SB 582 California Senate · 2011-2012 Regular Session

Commute benefit policies.

Summary
Existing law requires transportation planning agencies to undertake various transportation planning activities, including preparation of a regional transportation plan. Existing law requires transportation planning agencies that are designated under federal law as metropolitan planning organizations to include a sustainable communities strategy as part of the regional transportation plan for their region. Existing law creates air quality management districts and air pollution control districts with various responsibilities relative to reduction of air pollution. This bill, beginning on January 1, 2013, subject to certain exceptions, would authorize a metropolitan planning organization jointly with the local air quality management district or air pollution control district to adopt a commute benefit ordinance that requires covered employers operating within the common area of the organization and district with a specified number of covered employees to offer those employees certain commute benefits. The bill would require that the ordinance specify certain matters, including any consequences for noncompliance, and would impose a specified reporting requirement. The bill would provide for the 8 metropolitan planning organizations within the region served by a specified air district to adopt the ordinance only after the district first acts to adopt the ordinance. The bill would exclude from its provisions an air district with a trip reduction regulation initially adopted prior to the federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 as long as it continues to have a regulation that allows trip reduction as a method of compliance. The bill would make its provisions inoperative on January 1, 2017.
Bill status vetoed 4 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2011
Committee Review
Jul 2011
Senate Passage
May 2011
Assembly Passage
Jul 2011
Vetoed
Aug 2011
Introduced Feb 17, 2011 Vetoed Aug 1, 2011
Floor votes · Senate May 31, 2011 · Assembly Jul 11, 2011

How they voted

35–2
Passed · 2 other
Total votes 39
May 31, 2011
D Democratic24
23 Yea 1 Nay
95% Yea
R Republican15
12 Yea 1 Nay 2
80% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea All Nay Mixed No data
Full legislative history

Actions timeline

Total actions
34
Key actions
6
Committee
3
Amendments
4
Feb 2, 2012
Vetoed
Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.
upper
Aug 1, 2011
Vetoed
In Senate. Consideration of Governor's veto pending.
upper
Aug 1, 2011
Vetoed
Vetoed by the Governor.
upper
Jul 14, 2011
Upper · Passed
Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 24. Noes 14. Page 1863.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
upper
Jul 11, 2011
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (46-28-5)
assembly
Jul 11, 2011
Introduced
In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
upper
Jun 21, 2011
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. Ordered to consent calendar. (Ayes 14. Noes 0.) (June 20).
lower
Jun 9, 2011
Committee
Referred to Com. on TRANS.
lower
May 31, 2011
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (35-2-2)
senate
May 16, 2011
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 0. Page 930.) (May 9).
upper
Apr 27, 2011
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on E.Q. (Ayes 8. Noes 0. Page 766.) (April 26).
upper
Mar 3, 2011
Committee
Referred to Coms. on T. & H. and E.Q.
upper
Feb 17, 2011
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 1 co-sponsor

Sponsors