BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1386
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 1386 (Hayashi)
As Amended September 2, 2009
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |55-21|(June 1, 2009) |SENATE: |25-14|(September 8, |
| | | | | |2009) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: TRANS .
SUMMARY : Modifies provisions of existing law governing
development of a local alternative transportation improvement
program (LATIP) in the State Route (SR) 84 and SR 238 corridors.
The Senate amendments :
1)Define "excess properties" for purposes of this bill to mean
properties acquired, but no longer needed, to construct a new
SR 84 in the Cities of Fremont and Union City.
2)Provide for the use of proceeds from the sale excess
properties for relocation assistance.
3)Reconstruct provisions governing the accounting of revenue
from the sale of surplus property in the SR 84 and SR 238
corridors.
4)Allow a local jurisdiction to advance a project included in
either the SR 84 or SR 238 LATIP prior to sufficient funds
being available from the sale of excess properties.
5)Allow a local agency to enter into an agreement with a
transportation planning agency, the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans), and the California Transportation
Commission (CTC), to use its own funds to develop, purchase
right of way for, and construct a transportation project if
the project is in the LATIP, is to be funded by the proceeds
of excess properties and meets other, specified conditions.
6)Provide that existing provisions related to providing
relocation assistance and replacement housing units for
persons displaced as a result of the sale of excess properties
AB 1386
Page 2
in the SR 238 corridor will remain operative until the
superior court issues a final settlement agreement related to
the disposition of the excess properties, or until January 1,
2010, whichever comes later.
7)Provide that, upon issuance of that final settlement
agreement, the LATIP for the SR 238 corridor must provide:
a) A program to provide monetary assistance for tenants in
the corridor;
b) A program to provide 237 additional new low-income
housing units in the corridor; and
c) A program to provide home purchase assistance.
8)Prohibit excess property, or the proceeds from the sale of
excess property, in the SR 238 corridor to be used for housing
or housing-related programs except that excess property may be
used for housing purposes after Caltrans sells the property.
9)Provide that proceeds from the sale of excess properties may
be used to cover the cost of selling the properties.
10)Set forth provisions governing the sale of excess properties,
including:
a) Directs the sale of residential property on an "as is"
basis at fair market value, except that properties needed
for the LATIP may not be sold;
b) Exempts the sale of excess properties from general
statutes governing the disposition of excess property owned
by the state;
c) Exempts the disposition of excess properties from the
California Environmental Quality Act; and,
d) Requires Caltrans to offer the direct sale of excess
properties, at fair market value, to residential tenants
that have occupied excess property in the SR 238 corridor
for two or more years.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Grants local authorities, acting jointly with transportation
AB 1386
Page 3
planning agencies, authority to develop and file with CTC,
LATIPs to address transportation problems county that were to
be served by construction of freeways on SR 84 and SR 238.
2)Dictates that priority for funding in the LATIPs is to go to
projects in the local voter-approved transportation tax
measure.
3)Grants CTC final authority over the content and approval of
LATIPs for SR 84 and SR 238 and prohibits it from approving
any such program submitted after January 1, 2010.
4)Directs the proceeds from the sale of excess properties, less
specified costs, to be allocated by CTC to fund the approved
LATIP. These proceeds are exempt from formulae, such as the
north/south split and county shares, that generally govern the
distribution of capital improvement dollars for
transportation. These proceeds are restricted, however, for
state highway purposes.
5)Statutorily identifies state highway system routes; defines
"state highway" as any roadway that is acquired, laid out,
constructed, improved, or maintained as a state highway
pursuant to constitutional or legislative authorization.
6)Provides for the expansion or deletion of the state highway
system through a process whereby CTC makes a finding that it
is in the best interest of the state to include or delete a
specified portion of roadway to the system.
7)Provides for the relinquishment of a portion of state highway
to a city or county under an agreement between the local
jurisdiction and the Caltrans when an act of the Legislature
has deleted the portion of highway from the state highway
system.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill:
1)Expanded the uses for which proceeds from the sale of surplus
property in the SR 238 corridor can be allocated to include
improvements on any highways, not just state highways.
2)Added provisions governing the accounting of revenue from the
sale of surplus property in the SR 84 and SR 238 corridors.
3)Provided for the relinquishment of segments of SR 92, SR 185,
AB 1386
Page 4
and SR 238 to the City of Hayward, only if Caltrans and the
City enter into agreements providing for the relinquishments.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee:
1)Unknown costs to Caltrans to relinquish highway segments,
depending on the final agreement between Caltrans and the
cities.
2)Unknown long-term annual savings to Caltrans due to relief
from any future maintenance and repair costs of the
relinquished highway segments.
3)One-time CTC costs of $50,000 to $100,000 related to
promulgating regulations.
COMMENTS : In the late 1960s, Caltrans initiated a project to
build a freeway in the SR 238 corridor. Caltrans purchased
hundreds of parcels for right-of-way for the freeway. The
project stalled in the 1970s, and by the start of the 1980s, the
project had encountered enough delays and problems to be
considered infeasible by most interested parties. SB 1711
(Holmdahl) Chapter 799, Statutes of 1982, allowed local
transportation authorities to develop an alternative plan to the
SR 238 project and required them to submit that plan to CTC by
January 1, 1986, after which CTC was barred from approving any
alternative plan. SB 296 (Lockyer) Chapter 494, Statutes of
1985, extended the deadline to January 1, 1988. Both these
deadlines went unmet.
SB 509 (Figueroa) Chapter 611, Statutes of 2004, revived the
LATIP process and established a new deadline of January 1, 2010.
AB 1462 (Torrico) Chapter 619, Statutes of 2005, added SR 84 to
provisions providing for the LATIP in Alameda County. Last
year's SB 791 (Corbett) Chapter 705, Statutes of 2008,
authorized the use of revenues from sales of excess properties
for projects in the local alternative transportation improvement
program that are also in the local voter-approved transportation
sales tax measure, subject to approval by Caltrans.
According to the author, in addition to providing for the
relinquishment of state highway segments, provisions in the bill
establishing an accounting mechanism will ensure the proceeds of
AB 1386
Page 5
the property sales can be tracked.
This bill is the next step toward closing out these obsolete
state highway projects and moving forward toward meeting local
housing and transportation needs.
Analysis Prepared by : Janet Dawson / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093
FN:
0002974