(1) Existing law creates the Metropolitan Transportation Commission as a local area planning agency for the 9-county San Francisco Bay area with comprehensive regional transportation planning and other related responsibilities. Existing law creates various transit districts located in the San Francisco Bay area, with specified powers and duties relating to providing public transit services. This bill would establish the Public Transit Revenue Measure District with jurisdiction extending throughout the boundaries of the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, and Santa Clara and the City and County of San Francisco and would require the district to be governed by the same board that governs the commission, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a retail transactions and use tax applicable to the entire district to be imposed by the board of the district or by a qualified voter initiative for a duration of 14 years, and in an amount of 0.5% in each of the above-described counties located within the district and 1% in the City and County of San Francisco, subject to voter approval at the November 3, 2026, statewide general election. After payments are made for various administrative expenses, the bill would require the district to transfer specified portions of the proceeds of the tax to the commission for allocation to certain programs and other purposes and for allocation to the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board, commonly known as Caltrain, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, and other specified transit agencies, for transit operations expenses, and would require the district to transfer specified portions of the proceeds of the tax directly to other specified local transportation agencies, including the San Mateo County Transit District and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, for public transit expenses, as prescribed. By adding to the duties of local officials with respect to elections procedures for this bill on behalf of the district, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law requires the commission to develop regional transit service objectives, develop performance measures of efficiency and effectiveness, specify uniform data requirements to assess public transit service benefits and costs, and formulate procedures for establishing regional transportation priorities in the allocation of funds for transportation purposes. This bill would require the commission to contract with, and manage, a third-party consultant to conduct a financial efficiency review of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, Caltrain, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, as specified. The bill would require the review to be completed in 2 phases, with the analysis for the 2nd phase only required if the tax measure is approved by the voters of the Public Transit Revenue Measure District. The bill would require the consultant to transmit the analysis for each phase to an oversight committee, which the bill would create with a prescribed membership, for review and adoption. The bill would require a transit operator subject to the financial efficiency review to take specified actions in response to the analysis for the first phase and, subject to review of the oversight committee, to adopt an implementation plan that describes the cost-saving measures identified in the analysis for the 2nd phase that the operator plans to implement, as specified. The bill would require a transit operator subject to the financial efficiency review to verify its compliance with the requirements of the review as a condition of receiving funds from the tax measure approved by the voters of the district. The bill would require each transit operator to which the commission allocates funds to comply with a maintenance of effort requirement as a condition of receiving those funds, as provided. This bill would require the commission, if the tax measure is approved by the voters of the district and other conditions are satisfied, to establish an ad hoc adjudication committee for a transit operator subject to the above-described financial efficiency review to assess and adjudicate petitions submitted by a participating county transportation entity, as defined, or a county board of supervisors with regard to the performance of the transit operator within the geographic jurisdiction of the entity submitting the petition, as provided. As part of this process, the bill would require an ad hoc adjudication committee, among other things, to determine whether to direct the commission to withhold funding from the tax measure allocated to the transit operator if the committee agrees with a claim regarding the performance of the transit operator, as specified. This bill would require the commission to submit a report to the Legislature on or before March 31, 2026, on its forecast of the impacts to ridership on the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, Caltrain, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency from planned transportation projects and strategies included in its adopted regional transportation plan. By adding to the duties of the commission, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) The Bay Area County Traffic and Transportation Funding Act authorizes the formation of county transportation authorities in each of the 9 bay area counties, and provides for the imposition of a retail transaction and use tax in each of those counties of either 12 of 1% or 1%, subject to voter approval, with revenues to be used for various transportation purposes. This bill would instead provide that a retail transaction and use tax imposed under those provisions in the County of San Mateo or the City and County of San Francisco may be imposed in 18 of 1% increments up to 1%. (4) This bill would declare that its provisions are severable. (5) 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.
