ($3,000,000). The lead applicant is the department. (49) Hollywood Intermodal Transportation Center; intermodal facility at Highland Avenue and Hawthorn Avenue in the City of Los Angeles. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000). The lead applicant is the City of Los Angeles. (50) Route 71; complete three miles of six-lane freeway through Pomona, from Route 10 to Route 60 in Los Angeles County. Thirty million dollars ($30,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (51) Route 101/405; add auxiliary lane and widen ramp through freeway interchange in Sherman Oaks in Los Angeles County. Twenty-one million dollars ($21,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (52) Route 405; add HOV and auxiliary lanes for 1 mile in West Los Angeles, from Waterford Avenue to Route 10 in Los Angeles County. Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (53) Automated Signal Corridors (ATSAC); improve 479 automated signals in Victory/Ventura Corridor, and add 76 new automated signals in Sepulveda Boulevard and Route 118 Corridors in Los Angeles County. Sixteen million dollars ($16,000,000). The lead applicant is the City of Los Angeles. (54) Alameda Corridor East; build grade separations on Burlington Northern-Santa Fe and Union Pacific Railroad lines, downtown Los Angeles to Los Angeles County line in Los Angeles County. One hundred fifty million dollars ($150,000,000). The lead applicant is the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments. (55) Alameda Corridor East; build grade separations on Burlington Northern-Santa Fe and Union Pacific Railroad lines, with rail-to-rail separation at Colton through San Bernardino County. Ninety-five million dollars ($95,000,000). The lead applicant is the San Bernardino Associated Governments. (56) Metrolink; track and signal improvements on Metrolink; San Bernardino line in San Bernardino County. Fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000). The lead applicant is the Southern California Regional Rail Authority. (57) Route 215; add HOV lanes through downtown San Bernardino, Route 10 to Route 30 in San Bernardino County. Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the San Bernardino County Transportation Commission. (58) Route 10; widen freeway to eight lanes through Redlands, Route 30 to Ford Street in San Bernardino County. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the San Bernardino County Transportation Commission. (59) Route 10; Live Oak Canyon Interchange, including, but not limited to, the 14th Street Bridge over Wilson Creek, in the City of Yucaipa in San Bernardino County. Eleven million dollars ($11,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the San Bernardino County Transportation Commission. (60) Route 15; southbound truck climbing lane at two locations in San Bernardino County. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the San Bernardino County Transportation Commission. (61) Route 10; reconstruct Apache Trail Interchange east of Banning in Riverside County. Thirty million dollars ($30,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Riverside County Transportation Commission. (62) Route 91; add HOV lanes through downtown Riverside, Mary Street to Route 60/215 junction in Riverside County. Forty million dollars ($40,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Riverside County Transportation Commission. (63) Route 60; add seven miles of HOV lanes west of Riverside, Route 15 to Valley Way in Riverside County. Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Riverside County Transportation Commission. (64) Route 91; improve the Green River Interchange and add auxiliary lane and connector ramp east of the Green River Interchange to northbound Route 71 in Riverside County. Five million dollars ($5,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Riverside County Transportation Commission. (70) Route 22; add HOV lanes on Garden Grove Freeway, Route I-405 to Route 55 in Orange County. Two hundred six million five hundred thousand dollars ($206,500,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Orange County Transportation Authority. (73) Alameda Corridor East; (Orangethorpe Corridor) build grade separations on Burlington Northern-Santa Fe line, Los Angeles County line through Santa Ana Canyon in Orange County. Twenty-eight million dollars ($28,000,000). The lead applicant is the Orange County Transportation Authority. (74) Pacific Surfliner; double track intercity rail line within San Diego County, add maintenance yard in San Diego County. Forty-seven million dollars ($47,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or North Coast Transit District. (75) San Diego Transit Buses; acquire about 85 low-emission buses for San Diego transit service in San Diego County. Thirty million dollars ($30,000,000). The lead applicant is the San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board. (76) Coaster Commuter Rail; acquire one new train set to expand commuter rail in San Diego County. Fourteen million dollars ($14,000,000). The lead applicant is North County Transit District. (77) Route 94; complete environmental studies to add capacity to Route 94 corridor, downtown San Diego to Route 125 in Lemon Grove in San Diego County. Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or San Diego Association of Governments. (78) East Village access; improve access to light rail from new in-town East Village development in San Diego County. Fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000). The lead applicant is the San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board. (79) North County Light Rail; build new 20-mile light rail line from Oceanside to Escondido in San Diego County. Eighty million dollars ($80,000,000). The lead applicant is North County Transit District. (80) Mid-Coast Light Rail; extend Old Town light rail line 6 miles to Balboa Avenue in San Diego County. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000). The lead applicant is the San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board. (81) San Diego Ferry; acquire low-emission high-speed ferryboat for new off-coast service between San Diego and Oceanside in San Diego County. Five million dollars ($5,000,000). The lead applicant is the Port of San Diego. (82) Routes 5/805; reconstruct and widen freeway interchange, Genesee Avenue to Del Mar Heights Road in San Diego County. Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the San Diego Association of Governments. (83) Route 15; add high-tech managed lane on I-15 freeway north of San Diego (Stage 1) from Route 163 to Route 78 in San Diego County. Seventy million dollars ($70,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the San Diego Association of Governments. (84) Route 52; build four miles of new six-lane freeway to Santee, Mission Gorge to Route 67 in San Diego County. Forty-five million dollars ($45,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the San Diego Association of Governments. (85) Route 56; construct approximately five miles of new freeway alignment between I-5 and I-15 from Carmel Valley to Rancho Penasquitos in the City of San Diego in San Diego County. Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the San Diego Association of Governments. (86) Route 905; build new six-lane freeway on Otay Mesa, Route 805 to Mexico Port of Entry in San Diego County. Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the San Diego Association of Governments. (87) Routes 94/125; build two new freeway connector ramps at Route 94/125 in Lemon Grove in San Diego County. Sixty million dollars ($60,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the San Diego Association of Governments. (88) Route 5; realign freeway at Virginia Avenue, approaching San Ysidro Port of Entry to Mexico in San Diego County. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the San Diego Association of Governments. (89) Route 99; improve Shaw Avenue Interchange in northern Fresno in Fresno County. Five million dollars ($5,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Council of Fresno County Governments. (90) Route 99; widen freeway to six lanes, Kingsburg to Selma in Fresno County. Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Council of Fresno County Governments. (91) Route 180; build new expressway east of Clovis, Clovis Avenue to Temperance Avenue in Fresno County. Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Council of Fresno County Governments. (92) San Joaquin Corridor; improve track and signals along San Joaquin intercity rail line near Hanford in Kings County. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000). The lead applicant is the department. (93) Route 180; complete environmental studies to extend Route 180 westward from Mendota to I-5 in Fresno County. Seven million dollars ($7,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Council of Fresno County Governments. (94) Route 43; widen to four-lane expressway from Kings County line to Route 99 in Selma in Fresno County. Five million dollars ($5,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Council of Fresno County Governments. (95) Route 41; add auxiliary lane/operational improvements and improve ramps at Friant Road Interchange in Fresno in Fresno County. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Council of Fresno County Governments. (96) Friant Road; widen to four lanes from Copper Avenue to Road 206 in Fresno County. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000). The lead applicant is the County of Fresno. (97) Operational improvements on Shaw Avenue, Chestnut Avenue, Willow Avenue, and Barstow Avenue near California State University at Fresno in Fresno County. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000). The lead applicant is the California State University at Fresno. Of the amount authorized under this paragraph, the sum of two million dollars ($2,000,000) shall be transferred to the California State University at Fresno for the purposes of funding preliminary plans, working drawings, or both of those, and related program management costs for the Fresno Events Center. (98) Peach Avenue; widen to four-lane arterial and add pedestrian overcrossings for three schools in Fresno County. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000). The lead applicant is the City of Fresno. (99) San Joaquin Corridor; improve track and signals along San Joaquin intercity rail line in seven counties. Fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000). The lead applicant is the department. (100) San Joaquin Valley Emergency Clean Air Attainment Program; incentives for the reduction of emissions from heavy-duty diesel engines operating within the eight-county San Joaquin Valley region. Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000). The lead applicant is the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District. (101) Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District bus fleet; acquisition of low-emission buses. Three million dollars ($3,000,000). The lead applicant is the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District. (102) Route 101 access; State Street smart corridor Advanced Traffic Corridor System (ATSC) technology in Santa Barbara County. One million three hundred thousand dollars ($1,300,000). The lead applicant is the City of Santa Barbara. (103) Route 99; improve interchange at Seventh Standard Road, north of Bakersfield in Kern County. Eight million dollars ($8,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or Kern Council of Governments. (104) Route 99; build seven miles of new six-lane freeway south of Merced, Buchanan Hollow Road to Healey Road in Merced County. Five million dollars ($5,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Merced County Association of Governments. (105) Route 99; build two miles of new six-lane freeway, Madera County line to Buchanan Hollow Road in Merced County. Five million dollars ($5,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Merced County Association of Governments. (106) Campus Parkway; build new arterial in Merced County from Route 99 to Bellevue Road. Twenty-three million dollars ($23,000,000). The lead applicant is the County of Merced. (107) Route 205; widen freeway to six lanes, Tracy to I-5 in San Joaquin County. Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the San Joaquin Council of Governments. (108) Route 5; add northbound lane to freeway through Mossdale "Y" , Route 205 to Route 120 in San Joaquin County. Seven million dollars ($7,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the San Joaquin Council of Governments. (109) Route 132; build four miles of new four-lane expressway in Modesto from Dakota Avenue to Route 99 and improve Route 99 Interchange in Stanislaus County. Twelve million dollars ($12,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Stanislaus Council of Governments. (110) Route 132; build 3.5 miles of new four-lane expressway from Route 33 to the San Joaquin county line in Stanislaus and San Joaquin Counties. Two million dollars ($2,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Stanislaus Council of Governments. (111) Route 198; build 10 miles of new four-lane expressway from Route 99 to Hanford in Kings and Tulare Counties. Fourteen million dollars ($14,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Kings County Association of Governments. (112) Jersey Avenue; widen from 17th Street to 18th Street in Kings County. One million five hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000). The lead applicant is Kings County. (113) Route 46; widen to four lanes for 33 miles from Route 5 to San Luis Obispo County line in Kern County. Thirty million dollars ($30,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Kern Council of Governments. (114) Route 65; add four passing lanes, intersection improvement, and conduct environmental studies for ultimate widening to four lanes from Route 99 in Bakersfield to Tulare County line in Kern County. Twelve million dollars ($12,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Kern Council of Governments. (115) South Line Light Rail; extend South Line three miles towards Elk Grove, from Meadowview Road to Calvine Road in Sacramento County. Seventy million dollars ($70,000,000). The lead applicant is the Sacramento Regional Transit District. (116) Route 80 Light Rail Corridor; double-track Route 80 light rail line for express service in Sacramento County. Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000). The lead applicant is the Sacramento Regional Transit District. (117) Folsom Light Rail; extend light rail tracks from 7th Street and K Street to the Amtrak Depot in downtown Sacramento, and extend Folsom light rail from Mather Field Station to downtown Folsom. Add a new vehicle storage and maintenance facility in the area between the Sunrise Boulevard and Hazel Avenue Stations in Sacramento County. Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). The lead applicant is the Sacramento Regional Transit District. (118) Sacramento Emergency Clean Air/Transportation Plan (SECAT); incentive for the reduction of emissions from heavy-duty diesel engines operating within the Sacramento region. Fifty million dollars ($50,000,000). The lead applicant is the Sacramento Area Council of Governments. (119) Convert Sacramento Regional Transit bus fleet to low emission and provide Yolo bus service by the Yolo County Transportation District; acquire approximately 50 replacement low-emission buses for service in Sacramento and Yolo Counties. Nineteen million dollars ($19,000,000). The lead applicants are the Sacramento Regional Transit District, the Sacramento Area Council of Governments, and the Yolo Bus Authority. (121) Metropolitan Bakersfield System Study; to reduce congestion in the City of Bakersfield. Three hundred fifty thousand dollars ($350,000). The lead applicant is the Kern County Council of Governments. (122) Route 65; widening project from 7th Standard Road to Route 190 in Porterville. Three million five hundred thousand dollars ($3,500,000). The lead applicant is the County of Tulare. (123) Oceanside Transit Center; parking structure. One million five hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000). The lead applicant is the City of Oceanside. (126) Route 50/Watt Avenue Interchange; widening of overcrossing and modifications to interchange. Seven million dollars ($7,000,000). The lead applicant is the County of Sacramento. (127) Route 85/Route 87; interchange completion; addition of two direct connectors for southbound Route 85 to northbound Route 87 and southbound