BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2147|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2147
Author: V. Manuel Perez (D), et al
Amended: 8/20/10 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE : 7-1, 6/29/10
AYES: Lowenthal, DeSaulnier, Harman, Kehoe, Pavley,
Simitian, Wolk
NOES: Huff
NO VOTE RECORDED: Ashburn
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 58-16, 5/6/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Safe Routes to School Program
SOURCE : California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
PolicyLink
DIGEST : This bill adds benefit to low-income schools and
use of a public participation process to the list of
factors that the Department of Transportation must consider
when evaluating grant proposals for the state Safe Routes
to School (SRTS) program, and allows school districts, in
cooperation with a transportation agency, to compete for
SRTS grants.
Senate Floor Amendments of 8/20/10 eliminate the definition
of "low-income school," change eligible applicant from
CONTINUED
AB 2147
Page
2
"school" to "school district," allow the Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) to require a local transportation
agency to be the lead agency, delete the requirement that
the public participation process involve a "public
meeting," and require Caltrans establish an SRTS advisory
committee that includes a representative from a low-income
community.
ANALYSIS : In 1999, AB 1475 (Soto), Chapter 663,
established the state SRTS program, the first in the
nation, for the construction of bicycle and pedestrian
safety and traffic calming projects that improve safety and
promote walking and bicycling to school.
In 2005, the federal transportation bill, the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act:
A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), established a federal
Safe Routes to School program.
The state and federal programs are both administered by the
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) but, because the
two programs are subject to different requirements under
state and federal laws, they are administered as separate
programs. This bill makes changes only to the state
program.
In administering the state program, Caltrans determines how
much will be made available to each of Caltrans' 12
districts in proportion to the number of students enrolled
in kingergarten through the 12th grade with no district
receiving less than $500,000 per funding cycle. State law
permits "local governmental agencies" to submit
applications, though Caltrans restricts applicants to
cities and counties. Cities and counties must work
collaboratively with other local partners, including school
officials and community stakeholders, to develop project
proposals. The Caltrans district office ranks each
proposal it receives and forwards the top ranked proposals
to Caltrans headquarters for final approval.
Proposals are rated on the following factors:
Demonstrated needs of the applicant.
AB 2147
Page
3
Potential of the proposal to reduce child injuries and
fatalities.
Potential of the proposal to increase walking and
bicycling among students.
Identification of safety hazards.
Identification of current and potential walking and
bicycling routes to school.
Consultation and support for projects by school-based
associations, local traffic engineers, local elected
officials, law enforcement agencies, school officials,
and other relevant community stakeholders.
This bill:
This bill:
1. Allows Caltrans, when an application is submitted by a
school district, to require that a city or county serve
as a responsible agency to ensure that local design
standards and applicable state and federal requirements
are met.
2. Revises one of the current list of factors Caltrans must
use to rank project proposals which called for
"consultation and support for projects" by specified
groups to instead allow for the "degree to which the
proposal reflects the participation, input, and
priorities of community stakeholders?" and add parents,
students and business and community leaders to the
stakeholder list.
3. Adds to the list of factors Caltrans must use to rank
project proposals to include "benefit to a low-income
school."
4. Requires Caltrans form a multidisciplinary SRTS
committee made up of representatives of relevant state
agencies and other stakeholders including nonprofit
organizations, cities, schools, and no less than one
representative of a low-income community.
AB 2147
Page
4
Background
SRTS program statistics . To date, the SRTS program has
completed eight cycles, beginning in 2000-01, with
approximately $24.25 million made available each year.
Through the current fiscal year, Caltrans has received
3,820 applications and awarded 815 projects statewide at a
total cost of over $244 million. The projects awarded
throughout the state, in all 12 Caltrans districts and in
both urban and rural areas, have funded five basic types of
infrastructure improvements: sidewalk installation and
upgrading, traffic calming and speed reduction measures,
traffic signal installation, pedestrian and bicycle
crossing improvements, and construction of bicycle paths
and other bicycle facilities. Requests for funding have
exceeded available resources in each year the program has
been administered, funding an average of 21.3 percent of
projects that applied for funding over the past eight
cycles.
