BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 516
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 516 (V. Manuel Pérez)
As Amended May 27, 2011
Majority vote
TRANSPORTATION 12-2 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Bonnie Lowenthal, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Blumenfield, |
| |Jeffries, Achadjian, | |Bradford, Charles |
| |Blumenfield, Bonilla, | |Calderon, Campos, Davis, |
| |Buchanan, Eng, Furutani, | |Gatto, Hall, Hill, Lara, |
| |Galgiani, Miller, | |Mitchell, Solorio |
| |Portantino, Solorio | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Logue, Norby |Nays:|Harkey, Donnelly, |
| | | |Nielsen, Norby, Wagner |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Modifies the Safe Routes to School (SR2S) program to
result in increased participation from socio-economically
disadvantaged schools and communities. Specifically, this bill :
1)Modifies and expands the list of factors to be used to rate
SR2S grant proposals to include the use of a public
participation process, including but not limited to, a public
meeting that satisfies the following:
a) Involves the public, schools, parents, teachers, local
agencies, the business community, key professionals, and
others;
b) Identifies community priorities and gathers community
input to guide the development of projects included in the
proposals;
c) Ensures that community priorities are reflected in the
proposals; and,
d) Secures support for the proposal by relevant community
stakeholders.
AB 516
Page 2
1)Allows school districts, as well as local governmental
agencies, to apply and receive SR2S grants.
2)Expands the list of proposal rating factors to include
benefits to a "low-income school," as defined to mean a school
where at least 75% of students are eligible to receive free or
reduced price meals under the National School Lunch Program.
3)Requires the California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans), when revising SR2S programs guidelines and
procedures, to fully consider the needs of low-income schools.
EXISTING LAW :
4)Provides two separate and distinct SR2S programs-one federally
funded and one state funded. The federal program provides
grants for infrastructure and non-infrastructure projects
(e.g., education and enforcement). The state program provides
grants only for infrastructure projects. (This bill modifies
the evaluation criteria for state SR2S grants; hence, any
further reference to the "SR2S" program will be to the state
program.)
5)Establishes Caltrans as the multi-modal department responsible
for the statewide mobility of people, goods, and services.
Requires Caltrans to administer an SR2S program for
construction of bicycle and pedestrian safety and traffic
calming projects.
6)Requires Caltrans to award grants to local governmental
agencies on a statewide, competitive basis using various
factors as specified.
7)Encourages Caltrans to coordinate with law enforcement
agencies' community policy efforts in establishing and
maintaining the SR2S program.
8)Exempts SR2S grants from traditional transportation
distribution formulae, commonly referred to as the north-south
split and county shares.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, minor absorbable costs to Caltrans.
AB 516
Page 3
COMMENTS : The goal of both the federal and state SR2S programs
administered by Caltrans is to increase the number of children
that walk or bicycle to school by funding projects that remove
barriers that prevent or discourage them from doing so. In
1999, California was the first state in the country to legislate
its own state SR2S program with dedicated funding (from the
State Highway Account) on the premise that encouraging more
children to walk and bicycle to school would result in healthier
children, improved air quality, reduced fuel consumption and
greenhouse gas emissions, and less traffic congestion near
schools. The state SR2S program was funded at $24.25 million in
the latest annual cycle (October 2010) and funds are distributed
on a statewide, competitive basis. Typical projects in these
programs include installing curbs, sidewalks, traffic signals,
crosswalks, warning signs, and bicycle paths.
According to guidelines that govern Caltrans' administration of
the SR2S:
9)An applicant for SR2S grants must be an incorporated city or a
county within California.
10)SR2S funds are apportioned to each of 12 Caltrans districts
on a student enrollment basis, except that three rural,
low-student enrollment districts receive $1 million each for
each two-year cycle. Those districts are: Caltrans District
1 (Eureka), Caltrans District 2 (Redding), and Caltrans
District 9 (Bishop).
11)The maximum amount of SR2S funds allocated to any single
project is $900,000 and the maximum reimbursement rate allowed
for each project is 90%, with the remaining 10% to be matched
in local dollars. If the total project cost exceeds $1
million, the applicant must fund the balance of the project
with other funds.
12)Applicants are advised, but not prohibited, from submitting
more than three project applications.
Proposals are rated by Caltrans staff on the following factors:
1)Demonstrated needs of the applicant.
AB 516
Page 4
2)Potential of the proposal to reduce child injuries and
fatalities.
3)Potential of the proposal to increase walking and bicycling
among students.
4)Identification of safety hazards.
5)Identification of current and potential walking and bicycling
routes to school.
6)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 modifies and expands the above list of factors that
Caltrans considers when evaluating SR2S proposals. The
revisions to the rating factors are intended to result in
increased participation from socio-economically disadvantaged
schools and communities.