Route 87 to northbound Route 85. Three million five hundred thousand dollars ($3,500,000). The lead applicant is the City of San Jose. (128) Airport Road; reconstruction and intersection improvement project. Three million dollars ($3,000,000). The lead applicant is the County of Shasta. (129) Route 62; traffic and pedestrian safety and utility undergrounding project in right-of-way of Route 62. Three million two hundred thousand dollars ($3,200,000). The lead applicant is the Town of Yucca Valley. (133) Feasibility studies for grade separation projects for Union Pacific Railroad at Elk Grove Boulevard and Bond Road. One hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000). The lead applicant is the City of Elk Grove. (134) Route 50/Sunrise Boulevard; interchange modifications. Three million dollars ($3,000,000). The lead applicant is the County of Sacramento. (135) Route 99/Sheldon Road; interchange project; reconstruction and expansion. Three million dollars ($3,000,000). The lead applicant is the County of Sacramento. (138) Cross Valley Rail; upgrade track from Visalia to Huron. Four million dollars ($4,000,000). The lead applicant is the Cross Valley Rail Corridor Joint Powers Authority. (139) Balboa Park BART Station; phase I expansion. Six million dollars ($6,000,000). The lead applicant is the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District. (140) City of Goshen; overpass for Route 99. One million five hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000). The lead applicant is the department. (141) Union City; pedestrian bridge over Union Pacific rail lines. Two million dollars ($2,000,000). The lead applicant is the City of Union City. (142) West Hollywood; repair, maintenance, and mitigation of Santa Monica Boulevard. Two million dollars ($2,000,000). The lead applicant is the City of West Hollywood. (144) Seismic retrofit of the national landmark Golden Gate Bridge. Five million dollars ($5,000,000). The lead applicant is the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District. (145) Construction of a new siding in Sun Valley between Sheldon Street and Sunland Boulevard. Six million five hundred thousand dollars ($6,500,000). The lead applicant is the Southern California Regional Rail Authority. (146) Construction of Palm Drive Interchange. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000). The lead applicant is the Coachella Valley Association of Governments. (148) Route 98; widening of 8 miles between Route 111 and Route 7 from 2 lanes to 4 lanes. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000). The lead applicant is the department. (149) Purchase of low-emission buses for express service on Route 17. Three million seven hundred fifty thousand dollars ($3,750,000). The lead applicant is the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District. (150) Renovation or rehabilitation of Santa Cruz Metro Center. One million dollars ($1,000,000). The lead applicant is the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District. (151) Purchase of 5 alternative fuel buses for the Pasadena Area Rapid Transit System. One million one hundred thousand dollars ($1,100,000). The lead applicant is the Pasadena Area Rapid Transit System. (152) Pasadena Blue Line transit-oriented mixed-use development. One million five hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000). The lead applicant is the City of South Pasadena. (153) Pasadena Blue Line utility relocation. Five hundred fifty thousand dollars ($550,000). The lead applicant is the City of South Pasadena. (154) Route 134/I-5 Interchange study. One hundred thousand dollars ($100,000). The lead applicant is the department. (156) Seismic retrofit and core segment improvements for the Bay Area Rapid Transit system. Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). The lead applicant is the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District. (157) Route 12; Congestion relief improvements from Route 29 to I-80 through Jamison Canyon. Seven million dollars ($7,000,000). The lead applicant is the department. (158) Remodel the intersection of Olympic Boulevard, Mateo Street, and Porter Street and install a new traffic signal. Two million dollars ($2,000,000). The lead applicant is the City of Los Angeles. (159) Route 101; redesign and construction of Steele Lane Interchange. Six million dollars ($6,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Sonoma County Transportation Authority. (b) As used in this section "route" is a state highway route as identified in Article 3 (commencing with Section 300) of Chapter 2 of Division 1 of the Streets and Highways Code. SEC. 6. Section 14556.50 of the Government Code is amended to read: 14556.50. The grant authorized under paragraph (32) of subdivision (a) of Section 14556.40 shall be allocated as follows: (a) (1) Two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) to defray the administrative costs of the North Coast Railroad Authority, allocated directly to the authority as directed by the commission at its first scheduled meeting immediately upon enactment of the Budget Act of 2000. (2) Two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) to defray the administrative costs of the authority, allocated directly to the authority as directed by the commission within six months from the date of enactment of the Budget Act of 2000. (3) Five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) to defray the administrative costs of the authority, allocated to the authority as directed by the