HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-09-22 - AGENDA REPORTS - SENATE BILL 254 (2)D
Agenda Item: 7
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
" AGENDA REPORT
CONSENT CALENDAR
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: J�� j�/1n��?•�
DATE: September 22, 2015
SUBJECT: STATE LEGISLATION: SENATE BILL 254
DEPARTMENT: City Manager's Office
PRESENTER: Matthew Levesque
RECOMMENDED ACTION
City Council adopt the City Council Legislative Subcommittee's recommendation to oppose
Senate Bill 254 (Allen) and transmit position statements to Senator Allen, Santa Clarita's state
legislative delegation, appropriate legislative committees, Governor Brown, and the League of
California Cities.
BACKGROUND
Senate Bill 254 (SB 254), introduced by Senator Ben Allen (D -26 -Santa Monica) relates to state
highway relinquishment to local agencies. Existing law calls for the state to follow atwo-step
process in order to relinquish segments of state highways to local agencies. First, the Legislature
must act to remove the segment slated for relinquishment from the state highway system.
Secondly, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) must make findings that it is in the
state's best interest to proceed- with the relinquishment. Existing law also requires an agreement
is reached between the state and the receiving local agency prior to a relinquishment taking
place.
If enacted, SB 254 would revise the process for state highway relinquishment to local agencies
by removing the requirement that an act of the Legislature must first occur before the CTC may
proceed with relinquishing a segment of highway. SB 254 would also require the California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to submit a biannual report to the CTC listing state
highway segments identified as the best candidates for relinquishment. The CTC would be
required to include a list of state highway segments relinquished each year within its annual
report to the Legislature.
Concerns with SB 254 stem from the fact that the current bill language provides an opportunity
for the CTC to proceed with the relinquishment process without seeking approval from the local
agency receiving the segment of highway. An additional concern with the bill is that the CTC
and local agency are not required to mutually agree on what constitutes a state of good repair for
Page 1
.;" Packet Pg. 31
_ t
the segment of highway prior to the transfer. Without these provisions in the bill, it is very likely
that the state could relinquish segments of state highways to local governments who may not be
in a position to assume the long-term obligation.
Earlier versions of SB 254 included a requirement that in order for the state highway
relinquishment process to begin, the CTC must first enter into an agreement with the receiving
agency and that the CTC place the segment of state highway into a state of good repair prior to
transferring. The most current version of the bill does not include this provision, raising concerns
that the CTC may transfer segments of state highways to local governments without prior
approval.
The specific impact SB 245 could have on Santa Clarita pertains to a three mile segment of
Sierra Highway from Newhall Avenue to Friendly Valley Parkway. Caltrans has expressed
interest in relinquishing this portion of Sierra Highway to the City for several years; however, the
City has consistently refused to assume ownership of the roadway until it is placed in a state of
good repair. The most recent estimate for bringing this portion of Sierra Highway into a state of
good repair is $31 million.
SB 254 is a two-year bill and will be eligible to proceed in the legislative process in 2016. The
League of California Cities has taken an "oppose unless amended" position on the bill due to
concerns the bill language lacks the requirement that the CTC must enter into an agreement with
a local agency prior to proceeding with the relinquishment process.
The Legislative Subcommittee met on August 31, 2015, and recommends that the City Council
adopt an "oppose" position on SB 254.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
1. Adopt a "support" position on SB 254
2. Take no position on SB 254
3. Refer SB 254 back to the Legislative Subcommittee
4. Other action as determined by the City Council
FISCAL IMPACT
No additional resources, beyond those contained within the adopted Fiscal Year 2015/16 City
budget, are required for implementation of the recommended action.
ATTACHMENTS
Senate Bill 254, as amended June 2, 2015
Page 2
Packet Pg. 32
AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 29 2015
AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 22, 2015
SENATE BILL No. 254
Introduced by Senator Allen
February 18, 2015
An act to amend Section 73 of the Streets and Highways Code,
relating to state highways.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
SB 254, as amended, Allen. State highways: relinquishment.
