BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE BILL NO: SB 205
SENATOR ALAN LOWENTHAL, CHAIRMAN AUTHOR: Hancock
VERSION: 2/23/09
Analysis by: Art Bauer FISCAL: yes
Hearing date: March 31, 2009
SUBJECT:
Vehicle registration fee for congestion management programs
DESCRIPTION:
This bill authorizes a countywide transportation planning
agencies to impose, upon a majority vote of the electorate, an
annual fee of up to $10 on motor vehicles registered in a county
for transportation-related programs and projects.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1. Requires that county congestion management agencies
(CMA) within urbanized areas prepare and adopt congestion
management programs. CMAs, of which there are 32 in the
state, update there programs every two years. The
congestion management program must include all of the
following elements:
Traffic level of service standards established for a
system of highways and roadways designated by the
congestion management program agency;
Performance elements regarding the movement of
people and goods;
Program elements that promote alternative
transportation methods, including carpools, vanpools,
transit, bicycles, and other strategies;
SB 205 (HANCOCK) Page 2
Analysis of land use decisions on regional
transportation systems; and
A seven-year capital improvement program.
1. Establishes a basic vehicle registration fee of $34,
plus a $22 surcharge for additional personnel for the
California Highway Patrol, and authorizes local agencies
until January 1, 2010 to impose separate vehicle
registration fee surcharges in their respective
jurisdictions for a variety of special programs, including:
$1 for service authorities for freeway
emergencies,
$1 for deterring and prosecuting vehicle theft,
up to $7 for air quality programs,
$1 for removing abandoned vehicles, and
$1 for fingerprint identification programs
1. Distinguishes a fee from a tax in that a fee pays for a
specific service or project and cannot exceed the
reasonable costs of providing the service or projects that
it funds. Unlike a tax, which benefits the general public,
the payer of the fee is the beneficiary. Since a fee is not
a tax, it imposition does not require a vote of the people
and may be imposed by an agency's governing board.
Typically, governing boards require a study that
demonstrates that those paying the fee will benefit from
the services or facilities financed by the fee. This is
referred to as the nexus test.
This bill :
1) Makes legislative findings as to the need to reduce
traffic congestion as it negatively impacts businesses and
commuters, inhibits the efficient movement of goods, and
increases motor vehicle induced pollution. Moreover,
additional legislative findings are made that improved
signal coordination, traveler information systems,
intelligent transportation systems, highway operational
improvements, and the expansion of public transit services
will reduce congestion and contribute to an improvement of
air quality.
2) Authorizes a "countywide transportation planning agency"
to place on the ballot a majority vote local measure that
SB 205 (HANCOCK) Page 3
would impose a fee of up to $10 on each vehicle registered
in that county to fund programs to address congestion
mitigation and motor vehicle induced pollution.
3) Authorizes the governing boards of countywide
transportation planning agencies to adopt a resolution
containing a finding of fact that projects and programs to
be funded by the fee has a relationship or benefit to the
persons who will be paying the fee. The finding of fact
requires a majority vote of the governing board.
4) Requires a countywide transportation planning agency's
governing board to adopt a plan for the expenditure of fee
revenues that finance projects and programs benefiting the
persons paying the fee. These programs and projects would
include, but not be limited to, providing matching funds
for bond-funded transportation projects and creating or
sustaining congestion or pollution mitigation programs and
projects.
5) Defines "congestion mitigations programs and projects"
to include, but not be limited to, "programs and projects
identified in an adopted congestion management program or
county transportation plan; projects and programs to manage
congestion, including, for example, high-occupancy vehicle
or high-occupancy toll lanes; improved transit services
through the use of technology, bicycle and pedestrian
improvements; improved signal coordination, traveler
information systems, highway operational improvements, and
local street and road rehabilitation; and transit service
expansion."
6) Defines "pollution mitigation programs and projects" to
include, but not be limited to, "programs and projects
carried out by a congestion management agency, a regional
water quality control board, an air pollution control
district, an air quality management district, or another
public agency that is carrying out the adopted plan of a
congestion management agency, a regional water quality
control board, an air pollution control district, or an air
quality management district."
7) Authorizes up to five percent of fee revenue to be used
by a countywide transportation planning agency for
administrative costs associated with the programs and
SB 205 (HANCOCK) Page 4
projects.
8) Requires the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), if
requested by a countywide transportation planning agency,
to collect the fee upon the registration or renewal of the
registration of a motor vehicle registered in the county.
9) Requires a countywide transportation planning agency to
pay for the initial setup and programming costs identified
by DMV through a direct contract with the DMV and for any
direct contract payment by the CMA to be repaid from the
initial revenues available for distribution.