commission, within one year from the date of enactment of the Budget Act of 2000, if the commission determines that additional funding is needed by the authority as directed by the commission at its first scheduled meeting for administrative costs. (b) Six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) to fund completion of the authority's rail line from Lombard to Willits, allocated directly to the authority immediately upon enactment of the Budget Act of 2000. (c) One million dollars ($1,000,000) to fund completion of the authority's rail line from Willits to Arcata, allocated to the authority as directed by the commission, within six months from the date of enactment of the Budget Act of 2000. (d) Five million dollars ($5,000,000) to fund the upgrade of the authority's rail line to Class II or III status, allocated to the authority as directed by the commission. (e) Four million one hundred thousand dollars ($4,100,000) for environmental remediation projects, allocated to the authority as directed by the commission, within six months from the date of enactment of the Budget Act of 2000. (f) Ten million dollars ($10,000,000) for the authority's debt reduction, allocated to the authority as directed by the commission, within six months from the date of enactment of the Budget Act of 2000. (g) One million eight hundred thousand dollars ($1,800,000) for use by the authority as local match funds, allocated to the authority as directed by the commission. (h) Five million five hundred thousand dollars ($5,500,000) to fund repayment of the authority's federal loan obligations, allocated to the authority as directed by the commission. (i) Thirty-one million dollars ($31,000,000) for long-term stabilization projects, allocated to the authority as directed by the commission. SEC. 7. Section 14556.52 of the Government Code is amended to read: 14556.52. (a) Before grants from the fund may be allocated to any of the three Alameda Corridor East Projects identified in paragraphs (54), (55), and (73) of subdivision (a) of Section 14556.40, a report shall be completed and submitted to the commission within one year of the operative date of this section. The report shall be prepared by a team consisting of the lead applicants for those projects and the Riverside County Transportation Commission. The report shall address regional mobility needs as well as regional, state, and national economic impacts of the corridor. The team shall also evaluate and assess the technical merits, determine the phasing and delivery schedule, and identify a financing strategy for the proposed corridor improvements. Based on the good faith participation of the stakeholders, the commission shall allocate some or all of the available funds to one or more of the lead applicants for specific projects within the corridor that meet the requirements under this chapter. (b) Funds may be allocated from the fund to produce the report required under this section. SEC. 8. Section 7104 of the Revenue and Taxation Code is amended to read: 7104. (a) The Transportation Investment Fund (hereafter the fund) is hereby created in the State Treasury. Notwithstanding Section 13340 of the Government Code, the money in the fund is continuously appropriated without regard to fiscal years for disbursement in the manner and for the purposes set forth in this section. (b) All of the following shall occur on a quarterly basis: (1) The State Board of Equalization, in consultation with the Department of Finance, shall estimate the amount that is transferred to the General Fund under subdivision (b) of Section 7102 that is attributable to revenue collected for the sale, storage, use, or other consumption in this state of motor vehicle fuel, as defined in Section 7304. (2) The State Board of Equalization shall inform the Controller, in writing, of the amount estimated under paragraph (1). (3) The Controller shall transfer the amount estimated under paragraph (1) from the General Fund to the fund. (c) For each quarter during the period commencing on July 1, 2001, and ending on June 30, 2006, the Controller shall make all of the following transfers and apportionments from the funds identified for transfer under paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) in the following order: (1) To the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund created in the State Treasury by Section 14556.5 of the Government Code, the sum of one hundred sixty-nine million five hundred thousand dollars ($169,500,000), for a total transfer of three billion three hundred ninety million dollars ($3,390,000,000). (2) To the Public Transportation Account, a trust fund in the State Transportation Fund, 20 percent of the amount remaining after the transfer required under paragraph (1). Funds transferred under this paragraph shall be appropriated by the Legislature as follows: (A) To the Department of Transportation, 50 percent for purposes of subdivision (a) or (b) of Section 99315 of the Public Utilities Code. (B) To the Controller, 25 percent for allocation pursuant to Section 99314 of the Public Utilities Code. Funds allocated under this subparagraph shall be subject to all of the provisions governing funds allocated under Section 99314 of the Public Utilities Code. (C) To the Controller, 25 percent for allocation pursuant to Section 99313 of the Public Utilities Code. Funds allocated under this subparagraph shall be subject to all of the provisions governing funds allocated under Section 99313 of the Public Utilities Code. (3) To the Department of Transportation