Highway Users Tax Account: apportionment to counties: expenditure.
Summary
Article XIX of the California Constitution requires revenues from state excise taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel for use in motor vehicles upon public streets and highways, over and above the cost of collection and any refunds authorized by law, to be used for various street and highway purposes and for certain mass transit guideway purposes. Existing law creates the Highway Users Tax Account and requires the Controller to distribute by formula a portion of gasoline and diesel excise tax revenues in the Highway Users Tax Account to cities based on their population and to counties based on their number of registered vehicles and maintained miles of county roads. Existing law requires the board of supervisors of each county to establish a road fund to receive those moneys distributed from the Highway Users Tax Account and authorizes the board to deposit other moneys available for roads in its road fund. Existing law requires a county to expend moneys deposited its road fund exclusively for county roads for the transportation purposes authorized by Article XIX of the California Constitution or for other public street and highway purposes as provided by law. This bill would expand the purposes for which a county may spend moneys deposited into its road fund to include any street or road within the county. If a county expends moneys received from the Highway Users Tax Account for streets and roads within the county, the bill would require the county to use those funds equitably throughout the county to identify and improve streets and roads that have the highest need. Before a county expends moneys received from the Highway Users Tax Account, the bill would require the board of supervisors to consult with cities located in the county to identify opportunities for collaborative transportation projects to improve local streets and roads. By requiring counties to consult with cities in this manner, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Bill status
in committee
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2020
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Feb 20, 2020
Last action Mar 2, 2020
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
3
Key actions
0
Committee
2
Mar 2, 2020
Assembly · Referred to committee
Referred to Com. on TRANS.
Feb 21, 2020
Assembly · Reported by committee
From printer. May be heard in committee March 22.
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Sharon Quirk-Silva
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 2738
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 2738. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline