BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1957
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 1957 (Dickinson)
As Amended March 6, 2014
Majority vote
TRANSPORTATION 15-0 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Lowenthal, Linder, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bigelow, |
| |Achadjian, Ammiano, | |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian |
| |Bloom, Bonta, Buchanan, | |Calderon, Campos, |
| |Daly, Frazier, Gatto, | |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez, |
| |Holden, Nazarian, | |Holden, Jones, Linder, |
| |Patterson, Quirk-Silva, | |Pan, Quirk, |
| |Waldron | |Ridley-Thomas, Wagner, |
| | | |Weber |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Authorizes the California Transportation Commission
(CTC) to relinquish portions of State Route (SR) 16 to the City
and County of Sacramento. Specifically this bill:
1)Relinquishes the portion SR 16 located within the city limits
of Sacramento to the City of Sacramento.
2)Relinquishes the portion of SR 16 east of the City of
Sacramento boundary and west of Watt Avenue to the County of
Sacramento.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Statutorily identifies state highway system routes.
2)Defines a "state highway" as any roadway that is acquired,
laid out, constructed, improved, or maintained as a state
highway pursuant to constitutional or legislative
authorization.
3)Specifies that it is the intent of the Legislature that the
prescribed routes of the state highway system connect the
communities and regions of the state and that they serve the
state's economy by connecting centers of commerce, industry,
agriculture, mineral wealth, and recreation.
AB 1957
Page 2
4)Provides for the expansion or deletion of the state highway
system through a process whereby CTC makes a finding that it
is in the best interest of the state to include or delete a
specified portion of roadway to the system.
5)Provides for the relinquishment of a portion of the state
highway to a city or county under an agreement between the
local jurisdiction and the Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) when an act of the Legislature has deleted the
portion of highway from the state highway system.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)Potentially moderate one-time costs (State Highway Account)
depending on the outcome of negotiations between Caltrans and
the city and county and a determination by Caltrans that the
relinquishment is in the best interest of the state.
2)Moderate long-term maintenance and repair savings to Caltrans,
if the CTC exercises its authority to relinquish the highway
segment.
COMMENTS : Each session, numerous bills authorizing CTC to
relinquish segments of the state highway system to local
jurisdictions are passed by the Legislature and signed by the
Governor. Relinquishment transactions are generally preceded by
a negotiation of terms and conditions between the local
jurisdiction and Caltrans. Once an agreement has been
established, CTC typically approves the relinquishment and
verifies its approval via a resolution. The final step is for
the Legislature to delete these segments from current law.
State highway relinquishments provide recipient agencies with
greater control over a local transportation segment and relieve
Caltrans of any further responsibility to improve, maintain, or
repair it.
The City and County of Sacramento are seeking relinquishment of
portions of SR 16. The portion SR 16 within the City of
Sacramento city limits would be relinquished to the City of
Sacramento and the remainder (east of the City of Sacramento
boundary and west of Watt Avenue) would be relinquished to the
County of Sacramento. These entities believe that controlling
AB 1957
Page 3
these segments will allow them to make improvements that better
accommodate future development plans in the area.
Analysis Prepared by : Victoria Alvarez / TRANS. / (916) 319-
2093
FN: 0003743