10) Requires DMV, after deducting all its costs, to
distribute the net revenues for purposes of congestion
management and pollution mitigation programs projects.
COMMENTS:
1) Purpose . This bill provides an entity referred to as a
county transportation planning agency with a process for
raising voter-approved discretionary revenue generated by
motor vehicle registration fee for implementing a program of
transportation projects to mitigate congestion and
environmental consequences resulting from the operation of
motor vehicles. The author points out that to maximize the
capacity and improve the efficiency of the transportation
network, local transportation agencies are relying more on
intelligent transportation systems. These systems include
signal light coordination, as well as monitoring real-time
traffic conditions at intersections and on freeways, to allow
the agency to adjust signal times and update travel time on
freeway message signs. While the 2006 transportation bond,
Proposition 1B, dedicated $250 million for technology-based
improvements to local streets and roads, there is no funding
source to pay for on an ongoing program to support the
development, operations, and maintenance of these types of
projects.
2) Meaning of county transportation planning agency is unclear .
There are several agencies existing in state law that are
responsible for intergovernmental transportation planning at
both the county and at the multicounty level. Among the
county level transportation entities created in existing law
is congestion management agencies (CMA). CMAs are required to
be created in counties within urbanized areas for the purpose
SB 205 (HANCOCK) Page 5
of preparing and adopting congestion management programs.
Because the programs to be funded by this bill are consistent
with the programs developed by CMAs, the committee may wish
to identify congestion management agencies as the entity
responsible for implementing the program established by this
bill.
3) Interagency Coordination is not addressed . Because major
streets, roads, and highways in urban regions frequently
cross jurisdictional lines, there is a need to ensure that
funds from the fee are spent in coordination with adjacent
communities and with the agencies responsible for developing,
operating, and maintaining facilities. If some technology
programs, such as traffic signal coordination or changeable
message signs, are not coordinated with adjacent
jurisdictions, the benefits to the motorist are limited and
the return on the investment of the fee revenues may be
limited.
To ensure that program of projects to be funded by the fee
are coordinated with related plans regionally and locally,
the committee may wish to amend the bill to require the
regional transportation planning agencies for the CMA's area
of jurisdictions make a finding that the program is
consistent with the adopted regional transportation plan and
that program of projects, where appropriate, are coordinated
with adjacent jurisdictions.
4) Related legislation .
SB 348 (Simitian) Chapter 377, Statutes of 2008, extends,
from January 1, 2009 to January 1, 2013, the authority of the
City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County to
assess an up-to $4 annual fee on vehicles registered within
San Mateo County for programs to manage traffic congestion
and storm water pollution.
AB 444 (Hancock) of 2008 would have allowed vehicle
registration fees, up to $10 per vehicle, to be imposed for
congestion management programs in Alameda, Contra Costa,
Marin, Santa Clara, Solano, and Santa Cruz Counties. Held in
Senate Revenue and Taxation.
SB 619 (Simitian) of 2007 would have allowed the City/County
SB 205 (HANCOCK) Page 6
Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) to
reauthorize, through January 1, 2019, an existing fee of up
to $4 on motor vehicles registered within the county for a
program for the management of traffic congestion and storm
water pollution. Vetoed.
SB 1611 (Simitian) of 2006 would have allowed county
transportation congestion management agencies (CMAs) or
boards of supervisors to impose, subject to majority vote
approval of county voters, a maximum $25 surcharge on the
annual renewal of vehicles registered in their respective
jurisdictions to fund transportation-related projects and
programs, including pollution prevention programs carried out
by a congestion management agency, a regional water quality
control board, or a local air district. Held Assembly
Appropriations Suspense.
AB 1623 (Klehs) of 2006 would have authorized the designated
county transportation agencies in Alameda, Contra Costa,
Marin and Napa Counties to impose an annual fee of up to $5
on motor vehicles registered within their respective
jurisdictions for a program to manage traffic congestion and
mitigate the environmental impacts of motor vehicles within
that county. Vetoed.
SB 680 (Simitian) of 2005 would have authorized the Santa
Clara Valley Transportation Authority (Authority) to adopt
an annual vehicle registration fee of up to $5 per vehicle
for up to eight years to finance traffic and transportation
improvements in Santa Clara County.
Vetoed.
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the Committee before noon on
Wednesday,
March 25, 2009)
SUPPORT: Alameda County Congestion Management Agency
(sponsor)
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
Santa Cruz Regional Transportation Commission
OPPOSED: Automobile Club of Southern California
AAA for Northern California