BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2036
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 21, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
Bonnie Lowenthal, Chair
AB 2036 (Mansoor) - As Amended: April 9, 2014
SUBJECT : Orange County: toll facilities: two-thirds vote
SUMMARY : Requires approval by a two-thirds vote of the people
within Orange County to authorize a toll road in that county.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Provides, notwithstanding any other provision of law, that a
toll facility, as defined, may be initially implemented on a
public highway, also defined, within Orange County only if it
is approved by a two-thirds vote of the electorate in Orange
County.
2)Provides that these provisions do not prohibit charging for
parking or for a park entrance or other park user charges in
Orange County.
3)Defines "public highway" to mean a state or local agency
highway, road, street, or bridge.
4)Defines "toll facility" to mean a toll road, toll bridge, toll
lane, or any other facility on a public highway within the
boundaries of Orange County for which a toll is to be charged,
and includes the entire length of the portion of the pubic
highway that is subject to the toll.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Prescribes the membership of the Orange County Transportation
Authority (OCTA) as follows:
a) Five members of the Orange County Board of Supervisors,
appointed by the board;
b) Ten city members, each of which must be a mayor or a
city council member serving within the county; and,
c) Two public members appointed by a majority vote of the
other 15 voting members of OCTA; public members may not be
elected officials.
AB 2036
Page 2
2)Grants OCTA broad authority to acquire, construct, develop,
lease, own, operate, and control transportation facilities in
Orange County.
3)Authorizes creation of joint powers agencies to manage the
planning, financing, construction, and operation of a network
of toll roads in Orange County. Elected officials from 18
cities and 3 members of the Orange County Board of Supervisors
govern the Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA).
4)Generally requires lead agencies with the principal
responsibility for carrying out or approving a proposed
project to prepare a negative declaration, mitigated negative
declaration, or environmental impact report (EIR) for this
action, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
5)Sets forth the process, parameters, and guidelines for
preparing an EIR, including procedures meant to ensure
opportunities for public participation.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : In 2006, Orange County voters voted to renew a
half-cent sales tax for transportation (Measure M2). The
measure included funding for a project to add one general
purpose lane in each direction on a 16-mile stretch of
Interstate 405 (I-405) between Costa Mesa and Seal Beach. The
project is being developed jointly between the California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and OCTA.
The I-405 draft EIR was released in May 2012 and included three
build alternatives in addition to the no-build alternative. All
of the build alternatives included at least one free lane in
each direction, as provided for and approved in Measure M2. One
of the build alternatives included HOT lanes as part of the
proposed solution.
The proposal to develop high occupancy toll (HOT) lanes met with
contentious public outcry. Opponents argued that HOT lanes
would essentially be a "tax on a tax" because the lanes would
first be built with sales tax measure money and, after they were
built, drivers have to pay yet again to use them. Others argued
that the HOT lanes would hurt local businesses because there
AB 2036
Page 3
would be few exits within the HOT lane facility and traffic
would bypass cities within the interior stretches of the HOT
lane corridor.
Fearing losing the confidence of the voters that had originally
approved Measure M2, OCTA ultimately voted to recommend to
Caltrans that the project proceed with construction of one
general-purpose lane in each direction and without HOT lanes.
Caltrans, as the project lead, has the final decision on the
project alternative on the pending draft EIR and its decision is
pending. The final environmental studies are expected to be
completed in summer 2014 with construction anticipated to occur
from 2015 to 2020.
The author introduced this bill to ensure no toll facility is
constructed in Orange County without a two-thirds vote of the
voters within the county. He asserts that existing law does not
provide sufficient opportunities for affected communities and
residents within the county to have a vote on toll facilities.
Supporters of this bill argue that it is imperative that the
residents of Orange County have the opportunity to maintain
local control relating to transportation developments within the
community. Opponents, on the other hand, argue that requiring a
vote of one county's citizens to determine the future of a state
highway system that affects many counties has the potential to
degrade the state's mobility.
Committee concerns:
1)The bill sets forth an imbalanced project-approval process.
Currently, there are toll facilities under consideration in
the area that would be impacted by this bill and that would
give Orange County voters a disproportionate voice in the
outcome. For instance, Riverside County Transportation
Commission (RCTC) is developing a project to extend tolled
express lanes for 9 miles on State Route (SR) 91 between the
Orange County/Riverside County line and Interstate 15. The
western terminus of the project is about one mile west of the
Orange County line. Consequently, under this bill Orange
County voters would need to approve the project by a
two-thirds vote in order for RCTC to be able to proceed with
the project.
2)Opportunities for public participation already exist.
AB 2036
Page 4
Projects such as toll roads involve a long, complicated
environmental review processes set forth in CEQA and its
federal equivalent. Public participation in the environmental
impact review is an essential part of the process and
timelines built into the process are meant to ensure public
input and review opportunities. At the end of the process,
the lead agency formally approves the environmental review and
the public has an opportunity to challenge the results in
court if it feels the process was inadequate or the lead
agency did not consider appropriate alternatives.
Recent experiences in Orange County suggest that existing
processes already provide sufficient opportunities for public
participation. In fact, the I-405 HOT lane alternative did
not survive because of intense public opposition during the
environmental review processes. Furthermore, plans for
expanded toll lanes on SR 241 in Orange County were just this
month shelved in the face of decades-long public resistance,
providing evidence to suggest public participation has been
pretty effective.
3)Another vote requirement is redundant in the face of the OCTA
and TCA boards, comprised almost entirely of elected
officials. The boards, representing the two agencies most
likely to develop toll facilities in Orange County, are
required to comply with open meeting requirements meant in
part to ensure opportunities for public comment.
4)The term "initially implemented" is ambiguous and would be
difficult to operationalize. It could be interpreted to mean
"constructed," "authorized," and/or "open to traffic."
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
City of Costa Mesa
City of Los Alamitos
City of Fountain Valley
City of Seal Beach
City of Westminister
Opposition
Orange County Business Council
AB 2036
Page 5
Self-Help Counties Coalition
Analysis Prepared by : Janet Dawson / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093