To date, the SR2S program has been hugely successful, with
applications exceeding available funds by a ratio of about 6:1.
Further, many perceive the program's outcomes as being equally
successful in encouraging children to be more physically active
and SR2S is considered a critical program in the fight against
childhood obesity.
With this in mind, to help ensure California's SR2S grants
target low-income schools and communities, Caltrans was directed
by the prior administration to review and analyze SR2S funding
practices to assess participation of low-socioeconomic status
schools and communities. A primary reason for this emphasis is
that the epidemic of childhood obesity is especially prevalent
in low-income communities where 30% of children and youth are
overweight. Accordingly, Caltrans commissioned its Technical
Assistance Resource Center (TARC) to determine the level of
participation in the program by low-income schools historically
and to recommend strategies for increasing those levels going
forward. TARC is a joint project effort between the California
Department of Public Health (CDPH) and the University of
California, San Francisco (UCSF). The results of TARC's
AB 516
Page 5
research indicated that low-income schools (defined in the study
as having 75% or more of students eligible for school meal
subsidies) received more state and federal SR2S grants than
schools in middle or high income categories with less than 75%
of students eligible for school meal subsidies. The TARC
research further indicates that while it "does not conclusively
explain why the poorest schools get more grants, analysis
indicates that it is not because they submit more applications.
TARC also studied what other states and programs have done to
increase participation of low-income schools. While several
different strategies have been employed by other states; none
have been in place long enough to evaluate for their
effectiveness. The most promising strategies for increasing
participation may be providing continuous support for Caltrans
Districts since they are responsible for prioritizing local
applications, and maintaining funding to CDPH/UCSF for TARC,
which will provide ongoing targeted outreach and technical
assistance to low-income
schools and communities."
The TARC study recommended that a program goal be established by
at least 5% to increase the number of low-income schools that
participate in the state and federal SR2S programs. The study
indicated that "This goal is modest but provides a clear and
positive statement of intent. The goal can be met through a
collaborative Caltrans-TARC effort that includes enhanced
community involvement, additional technical assistance and
training, and continued emphasis on environmental justice. TARC
is confident that these steps will continue to improve the reach
of federal and state SR2S programs into low-income schools and
communities and ensure the most at-risk children will benefit
from these valuable programs."
According to the author, "thousands of child pedestrians are hit
each year due to limited school zone parameters and excessive
speed near schools. Disadvantaged and rural communities lack
infrastructure to keep kids safe. While SR2S has been a popular
and effective program in ensuring school children are safe
walking to and from school, it is unclear whether it targets
communities most in need." Further, numerous entities indicate
their support of this bill that would help promote greater
inclusion of community voices in the development of the
proposals as well as safeguarding disadvantaged communities by
ensuring their predominant health and safety concerns are met.
AB 516
Page 6
Despite the purported merits of this bill, some may question the
need for advocacy on behalf of disadvantaged communities
especially as schools in those areas are receiving their
proportionate share of SR2S grants, according to the TARC study.
Also, some may believe that by requiring Caltrans to include
"benefit to low-income school" as a scoring criterion, the
application screening and rating process may be skewed away from
a focus on quality. Thus, while a mandate to award extra
ratings points to applications submitted on behalf of low-income
schools would likely result in an immediate increase in grant
awards to these communities, it may not necessarily lead to
quality construction of projects with long-term increases in
walking and bicycling rates as well as improvements in traffic
safety.
Previous legislation: AB 2147 (V. Manuel Perez) of 2010, a
similar bill, was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger. In his
veto message, he indicated that "While this bill is intended to
enhance the position of low-income communities to compete for
SRTS funds, based on the recent success of those communities
receiving SRTS program funding, this bill may be unnecessary. A
recent review of the SRTS Program determined that low-income
schools, which compromise approximately one-third of California
schools, have received 35% and 44% of all
SRTS grants awarded over the past five years through the state
and federal programs, respectively. Additionally, to the extent
funding is provided to weaker proposals receiving additional
credits by benefitting low-income schools, this bill could have
a negative impact on project delivery and may not result in the
intended long-term increases in walking and biking that the
program funds are intended to encourage."
AB 1475 (Soto), Chapter 663, Statutes of 1999, establishes the
first SR2S Program, on a limited-term basis. The program was
extended twice: SB 10 (Soto), Chapter 600, Statutes of 2001,
and SB 1087 (Soto), Chapter 392, Statutes of 2004. The statute
was finally amended to strike the sunset date and continue the
program indefinitely by ÝAB 57 (Soto), Chapter 673, Statutes of
2007].
Analysis Prepared by : Ed Imai / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093
AB 516
Page 7
FN: 0000959