Existing law, commencing January 1, 2019, made various changes to the law governing ignition interlock devices (IID) , including, among other things, requiring a person who has been convicted of driving a motor vehicle under the influence of an alcoholic beverage, as specified, to install for a specified period of time as ordered by the court, an IID on the vehicle they operate, provided however that installation of an IID is discretionary for a first offender, as specified; authorizing a person convicted of driving a motor vehicle under the influence, if all other requirements are satisfied, including the installation of an IID, to apply for a restricted driver's license without completing a period of license suspension or revocation; and requiring ignition interlock device manufacturers to be in compliance with specified provisions relating to payment for the costs of an ignition interlock device. Existing law makes these changes operative until January 1, 2026. On January 1, 2026, existing law, as it relates to these provisions, is generally reinstated to read as it read prior to January 1, 2019. Existing law makes it a crime to violate certain provisions relating to IIDs and motor vehicles equipped with IIDs. This bill would extend the operation of these provisions until January 1, 2033, and would instead reinstate the law to how it read prior to January 1, 2019, on January 1, 2033. By extending the application of a crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law authorizes the limit line, intersection, or other places where a driver is required to stop to be equipped with an automated traffic enforcement system if the governmental agency utilizing the system meets certain requirements, including identifying the system with signs and ensuring that the system meets specified criteria on minimum yellow light change intervals. Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2032, the Cities of Los Angeles, San Jose, Oakland, Glendale, and Long Beach, and the City and County of San Francisco to establish a speed safety system pilot program for speed enforcement that utilizes a speed safety system in specified areas, if the system meets specified requirements. Existing law prescribes specified requirements for a notice of violation issued pursuant to these provisions, and requires a violation of a speed law that is recorded by a speed safety system to be subject only to a specified civil penalty. This bill would additionally authorize a city, county, or city and county to establish an automated traffic enforcement system program to use those systems to detect a violation of a traffic control signal, if the system meets specified requirements. The bill would require a violation of a traffic control signal that is recorded by an automated traffic enforcement system to be subject to escalating civil penalties, as specified. The bill would, among other things, provide for the issuance of a notice of violation, an initial review, an administrative hearing, and an appeals process, as specified, for a violation under this program. The bill would clarify that a local jurisdiction may utilize an automated traffic enforcement system pursuant to these provisions or the above-described provisions authorizing the utilization of an automated traffic enforcement system. The bill would require a local jurisdiction utilizing the above-described provisions to take into account the relative risk to traffic and pedestrian safety posed by prohibited right turns on red compared to proceeding through the intersection against a red signal. Existing law establishes a $25 filing fee for specified appeals and petitions. This bill would require a $25 filing fee for an appeal challenging a notice of violation issued as a result of an automated traffic enforcement system. Existing provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 70615 of the Government Code proposed by AB 289 to be operative only if this bill and AB 289 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law generally regulates classes of insurance, including automobile liability insurance. Existing law prohibits a motor vehicle, insured pursuant to a policy of automobile liability insurance, from being classified as a common carrier, livery, or for-hire vehicle solely for the reason that the named insured is performing volunteer services for a nonprofit charitable organization or governmental agency consisting of providing social service transportation, as defined. This bill, for purposes of insurance, would prohibit a motor vehicle, insured pursuant to a policy of automobile liability insurance, from being classified as a common carrier, commercial vehicle, for-hire vehicle, permissive use vehicle, or livery solely for the reason that the named insured is operating or using the insured motor vehicle to provide public social services, as defined, or social service transportation, as defined.