for expenditure for programming for transportation capital improvement projects subject to all of the provisions governing the State Transportation Improvement Program, 40 percent of the amount remaining after the transfer required under paragraph (1). (4) To the Controller for apportionment to the counties, including a city and county, 20 percent of the amount remaining after the transfer required under paragraph (1), in accordance with the following formulas: (A) Seventy-five percent of the funds payable under this paragraph shall be apportioned among the counties in the proportion that the number of fee-paid and exempt vehicles that are registered in the county bears to the number of fee-paid and exempt vehicles registered in the state. (B) Twenty-five percent of the funds payable under this paragraph shall be apportioned among the counties in the proportion that the number of miles of maintained county roads in each county bears to the total number of miles of maintained county roads in the state. For the purposes of apportioning funds under this subparagraph, any roads within the boundaries of a city and county that are not state highways shall be deemed to be county roads. (5) To the Controller for apportionment to cities, including a city and county, 20 percent of the amount remaining after the transfer required under paragraph (1). Funds transferred under this paragraph shall be apportioned among the cities in the proportion that the total population of the city bears to the total population of all the cities in the state. (d) Funds received under paragraphs (4) and (5) of subdivision (c) shall be deposited as follows in order to avoid the commingling of those funds with other local funds: (1) In the case of a city, into the city account that is designated for the receipt of state funds allocated for transportation purposes. (2) In the case of a county, into the county road fund. (3) In the case of a city and county, into a local account that is designated for the receipt of state funds allocated for transportation purposes. (e) Funds allocated to a city, county, or city and county under this section shall be used only for street and highway maintenance, rehabilitation, reconstruction, and storm damage repair. For purposes of this section, the following terms have the following meanings: (1) "Maintenance" means either or both of the following: (A) Patching. (B) Overlay and sealing. (2) "Reconstruction" includes any overlay, sealing, or widening of the roadway, if the widening is necessary to bring the roadway width to the desirable minimum width consistent with the geometric design criteria of the department for 3R (reconstruction, resurfacing, and rehabilitation) projects that are not on a freeway, but does not include widening for the purpose of increasing the traffic capacity of a street or highway. (3) "Storm damage repair" is repair or reconstruction of local streets and highways and related drainage improvements that have been damaged due to winter storms and flooding, and construction of drainage improvements to mitigate future roadway flooding and damage problems, in those jurisdictions that have been declared disaster areas by the President of the United States, where the costs of those repairs are ineligible for emergency funding with Federal Emergency Relief (ER) funds or Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) funds. (f) (1) Cities and counties shall maintain their existing commitment of local funds for street and highway maintenance, rehabilitation, reconstruction, and storm damage repair in order to remain eligible for the allocation of funds pursuant to paragraph (4) or (5) of subdivision (c). (2) In order to receive any allocation pursuant to paragraph (4) or (5) of subdivision (c), the city or county shall annually expend from its general fund for street, road, and highway purposes an amount not less than the annual average of its expenditures from its general fund during the 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 fiscal years, as reported to the Controller pursuant to Section 2151 of the Streets and Highways Code. For purposes of this paragraph, in calculating a city's or county's annual general fund expenditures and its average general fund expenditures for the 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 fiscal years, any unrestricted funds that the city or county may expend at its discretion, including vehicle in-lieu tax revenues and revenues from fines and forfeitures, expended for street and highway purposes shall be considered expenditures from the general fund. One-time allocations that have been expended for street and highway purposes, but which may not be available on an ongoing basis, including revenue provided under the Teeter Plan Bond Law of 1994 (Chapter 6.6 (commencing with Section 54773) of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code, may not be considered when calculating a city's or county's annual general fund expenditures. (3) For any city incorporated after July 1, 1996, the Controller shall calculate an annual average of expenditure for the period between July 1, 1996, and December 31, 2000, that the city was incorporated. (4) For purposes of paragraph (2), the Controller may request fiscal data from cities and counties in addition to data provided pursuant to Section 2151, for the 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 fiscal years. Each city and county shall furnish the data to the Controller not later than 120 days after receiving the request. The