BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                      



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   SB 739|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                              UNFINISHED BUSINESS


          Bill No:  SB 739
          Author:   Lowenthal (D)
          Amended:  7/7/11
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMM  :  9-0, 04/05/11
          AYES:  DeSaulnier, Gaines, Harman, Huff, Kehoe, Lowenthal, 
            Pavley, Rubio, Simitian

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  Senate Rule 28.8

           SENATE FLOOR  :  32-7, 05/31/11
          AYES:  Alquist, Calderon, Cannella, Corbett, Correa, De 
            Le�n, DeSaulnier, Emmerson, Evans, Gaines, Hancock, 
            Harman, Hernandez, Huff, Kehoe, Leno, Lieu, Liu, 
            Lowenthal, Negrete McLeod, Padilla, Pavley, Price, Rubio, 
            Runner, Simitian, Steinberg, Vargas, Wolk, Wright, 
            Wyland, Yee
          NOES:  Anderson, Blakeslee, Dutton, Fuller, La Malfa, 
            Strickland, Walters
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Berryhill

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  57-21, 8/31/11 - See last page for vote


           SUBJECT  :    Ports:  infrastructure and air quality 
          improvement plans

           SOURCE  :     Author


           DIGEST  :    This bill requires the ports of Los Angeles, 
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 739
                                                                Page 
          2

          Long Beach, and Oakland, by July 1, 2012, to assess their 
          infrastructure and air quality improvement needs, including 
          assessing the total cost for these projects and identifying 
          potential sources of funding for them.

           Assembly Amendments  made technical nonsubstantive changes, 
          and add Assemblymember Furutani as co-author.

           ANALYSIS  :    Ports are local government agencies governed 
          by port commissions that are responsible for developing, 
          maintaining, and overseeing the operation of shoreside 
          facilities for the intermodal transfer of cargo between 
          ships, trucks, and railroads.  Some ports have jurisdiction 
          over affiliated airports (e.g., Oakland), build and 
          maintain terminals for the passenger cruise ship industry, 
          or manage marinas and other public facilities.  

          Existing law establishes 11 ports in the state:  Hueneme, 
          Humboldt Bay, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Oakland, Redwood 
          City, Richmond, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, and 
          Stockton.   Under current law, each port may establish a 
          general plan and port system improvements and prescribe the 
          specifications for such improvements.

          This bill:

          1.Makes various findings and declarations relative to the 
            need of infrastructure improvements and air quality 
            reduction measures for the state's major ports. 

          2.Requires the ports of Long Beach, Los Angeles (San Pedro 
            Ports), and the port of Oakland (Oakland) to assess 
            infrastructure and air quality improvement needs 
            beginning January 1, 2012. 

          3.Requires the San Pedro ports to consult with the Southern 
            California Association of Governments, and Oakland to 
            consult with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, 
            on infrastructure projects that improve cargo movement 
            efficiency and reduce congestion impacts associated with 
            cargo movement. The ports must identify the project, 
            funding sources or possible funding sources, and 
            estimated project timeliness for completion. 


                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 739
                                                                Page 
          3

          4.Requires the San Pedro ports to consult with the South 
            Coast Air Quality Management District, and Oakland to 
            consult with the Bay Area Air Quality Management 
            District, on air quality projects that reduce pollution 
            associated with cargo movement, including projects that 
            reduce pollution from trucks, cargo handling equipment, 
            locomotives, and ships. The ports must identify the 
            project, funding sources or possible funding sources, and 
            estimated project timelines for completion. 

          5.Requires the ports to provide the assessments to the 
            Assembly Natural Resources Committee, Assembly 
            Transportation Committee, Senate Environmental Quality 
            Committee, and Senate Transportation and Housing 
            Committee by July 1, 2012, including assessments of 
            infrastructure and air quality improvement costs, funding 
            sources, and possible funding options for projects 
            without a funding source. 

          6.Makes inoperative the report requirement four years after 
            the bill's enactment. 

          7.Makes non-substantive changes to the California Marine 
            and Intermodal Transportation System Advisory Council.

           Related Legislation
           
          This bill is nearly identical to SB 632 (Lowenthal), from 
          the 2009-10 Session, and was ultimately amended to deal 
          with a different subject matter.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes   
          Local:  Yes

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  8/31/11)

          South Coast Air Quality Management District
          Bay Area Air Quality Management District
          American Lung Association
          Breathe California
          Coalition for Clean Air
          Natural Resources Defense Council
          Sierra Club California


                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 739
                                                                Page 
          4

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    There have been several plans 
          establishing lists of projects for goods movement 
          infrastructure and for reducing emissions from goods 
          movement-related sources.  These plans, however, are 
          several years old and most do not identify the sources of 
          funding necessary to complete the projects.  

          The Goods Movement Emission Reduction Plan produced by the 
          Air Resources Board in 2006 estimated the costs to reduce 
          emissions associated with goods movement to be between $6 
          and $10 billion.  The Goods Movement Action Plan, completed 
          by the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency in 
          January 2007, estimated goods movement infrastructure costs 
          to exceed $20 billion over the following decade.  

          Proposition 1B, approved by voters in 2006, authorized the 
          sale of general obligation bonds for transportation 
          purposes, including $2 billion for trade infrastructure and 
          $1 billion for air quality mitigation.  These funds have 
          been fully programmed, leaving a gap of $23 to $27 billion 
          in unmet need.  This bill, therefore, seeks to update the 
          infrastructure and air quality needs of the regions 
          surrounding the state's largest ports and to identify the 
          sources funding necessary to fill that gap.  

          The author argues that ensuring the completion of 
          infrastructure and air quality improvements in California 
          is especially important in light of increased competition 
          from ports on the East Coast and in the Southern United 
          States, noting that a project to widen the Panama Canal to 
          allow for more shipping between Asia and other parts of the 
          U.S. is expected to be completed in 2014.  


           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  57-21, 8/31/11
          AYES:  Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall, 
            Bill Berryhill, Block, Blumenfield, Bonilla, Bradford, 
            Brownley, Buchanan, Butler, Campos, Carter, Cedillo, 
            Chesbro, Davis, Dickinson, Eng, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, 
            Fuentes, Furutani, Galgiani, Gatto, Gordon, Hall, 
            Hayashi, Roger Hern�ndez, Hill, Huber, Hueso, Huffman, 
            Jeffries, Lara, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Miller, 
            Mitchell, Monning, Nestande, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel P�rez, 
            Portantino, Skinner, Solorio, Swanson, Torres, 

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 739
                                                                Page 
          5

            Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. P�rez
          NOES:  Conway, Cook, Donnelly, Beth Gaines, Garrick, Grove, 
            Hagman, Halderman, Harkey, Jones, Knight, Logue, Mansoor, 
            Morrell, Nielsen, Norby, Olsen, Silva, Smyth, Valadao, 
            Wagner
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Charles Calderon, Gorell


          JJA:nl  8/31/11   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****
































                                                           CONTINUED