The Local Transportation Authority and Improvement Act authorizes a county board of supervisors to create or otherwise designate a local transportation authority in the county that may impose a transactions and use tax for transportation purposes subject to voter approval and other specified requirements. Pursuant to that authority, the county board of supervisors of the County of Sacramento created the Sacramento Transportation Authority (STA) . This bill would provide that the allowable expenditure categories for revenues from a tax imposed by STA include the construction, modernization, and improvement of infrastructure, as defined, that supports infill or transit-oriented development in areas nominated by local governments, and included in regionally adopted plans that advance state greenhouse gas emissions reduction objectives, as specified. The bill would also authorize STA to impose a transactions and use tax under the act in a geographic area that comprises less than the total area of the County of Sacramento, subject to the approval of voters within that area and other specified requirements. Existing law authorizes regional transportation agencies and the Department of Transportation to apply to the California Transportation Commission to develop and operate high-occupancy toll lanes or other toll facilities. Under existing law, revenue generated from the operation of a toll facility under these provisions is available to the sponsoring agency for the expenses related to the toll facility and for other uses within the corridor from which the revenue is generated pursuant to an expenditure plan developed by the sponsoring agency. Existing law authorizes a regional transportation agency to issue bonds to finance construction-related expenditures for a toll facility, and construction-related expenditures that are included in the expenditure plan, payable from the revenues generated from the toll facility. Existing law defines regional transportation agency for these purposes to mean, among other things, a joint exercise of powers authority subject to the consent of a transportation planning agency for the jurisdiction in which the transportation project will be developed. For purposes of these provisions, the Sacramento Area Council of Governments, the Yolo Transportation District, and the department formed a joint powers authority, known as the Capital Area Regional Tolling Authority (CARTA) , to apply to the commission to develop and operate toll facilities in the Sacramento region. This bill would authorize STA to issue bonds to finance costs of high-occupancy toll lanes or other toll facilities within the County of Sacramento approved by the commission pursuant to the above-described provisions. The bill would authorize those bonds to be payable from toll revenue or any other funds lawfully available to STA for those purposes, including sales tax revenue. Before STA issues bonds payable from toll revenue for a toll facility operated by CARTA, the bill would require STA to enter into an agreement with CARTA regarding the application of toll revenue to pay for bonds issued by STA and would require the governing board of CARTA to review and approve a toll facility expenditure plan.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA, until January 1, 2030, exempts from its requirements active transportation plans, pedestrian plans, or bicycle transportation plans for the restriping of streets and highways, bicycle parking and storage, signal timing to improve street and highway intersection operations, and the related signage for bicycles, pedestrians, and vehicles. This bill would extend the operation of the above-mentioned exemption indefinitely. The bill would also exempt a transit comprehensive operational analysis, as defined, a transit route readjustment, or other transit agency route addition, elimination, or modification, from the requirements of CEQA. Because a lead agency would be required to determine whether a plan qualifies for this exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. CEQA, until January 1, 2030, exempts from its requirements certain transportation-related projects, such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities, transit prioritization projects, public projects located on a site that is wholly within the boundaries of an urbanized area or urban cluster, as provided, for the institution or increase of bus rapid transit, bus, or light rail service, including the construction or rehabilitation of stations, terminals, or existing operations facilities, and public projects for the construction or maintenance of infrastructure of facilities to charge, refuel, or maintain zero-emission public transit buses, trains, or ferries, as provided. CEQA requires, except as provided, those exempted projects to be carried out by a local agency and meet certain requirements, including certain labor requirements. This bill would extend the operation of the above-mentioned exemption until January 1, 2040. The bill would exempt from the requirements of CEQA a public project for the protection and improvement of bus rapid transit, bus, or light rail service, including the protection, operation, and maintenance, public projects for the