BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE BILL NO: SB 716
SENATOR ALAN LOWENTHAL, CHAIRMAN AUTHOR: Wolk
VERSION: 2/27/09
Analysis by: Art Bauer FISCAL: No
Hearing date: April 21, 2009
SUBJECT:
Local transportation funds
DESCRIPTION:
This bill would authorize the use of Transportation Development
Act (TDA) funds to acquire vans for farm worker vanpools and to
subsidize the operations of such vanpools.
ANALYSIS:
The Legislature enacted the Transportation Development Act
(TDA), Senate Bill 325, Chapter 1400, Statutes of 1971, in order
to ensure "the efficient and orderly movement of people and
goods in the urban areas of the state." The TDA authorized the
boards of supervisors in each county to impose a -percent local
sales tax for transportation purposes. All counties imposed the
tax in 1972, because if they had not, the state, under the
state's uniform tax law would not have collected the one-percent
local sales that supports the general funds of cities and
counties. Although the focus of the law is the provision of
transit services in urban areas, it recognizes that rural areas
have a different mix of transportation needs. To this end,
general revenues from the tax must be used for public transit
purposes in counties with a population greater than 500,000 as
of the 1970 census. Counties with a population under 500,000 as
of 1970 may use the revenues for transit and for local streets
and roads.
TDA funds are allocated by regional transportation planning
agencies, which in the urban areas are often multicounty
SB 716 (WOLK) Page 2
entities, but in rural areas are generally single counties.
Before funds can be used for local streets and roads, the
regional transportation planning agency in a rural county must
hold public hearings and make a finding that all reasonable
unmet transit needs have been met. This process determines the
split between funds for transit and streets and roads. In 2007,
$1.4 billion was generated by the statewide local -percent
sales tax for transportation. About 11 percent of the funds were
used for local street and road purposes. California's TDA
program is the only permanent, statewide transit funding program
in the country.
This bill authorizes a county, city, county transportation
commission, or transit operator to file a claim with a
transportation planning agency to use TDA revenues to purchase
vans and to subsidize the operations of vanpools used to
transport agricultural workers to and from work.
COMMENTS:
1. Purpose . The purpose of this bill is to provide safe and
reliable vanpool services to agricultural workers employed
in the fields and in food processing plants.
2. Background . In 1999, a van transporting agricultural
workers collided with a tractor semi-trailer at Five
Points, a rural community in Fresno County, resulting in
the loss of 13 lives. Several reforms were enacted almost
immediately after the accident regarding the process for
inspecting farm worker vans. In addition, in 2000 a federal
demonstration program was established to underwrite farm
worker transportation projects. The most significant
program was established in 2006 with the enactment of SB
1135 (Budget and Fiscal Review Committee Bill), Chapter
516.
SB 1135 established the Agricultural Worker Transportation
Program (AWTP) to be administered by the Department of
Transportation (Caltrans). The program was funded by an
appropriation of $20 million from the Public Transit
Account (PTA). The funds had to be encumbered by June 30,
2009 and expended by January 1, 2011, when the AWTP
sunsets. According to Caltrans, the intent of the AWTP "is
to provide safe, efficient, reliable and affordable
transportation services, utilizing vans and buses, to
agricultural workers commuting to/from worksites in rural
areas statewide."
SB 716 (WOLK) Page 3
After three rounds of AWTP funding, $605,552 has been
awarded for planning grant and
$19 million for in-service implementation grants to 10
agencies. Among the 10 agencies are the Kings County Area
Public Transit Agency, the City of Greenfield, the Santa
Barbara County Department of Public Works, the San Luis
Obispo County Council of Governments, the Napa County
Transportation Planning Agency, the Ventura County
Transportation Commission, and the Sacramento Area Council
of Governments.
The AWTP is modeled on the Agricultural Industries
Transportation Services (AITS) program operated by the
Kings Area Rural Transit, the transit provider for Kings
County. The AITS is a vanpool program for agricultural
workers. This program was established using federal, state,
and local funds in 2002 when 123 fifteen-passenger vans
were deployed. The program now operates approximately 200
vans throughout the southern San Joaquin Valley and is
widely considered a success.
3. Why are the vanpools being organized by public agencies?
Vans used in providing vanpool services may not have more
than fifteen seats; otherwise they would come under the
regulatory jurisdiction of the Public Utilities Commission.
In urban settings, vanpools are usually organized by one of
two national firms that market this service across the
country. The vehicles are leased, a member of the vanpool
drives the vehicle, and the charge to the riders covers the
leasing cost, insurance, fuel, and other costs. Public
agencies or large employers may provide services that find
riders who live in close proximity that desire to
participate in a vanpool.
