BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 1194
                                                                  Page  1


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
          AB 1194 (Ammiano and V. Manuel P�rez)
          As Amended  May 24, 2013
          Majority vote 

           TRANSPORTATION      12-0        APPROPRIATIONS      13-0        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Linder, Achadjian,        |Ayes:|Gatto, Bocanegra,         |
          |     |Ammiano, Bonta, Buchanan, |     |Bradford,                 |
          |     |Daly, Frazier, Gatto,     |     |Ian Calderon, Campos,     |
          |     |Holden, Morrell,          |     |Eggman, Gomez, Hall,      |
          |     |Nazarian,                 |     |Ammiano, Linder, Pan,     |
          |     |Quirk-Silva               |     |Quirk, Weber              |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           SUMMARY  :  Modifies the Safe Routes to School (SR2S) program.   
          Specifically,  this bill :  

          1)Adds a non-infrastructure element to the state SR2S program,  
            including public awareness campaigns and outreach to press and  
            community leaders, traffic education and enforcement in the  
            vicinity of schools, student sessions on bicycle and  
            pedestrian safety, health, and environment, and funding for  
            training, volunteers, and managers of SR2S programs.  

          2)Specifies that 20% of the program funds are to be used for  
            non-infrastructure-related activities and up to 20% of these  
            funds are to be used for a statewide technical assistance  
            resource center.  

          3)Provides the Transportation Agency discretion to transfer the  
            responsibility to administer the SR2S program from the  
            California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to the  
            California Transportation Commission.  

          4)Requires Caltrans to employ a full-time SR2S coordinator to  
            administer the program.  

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)Directs Caltrans to award SR2S grants to local government  
            agencies based on a statewide competition that rates proposals  
            on the following factors:  








                                                                  AB 1194
                                                                 Page  2



             a)   Demonstrated need;

             b)   Potential to reduce child injuries and fatalities;

             c)   Potential to encourage increased walking and biking  
               among students;

             d)   Identification of safety hazards;

             e)   Identification of current and potential walking and  
               bicycling routes to school;

             f)   Use of a public process; and,

             g)   Benefits to low-income schools.  

          2)Provides that any annual state budget allocation to fund SR2S  
            grants is to be in addition to federal funding received for  
            the program.  

          3)Allows up to 10% of SR2S funds to be used to make  
            infrastructure improvements that create safe routes to school  
            bus stops that are located away from schools.  

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to Assembly Appropriations Committee,  
          negligible fiscal impact, as this bill is consistent with SR2S  
          program operations.  

           COMMENTS  :  Until last summer, existing law provided for two  
            separate and distinct SR2S programs-one federally funded and  
            one state funded.  The federal program provided grants for  
            infrastructure and non-infrastructure projects (such as  
            education and enforcement) and was typically funded at about  
            $21 million annually.  With enactment of Moving Ahead for  
            Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21), the federal SR2S  
            program was collapsed along with an array of other existing  
            programs into a more simplified, substantially consolidated  
            program, referred to as the federal Transportation  
            Alternatives Program (TAP).  California anticipates receiving  
            $72 million in TAP funds over the two-year life cycle of  
            MAP-21.  

          California was the first state to establish a state-level SR2S  








                                                                  AB 1194
                                                                  Page  3


            program in 1999 with the passage of AB 1475 (Soto), Chapter  
            663.  The state program differs slightly from the previous  
            federal program in that the state program provides grants only  
            for infrastructure projects.  It is typically funded at around  
            $24 million annually.  Like the federal program, the state  
            SR2S program is administered by Caltrans and grants are  
            awarded on a statewide competitive basis.  

          The goal of the SR2S program 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.   
          The program places particular emphasis on reducing crashes,  
          injuries, and fatalities involving children in the vicinity of  
          schools.  The SR2S program has been very popular, with  
          applications exceeding available funds by a ratio of about 5:1.   


          Supporters of the program point to a 2007 study commissioned by  
          Caltrans to tout the success of the program.  That report  
          determined that the SR2S program was successful in achieving its  
          goals of improving safety and increasing bicycling and walking.   
          The report concluded:

               The Safe Routes to School program has captured the  
               attention of traffic engineers, public health  
               advocates, schools, communities and families.   
               Anecdotally it has been a resounding success.  Through  
               the quantitative and qualitative analyses conducted as  
               part of the legislative mandate, the SR2S program has  
               been effective in achieving its goals of increasing  
               walking/bicycling and improving safety.  

          The author introduced AB this bill in response to a budget  
          proposal put forward this year by the Administration that many  
          suggest threatens the success of the SR2S program.  The  
          Administration's proposal consolidates existing programs and  
          creates an Active Transportation Program (ATP) within Caltrans.   
          The intent of the ATP is to fund projects and programs that  
          encourage increased use of active modes of transportation to  
          achieve one or more of the following goals:  

          1)Increase the proportion of trips accomplished by biking and  
            walking.









                                                                  AB 1194
                                                                  Page  4


          2)Increase safety and mobility for non-motorized users.

          3)Advance regional agencies' efforts to achieve greenhouse gas  
            reduction goals.

          4)Enhance public. 

          5)Provide environmental mitigation that supports and encourages  
            active transportation.  

          To the extent that the Administration's proposed ATP combines  
          several programs into one, the proposal is consistent with  
          MAP-21, the hallmark of which is a substantially consolidated  
          program with a handful of broad core programs to provide maximum  
          flexibility to states.  Programs to be included in the proposed  
          ATP include the state bicycle program, state and federal SR2S  
          programs, the federal recreational trails program, the federal  
          transportation enhancement program, and the state environmental  
          enhancement and mitigation program.  The Administration proposes  
          to fund the ATP at a level of at least $134 million annually.  

          In response to the proposed ATP, SR2S advocates have voiced a  
          number of concerns, namely that:

          1)The ATP proposes no minimum guarantee for SR2S funding.

          2)The ATP would be established after existing programs are  
            repealed (thereby impeding continuity of the program).  

          3)Non-profit organizations are not adequately represented in the  
            ATP guideline development process.

          4)The proposed ATP process does not provide sufficient  
            transparency with regard to project awards. 

          5)The proposed program would not adequately ensure lower-income  
            communities are appropriately considered in the program's  
            application process.  

          The Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 3-Resources and  
          Transportation heard the Administration's budget proposal  
          relative to the ATP earlier this month and voted to deny it  
          without prejudice.  Instead, the subcommittee adopted  
          placeholder trailer bill language to require the Secretary of  








                                                                  AB 1194
                                                                  Page  5


          the Transportation Agency to convene a stakeholder group to  
          discuss active transportation compromise options by August 1,  
          2013.  That action now moves to the full committee for  
          consideration and reconciliation with Senate budget actions.  At  
          some point this summer, this bill will likely need to be  
          reconciled with whatever actions are taken on the budget.  

           
          Analysis Prepared by  :   Janet Dawson / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093 


                                                                FN: 0000966