protection, improvement, institution, or increase of microtransit, paratransit, shuttle, and ferry, and for the protection, maintenance, construction, operation, or rehabilitation of stops that will be exclusively used by zero-emission, near-zero-emission, low oxide of nitrogen engine, compressed natural gas fuel, fuel cell, or hybrid powertrain vehicles, rail or cable cars, rolling stock, or vessels. The bill would, until January 1, 2032, exempt from the requirements of CEQA a public project for the protection, improvement, institution, or increase of microtransit, paratransit, shuttle, bus, ferry, bus rapid transit, or light rail service, including the protection, maintenance, construction, operation, or rehabilitation of stops, stations, terminals, or existing operations facilities, if used primarily by near-zero-emission, low oxide of nitrogen engine, compressed natural gas fuel, or hybrid powertrain vehicles, except as provided. The bill would exclude from this exemption certain public projects for the construction or rehabilitation of a ferry terminal, as provided, and, except as provided, public projects for transit services operated by a transportation network company, as defined. Because a lead agency would be required to determine whether a project qualifies for this exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. CEQA exempts from its requirements a project that consists exclusively of a combination of any of the components of specified transportation-related projects. This bill would extend the operation of the above-mentioned exemption until January 1, 2040. The bill would, until January 1, 2040, exempt from the requirements of CEQA a project that combines any of those specified transportation-related projects and a housing development project that is either subject to a nondiscretionary approval or is exempt from CEQA, as provided. Because a lead agency would be required to determine whether a project qualifies for this exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law exempts from the requirements of CEQA public projects for the institution or increase of passenger rail service, other than light rail service that is eligible for a specified exemption, including the construction or rehabilitation of stations, terminals, or existing operations facilities, which will be exclusively used by zero-emission trains. This bill would extend the operation of the above-mentioned exemption until January 1, 2040. The bill would exempt from the requirements of CEQA public projects for the improvement of passenger rail service, other than light rail service eligible for a specified exemption, including the maintenance of stations, terminals, or existing operations facilities, which will be exclusively used by zero-emission trains, public projects for the maintenance, construction, or rehabilitation of stations, terminals, or existing operations facilities which will be exclusively used by zero-emission certified Tier 4 or cleaner rolling stock or locomotives, as provided. The bill would exclude from this exemption public projects located in certain air basins for the maintenance, construction, or rehabilitation of stations, terminals, or existing operations facilities that will be used by certified Tier 4 or cleaner rolling stock or locomotives that are not zero-emission rolling stock or locomotives. Because a lead agency would be required to determine whether a project qualifies for this exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires certain CEQA-exempt projects exceeding specified dollar amounts to meet certain criteria, as provided. This bill would instead require certain CEQA-exempt projects that are, based on the project engineer's cost estimate, anticipated to exceed a specified dollar amount, to meet certain criteria, as provided. The bill would require the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, beginning January 1, 2026, and every two years thereafter, to adjust these amounts to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index, as provided, and publish the updated amounts on its internet website. The bill would authorize the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation to implement, interpret, or make specific that provision without taking any regulatory action. This bill would declare that its provisions are severable. 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law provides various provisions applicable to all public transit and transit districts and includes specific requirements applicable to public entities that operate commuter rail or rail transit systems. This bill would prohibit a public entity that owns diesel-powered on-track equipment from selling, donating, or otherwise transferring ownership of that equipment for continued use after the public entity decommissions the equipment. The bill would exempt the sale, donation, or transfer of the ownership of that equipment from the prohibition if the equipment is deemed to be in one of specified categories of emissions standards designated by the federal government for locomotives, the equipment produces emissions equivalent to any equipment within any of those federal categories, or the diesel engine is removed from the equipment, as specified.
Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2032, the City of Malibu to establish a speed safety system pilot program for speed enforcement on the Pacific Coast Highway if the system meets specified requirements. Existing law requires the city to administer a public information campaign at least 30 days before implementation of the program, including information relating to when the systems would begin detecting violations. Existing law requires the city to issue warning notices rather than notices of violations for violations detected within the first 60 calendar days of the program. Existing law also requires the city to develop guidelines for, among other things, the processing and storage of confidential information. Existing law requires photographic or administrative records made by a system to be confidential, except as specified, and would only authorize public agencies to use and allow access to these records for specified purposes. This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2032, the Department of Transportation to establish a similar program for speed enforcement that utilizes up to 35 speed safety systems on state highway construction or maintenance areas, as specified. The bill would require the department to adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems before entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program, and would require the department, in developing the guidelines, to consult with relevant state agencies and other relevant stakeholder organizations. The bill would only authorize the Department of Transportation to use and allow access to the photograph or administrative records for specified purposes. Existing law requires a violation of a speed law recorded by a speed safety system to be subject only to civil penalties, as specified. Existing law requires, among other things, the issuance of a notice of violation, an initial review, an administrative hearing, and an appeals process, as specified, for a violation under the speed safety pilot program. This bill would require the department to also implement similar provisions if it establishes the state highway work zone speed safety program on state highway construction or maintenance areas. Existing law requires the city to submit a report to evaluate the speed safety system to determine the system's impact on street safety and the economic impact on the communities where the system is utilized. Existing law requires revenues derived from a program to first be used to cover program costs, such as the installation of speed safety systems, the adjudication of violations, and reporting requirements. This bill would require the department to submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety no later than 2 years after the commencement of the program, and annually thereafter. The bill would require moneys generated from the issuance of citations to be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which the bill would create in the State Transportation Fund. The bill would require moneys in the account to be continuously appropriated to the department for administration of the program, and would require any remaining funds to be used by the department for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program. By authorizing moneys to be continuously appropriated to the department for these purposes, the bill would make an appropriation. Existing law establishes a $25 filing fee for specified appeals and petitions. This bill would require a $25 filing fee for an appeal challenging a notice of violation issued as a result of the department's speed safety program until January 1, 2032. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 70615 of the Government Code proposed by SB 720 to be operative only if this bill and SB 720 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Under the Mills-Alquist-Deddeh Act, also known as the Transportation Development Act, revenues from a 14 percent sales tax in each county are, among other things, available for allocation by the transportation planning agency to transit operators and for community transit services. Existing law requires a transit operator that receives funds through the Mills-Alquist-Deddeh Act and that provides dial-a-ride or paratransit service to provide those services consistent with certain requirements. This bill would require, on or before January 1, 2027, transit operators, as defined, to establish a streamlined recertification process for eligible persons, as specified. The bill would require, on and after June 1, 2027, transit operators to only use the streamlined recertification process for eligible persons unless certain conditions apply. The bill would define "eligible persons" as persons who receive, or who are eligible to receive, paratransit services based on a disability and whose disability cannot reasonably be expected to improve over time, as determined by the person's qualified licensed medical professional, and whose ability to access the fixed route system cannot reasonably be expected to improve over time, as determined by the transit operator. To the extent the bill would impose additional duties on a local agency, it 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.
Existing law creates the Monterey-Salinas Transit District to include all of the County of Monterey, with specified powers and duties related to public transit service. Existing law prohibits the district from imposing sales or special taxes, but authorizes the district, with the concurrence of a majority of the member jurisdictions represented on the board of directors, to submit a ballot measure for the imposition of those taxes to voters of the district. This bill would prohibit the submission of a measure for the imposition of a sales or special tax to the voters of the district under this authority on or after January 1, 2026. Existing law authorizes various local governmental entities, subject to certain limitations and approval requirements, to levy a transactions and use tax, in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in the Transactions and Use Tax Law, including a requirement that the combined rate of all taxes that may be imposed in accordance with that law in the county not exceed 2%. This bill would authorize the Monterey-Salinas Transit District, upon the affirmative vote of at least 23 of the board of directors, to submit to the voters of the district a measure proposing a retail transactions and use tax ordinance in accordance with the Transactions and Use Tax Law. The bill would also separately authorize the district to impose a transactions and use tax for the support of its transportation services at a rate of no more than 0.25% that would, in combination with other transactions and use taxes, exceed the above-described combined rate limit of 2%, if the ordinance proposing the tax is approved by the voters before January 1, 2035, subject to applicable voter approval requirements, as specified. The bill would prohibit a transactions and use tax rate imposed pursuant to this authority from being considered for purposes of that combined rate limit described above.