Controller may withhold payment to cities and counties that do not comply with the request for information or that provide incomplete data. (5) The Controller may perform audits to ensure compliance with paragraph (2) when deemed necessary. Any city or county that has not complied with paragraph (2) shall reimburse the state for the funds it received during that fiscal year. Any funds withheld or returned as a result of a failure to comply with paragraph (2) shall be reallocated to the other counties and cities whose expenditures are in compliance. (6) If a city or county fails to comply with the requirements of paragraph (2) in a particular fiscal year, the city or county may expend during that fiscal year and the following fiscal year a total amount that is not less than the total amount required to be expended for those fiscal years for purposes of complying with paragraph (2). (7) The allocation made under paragraph (4) or (5) of subdivision (c) shall be expended not later than the end of the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the allocation was made, and any funds not expended within that period shall be returned to the Controller and shall be reallocated to the other cities and counties pursuant to the allocation formulas set forth in paragraph (4) or (5) of subdivision (c). (g) The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority shall give first priority for using its share of the funds made available under subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (c) to providing the levels of bus service mandated under the consent decree entered into by the authority on October 29, 1996, in the case of Labor/Community Strategy Center, et al. v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (h) For the purpose of allocating funds under this section to counties, cities, and a city and county, the Controller shall use the most recent population estimates prepared by the Demographic Research Unit of the Department of Finance. For a city that incorporated after January 1, 1998, that does not appear on the most recent population estimates prepared by the Demographic Research Unit, the Controller shall use the population determined for that city under Section 11005.3 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. (i) This section shall become inoperative on the date that all encumbrances incurred for the projects funded under paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) have been liquidated or on June 30, 2006, whichever date is later, and as of the January 1 immediately following that date is repealed. SEC. 9. Section 2182 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended to read: 2182. (a) The funds appropriated from the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 14556.5 of the Government Code shall be allocated by the Controller to cities and counties for street and road maintenance, rehabilitation, and reconstruction. Four hundred million dollars ($400,000,000) shall be allocated to the counties, including a city and county, and cities, including a city and county, as follows: (1) Fifty percent to the counties, including a city and county, in accordance with the following formulas: (A) Seventy-five percent of the funds payable under this paragraph shall be apportioned among the counties in the proportion that the number of fee-paid and exempt vehicles that are registered in the county bears to the number of fee-paid and exempt vehicles registered in the state. (B) Twenty-five percent of the funds payable under this paragraph shall be apportioned among the counties in the proportion that the number of miles of maintained county roads in each county bears to the total number of miles of maintained county roads in the state. For the purposes of apportioning funds under this subparagraph, any roads within the boundaries of a city and county that are not state highways shall be deemed to be county roads. (2) Fifty percent to cities, including a city and county, apportioned among the cities in the proportion that the total population of the city bears to the total population of all the cities in the state. (b) Funds received under this section shall be deposited as follows in order to avoid the commingling of those funds with other local funds: (1) In the case of a city, into the city account that is designated for the receipt of state funds allocated for transportation purposes. (2) In the case of a county, into the county road fund. (3) In the case of a city and county, into a local account that is designated for the receipt of state funds allocated for transportation purposes. (c) Funds apportioned to a city or county under this section shall be used only for street and highway pavement maintenance, rehabilitation, and reconstruction of necessary associated facilities such as drainage and traffic control devices. Rehabilitation or reconstruction may include widening necessary to bring the roadway width to the desirable minimum pavement width consistent with accepted design standards for local streets and roads, but does not include widening or increasing the traffic capacity of a street or road. (d) For the purpose of allocating funds under this section to cities, counties, and a city and county, the Controller shall use the most recent population estimates prepared by the Demographic Research Unit of the Department of Finance. For a city that incorporated after January 1, 1998, that does not appear on the most recent population estimates prepared by the Demographic Research Unit, the Controller shall use the