Children living in low-income neighborhoods experience
higher rates of pedestrian injury and obesity than children
who live in higher-income areas. Given the documented
success of the SRTS program in increasing walking and
bicycling to school, this bill may be an important step
towards ensuring that low-income schools and communities
are able to access and benefit from SRTS grant funding. It
is not clear, however, the extent to which low-income
communities are unable to access SRTS funds or what
specific barriers they face in developing and implementing
successful projects under California's SRTS program.
To address these issues, in February of this year, Governor
Schwarzenegger directed Caltrans to take specific actions
to increase support for low-income schools and communities
that participate in the SRTS program. These actions
included:
Determining the socioeconomic status (SES) of current and
past SRTS program participants and determining the
appropriate level of participation among these school and
communities.
AB 2147
Page
5
Completing a review of funding practices in other
programs that have been effective in securing high
participation levels from low-SES schools and
communities.
This analysis is due July 1 of this year. The Governor
also directed Caltrans to revise its funding priorities and
criteria, based on its findings, in order to increase
participation in SRTS among low-SES, disadvantaged schools
and communities, which Caltrans has committed to do.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/4/10)
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation (co-source)
PolicyLink (co-source)
Alameda County Congestion Management Agency
Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority
American Cancer Society
American Heart Association
Binacional Center for the Development of the Oaxacan
Indigenous Communities Center
California Food Policy Advocates
California Pan-Ethnic Health Network
California State PTA
Central Valley Partnership for Citizenship
Ceres Partnership for Healthy Children
Community Prevention of Alcohol & Drug Related Problems
East Yard Communities
Fresno Metro Ministry
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
Organizacion en California de Lideres Campesinas, Inc.
Poder Popular of the Coachella Valley
Prevention Institute
San Joaquin Valley Latino Environmental Advancement Project
Strategic Alliance for Healthy Food and Activity
Environments
The City Project
TransForm
Urban Habitat
AB 2147
Page
6
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
the intent of the bill is to ensure equitable access to
SRTS funds. The bill achieves this by making changes to
the criteria used to evaluate project proposals.
Specifically, the bill requires Caltrans to give priority
to proposals that benefit low-income schools. The bill
also gives community residents a stronger role in the
development of SRTS project proposals by giving extra
points to applicants who work with parents and community
residents to develop and prioritize projects.
While SRTS has been a popular and effective program, its
guidelines do not currently target resources to
disadvantaged communities. As a result, schools that serve
low-income students are often unable to enjoy the benefits
of this program.
The author's office states that disadvantaged communities,
particularly those in unincorporated and rural areas,
frequently lack basic infrastructure. Sidewalks, storm
drains, stoplights, and other similar infrastructure may be
missing or in disrepair. Walking and biking in these
communities can be unsafe and thousands of child
pedestrians are hit in California each year as a result.
Today, less than 15 percent of children walk or bicycle to
school and 20 percent are considered overweight or obese.
When children are unable to walk or bicycle to school, the
chances of becoming obese and developing associated health
problems increase. The author's office asserts that
expanding opportunities for physical activity is a critical
component of the solution and ensuring that children can
safely walk and bicycle to school is one way to accomplish
this.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Arambula, Beall, Bill Berryhill,
Blakeslee, Blumenfield, Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan,
Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter, Chesbro, Conway,
Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon, Eng, Evans,
Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes, Fuller, Furutani,
Galgiani, Hall, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huber, Huffman,
Jeffries, Jones, Lieu, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Monning,
AB 2147
Page
7
Nava, Nestande, Nielsen, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino,
Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Skinner, Solorio, Swanson,
Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Tran, Yamada, John A. Perez
NOES: Anderson, Tom Berryhill, DeVore, Emmerson, Gaines,
Garrick, Hagman, Harkey, Knight, Logue, Miller, Niello,
Silva, Smyth, Audra Strickland, Villines
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bass, Block, Gilmore, Mendoza, Norby,
Vacancy
JJA:mw 8/22/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****