Agricultural vanpools operate in a different environment
where market rate services appear to be difficult to
provide. To begin with, the vans are purchased and
maintained by public agencies. Because the workers are very
low paid, they are charged only for the cost of fuel and
maintenance. The cost of vehicle acquisition or lease is
not included in the charge to users. The driver is a
volunteer and is legally an independent contractor who
collects the weekly payments from the riders. (All drivers
must have a good driving record and pass an alcohol and
drug test.) In the case of AITS, the drivers do not have to
SB 716 (WOLK) Page 4
pay for using the van and can use the van for incidental
trips such as taking their children to and from child care.
The use of the van is monitored via a GPS system. AITS
establishes a fee schedule based on miles traveled during
the week. For example, under 300 miles, the fee to the
rider is $25 per week. Between 601 and 700 miles, the
weekly fee is $40. Its top fee for weekly miles of between
901 and 1,000 miles is $55. According to the general
manager of the service, there is no operating subsidy for
the service, as the fee revenues cover the operating cost.
The only direct public cost is for the vans.
4. TDA is stable and predictable/state transit assistance
is exactly the opposite . The TDA program has been a stable
program over its nearly forty years of existence. It is the
foundation of all transit funding in the state. Because the
revenue is derived from the sales tax, the growth of funds
mirrors the performance of the economy. While the
Legislature has amended the law to adjust to changing
circumstances, it has not tampered with the funds, or
redirected them to other local purposes. With the
expenditure of the
$20 million in the state grant program for farm worker
vanpools, the TDA program is a potential source of revenue
to continue funding the program.
Over many years the state has endeavored to create its own
transit assistance program to complement the TDA by using
sales tax related to gasoline sales. The state's efforts
have been unreliable from the perspective of the public
transit sector. For example, over the last three fiscal
years, approximately $4.3 billion have been diverted to the
General Fund from the state programs that assist public
transit. In fiscal year 2008, public transit received $306
million for operations and in fiscal year 2009, the amount
of state assistance was reduced to $150 million. In the
next fiscal year, no state funds are available for transit
and under existing law no funds may be made available until
after 2013.
5. Farm worker vanpools and the TDA program . To date, the
farm worker transportation program has been operating as a
pilot program and relying on the $20 million dedicated
stream of revenue established in the 2006 budget process.
The purpose of this bill is to take advantage of the TDA
program to continue the services created by the
SB 716 (WOLK) Page 5
demonstration efforts. The TDA funds, though, are fully
subscribed. In the urban counties, the allocation of the
revenues is essentially done by formula to well-established
transit providers, and serves as their baseline revenue. In
rural counties, if the revenues are not entirely committed
to public transit services, there is competition between
transit and local street and road needs, which is resolved
through the unmet needs process.
6. Possible amendments . Should this bill be enacted, the
farm worker program would become another claimant for TDA
revenue, without any reference to the process for
allocating the revenues to claimants. It would have a claim
to the revenues ahead of any other claimant. This could
dislocate long-term existing programs. The committee may
wish to consider three amendments that integrate the farm
worker vanpool program into the existing TDA process.
a. Limit the farm work vanpool program to counties
under 500,000 as of the 1970 census. This essentially
captures the rural counties of the state. A large
county, such as Ventura, with a large agriculture
industry, today that had a population under 500,000
persons in 1970, but well above that today, would be
eligible to receive funding. Other counties well above
the 1970 threshold, but with a large agricultural sector
such as San Diego and Riverside, would be unable to take
advantage of this program. In both counties, however,
local sales tax revenues may be available to provide a
farm worker vanpool program. This, of course, would
depend on the needs of existing public transit, which
are substantial during the current recession.
b. Limit the farm worker vanpool program to the
acquisition or lease of vans and related equipment.
According to the largest provider of farm worker
vanpools, AITS in Kings County, the operating cost of
the program is covered by the user fees collected from
the riders. Because there is no driver cost as there is
with the typical public transit service or with the
usual paratransit service for the elderly and
handicapped, the single largest unit of operating cost
is removed from the ledger, and providing the service
without operating subsidy appears reasonable. Farm
worker vanpool programs would be ineligible for transit
operating subsidies.
SB 716 (WOLK) Page 6
c. Require that the decision by a regional
transportation planning agency to fund farm worker
vanpool services be an outcome of the unmet needs
process. The unmet needs process is a means in counties
below the 500,000 threshold to resolve competing claims
for TDA revenues. To circumvent this process would
create a special class of claimant, and bypass its
public outreach and public hearing processes.
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on
Wednesday,
April 15, 2009)
SUPPORT: California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
(Sponsor)
Environmental Defense Fund
OPPOSED: None received.