population determined for that city under Section 11005.3 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. SEC. 10. Section 2182.1 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended to read: 2182.1. (a) The Legislature finds and declares that it intends cities and counties to use the funds made available under subdivision (b) of Section 14556.5 of the Government Code to supplement existing local revenues being used for maintenance and rehabilitation of local streets and roads. Cities and counties shall maintain their existing commitment of local funds for maintenance and rehabilitation of local streets and roads in order to remain eligible for allocation and expenditure of the additional four hundred million dollars ($400,000,000) made available by Section 21 of the act that added this section. (b) In order to receive any allocation pursuant to Section 2182, the city or county shall annually expend from its general fund for street, road, and highway purposes an amount not less than the annual average of its expenditures from its general fund during the 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 fiscal years, as reported to the Controller pursuant to Section 2151. For purposes of this subdivision, in calculating a city's or county's annual general fund expenditures and its average general fund expenditures for the 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 fiscal years, any unrestricted funds that the city or county may expend at its discretion, including vehicle in-lieu tax revenues and revenues from fines and forfeitures, expended for street and highway purposes shall be considered expenditures from the general fund. One-time allocations that have been expended for street and highway purposes, but which may not be available on an ongoing basis, including revenue provided under the Teeter Plan Bond Law of 1994 (Chapter 6.6 (commencing with Section 54773) of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code, may not be considered when calculating a city's or county's annual general fund expenditures. (c) For any city incorporated after July 1, 1996, the Controller shall calculate an annual average of expenditure for the period between July 1, 1996, and December 31, 2000, that the city was incorporated. (d) For purposes of subdivision (b), the Controller may request fiscal data from cities and counties in addition to data provided pursuant to Section 2151, for the 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 fiscal years. Each city and county shall furnish the data to the Controller not later than 120 days after receiving the request. The Controller may withhold payment to cities and counties that do not comply with the request for information or that provide incomplete data. (e) The Controller may perform audits to ensure compliance with subdivision (b) when deemed necessary. Any city or county that has not complied with subdivision (b) shall reimburse the state for the funds it received during that fiscal year. Any funds withheld or returned as a result of a failure to comply with subdivision (b) shall be reallocated to the other counties and cities whose expenditures are in compliance. (f) If a city or county fails to comply with the requirements of subdivision (b) in a particular fiscal year, the city or county may expend during that fiscal year and the following fiscal year a total amount that is not less than the total amount required to be expended for those fiscal years for purposes of complying with subdivision (b). (g) The allocation made under Section 2182 shall be expended not later than the end of the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the allocation was made, and any funds not expended within that period shall be returned to the Controller and shall be reallocated to the other cities and counties pursuant to the allocation formulas set forth in Section 2182. SEC. 11. Section 21 of Chapter 91 of the Statutes of 2000 is repealed. SEC. 12. The following amounts are hereby appropriated for the following purposes: (a) The sum of one million nine hundred thousand dollars ($1,900,000) from the Public Transportation Account in the State Transportation Fund to the Capitol Corridors Joint Powers Authority for the purpose of expanding intercity rail service in the Capitol Corridor. (b) (1) The sum of twelve million dollars ($12,000,000) from the Public Transportation Account in the State Transportation Fund to the Bay Area Water Transit Authority to fund the environmental impact reports and design functions specified in Chapter 1011 of the Statutes of 1999. (2) Of the amount specified in paragraph (1), six million dollars ($6,000,000) shall be available no sooner than 30 days after the Bay Area Water Transit Authority submits a work plan to the appropriate legislative fiscal committees and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee. The work plan shall specify the intended work elements to be accomplished in the budget year, when the work will be initiated and is projected to be completed, and the cost associated with each item of work. SEC. 13. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within the meaning of Article IV of the Constitution and shall go into immediate effect. The facts constituting the necessity are: This act helps to create a significant program designed to reduce traffic congestion, which will improve the health and safety of the public. In order for the program enhanced by this act to be implemented as soon as possible, it is necessary that this take effect immediately.