BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  SB 1430
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   August 6, 2014

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                  Mike Gatto, Chair

                    SB 1430 (Hill) - As Amended:  March 25, 2014 

          Policy Committee:                              
          TransportationVote:11-0

          Urgency:     Yes                  State Mandated Local Program:  
          Yes    Reimbursable:              No

           SUMMARY  

          This bill clarifies that a person providing transportation  
          services to an airport owned by a city, county, or city and  
          county, but located in another county, is prohibited from  
          transporting passengers to the airport if they are not  
          authorized by the airport to provide such services.  

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          Likely minor non-reimbursable costs for prosecution of  
          violations, which constitute a misdemeanor, offset to some  
          extent by fine revenues.

           COMMENTS  

           1)Background  . Currently, two airports are owned by a county but  
            are operated outside the county's jurisdiction.  Ontario  
            Airport, located in San Bernardino County, is owned and  
            operated by Los Angeles World Airports, and San Francisco  
            International Airport (SFO), located in San Mateo County, is  
            owned by the City and County of San Francisco. As a result,  
            when crimes/violations occur at these airports, the local  
            county district attorney (DA) prosecutes these crimes - e.g.  
            the San Mateo County DA for crimes committed on SFO property.

            AB 1885 (Hill)/Statutes of 2010, allowed the San Mateo DA to  
            prosecute persons illegally conducting business at SFO to  
            clarify that transportation service providers not authorized  
            by SFO and charter-party carriers (CPCs) illegally soliciting  
            business from airport patrons are subject to prosecution. At  
            that time, SFO was experiencing a significant problem with  








                                                                  SB 1430
                                                                  Page  2

            CPCs illegally soliciting customers "off the curb" rather than  
            on a prearranged basis. This clarification provided by AB 1885  
            allowed the San Mateo DA to prosecute these types of  
            violations on SFO property.

           2)Purpose  . This bill further clarifies existing law, which  
            prohibits unauthorized businesses, including transportation  
            services, from operating on or from SFO, but does not address  
            transportation services taking passengers to SFO. Absent this  
            clarification, the San Mateo DA has declined to prosecute  
            unauthorized transportation service providers, such as  
            transportation network companies (TNCs), which drop off  
            passengers at SFO. (A TNC is defined in regulation as a  
            business that provides prearranged transportation services for  
            compensation using an online-enabled application or platform  
            to connect passengers with drivers using their personal  
            vehicles.)

            Currently, no TNC is authorized to provide transportation  
            services to and/or from SFO.  SFO does have an application  
            process that allows PUC-permitted TNCs to obtain  
            authorization; however, only two TNCs have applied and did not  
            meet authorization criteria (e.g. commercial insurance,  
            real-time tracking on SFO property, etc.).  Despite not having  
            the proper authorization, TNCs continue to conduct business on  
            SFO property.  

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081