Existing law gives the Department of Transportation full possession
and control of all state highways. Existing law describes the authorized
routes in the state highway system and establishes a process for adoption
of a highway on an authorized route by the California Transportation
Commission. Existing law also provides for the commission to relinquish
to local agencies state highway segments that have been deleted from
the state highway system by legislative enactment or have been
superseded by relocation, and in certain other X9-':3V;iS*L'i*LqLg "Law
fa
This bill would revise and recast these provisions to delete the
requirement that the portion to be relinquished be deleted from the state
highway system by legislative
TLP UW ;4ximilald Q:1;1*j*iqr4QC1Q *14P
97
7.a
Packet Pg. 33
SB 254 2
. enactment.
The bill would require the department, not later than April 1, 2016,
and biennially thereafter, to make a specified report to the commission
on which state highway routes or segments primarily serve regional
travel and do not primarily facilitate interregional movement of people
and goods. The bill would also authorize the department to identify in
the report which of those routes and segments are the best candidates
for relinquishment.
The bill would also authorize the commission to relinquish a portion
of a state highway to a county or city, if the department and the county
or city concerned have entered into an agreement providing for the
relinquishment of a portion of a state highway, within the territorial
limits of the county or city, that is not an interstate highway and does
not primarily facilitate the interregional movement of people and goods,
as determined in the report. The bill would also require that the
relinquishment of those routes and segments is subject to certain
conditions, including that the department complete a specified
cost -benefit analysis and hold a public hearing on the proposed
relinquishment.
The bill would require the commission to compile a list of all portions
of the state highway system relinquished in the previous 12 months and
include this information in its annual report to the Legislature, as
specified.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State -mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
1 SECTION 1. Section 73 of the Streets and Highways Code is
2 amended to read:
3 73. (a) The Legislature finds and declares both of the
4 following:
5 (1) Ownership and management of transportation infrastructure
6 should be placed at the most appropriate level of government.
7 Transportation infrastructure primarily serving regional travel and
8 not primarily facilitating interregional movement of people and
9 goods is typically best managed by local and regional government
10 entities. Transportation infrastructure, including interstate
11 highways, that is needed to facilitate interregional movement of
97
7.a
Packet Pg. 34
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
3 SB 254
people and goods is typically best managed at the state government
level.
(2) The Legislature intends for the department to identify routes,
and segments of routes, that may be appropriate candidates for
relinquishment and to streamline the process of approving
relinquishments where the department and the city or county have
entered into an agreement providing for the relinquishment.
(b) (1) The commission may relinquish to a county or city a
portion of a state highway within the county or city that
. .has
been superseded by relocation.
(2) The commission shall not relinquish to a county or city a
portion of a state highway that has been superseded by relocation
until the department has placed the highway, as defined in Section
23, in a state of good repair. This requirement shall not obligate
the department for widening, new construction, or major
reconstruction, except as the commission may direct. A state of
good repair requires maintenance, as defined in Section 27,
including litter removal, weed control, and tree and shrub trimming
to the time of relinquishment.
(c) Whenever the department and the county or city concerned
have entered into an agreement providing therefor, or the legislative
body of the county or city has adopted a resolution consenting
thereto, the commission may relinquish, to that county or city, any
frontage or service road or outer highway, within the territorial
limits of the county or city, that has been constructed as a part of
a state highway project, but does not constitute a part of the main
traveled roadway thereof.
(d) The commission may also relinquish, to a county or city
within whose territorial limits it is located, any nonmotorized
transportation facility, as defined in Section 887, constructed as
part of a state highway project if the county or city, as the case
97
7.a
Packet Pg. 36
SB 254
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
4
may be, has entered into an agreement providing therefor or its
legislative body has adopted a resolution consenting thereto.
(e) (1) The commission may relinquish a portion of a state
highway to a county or city if the department and the county or
city concerned have entered into an agreement providing for the
relinquishment of that portion of that state highway, within the
territorial limits of the county or city, that is not an interstate
highway and does not primarily facilitate the interregional
movement of people and goods as determined in the report
described in subdivision (h). The department and the county or
city shall agree upon the condition or state of the relinquished
portion of the state highway at the time of its transfer from the
department to the county or city. The agreement shall specify any
financial terms upon which the department and county or city have
agreed. The agreement shall transfer all legal liability for the
relinquished portion of the state highway at the time of its transfer
from the department to the county or city.
(2) A relinquishment pursuant to paragraph (1) shall not occur
unless all of the following conditions are met:
(A) The commission has determined the relinquishment is in
the best interest of the state.
(B) The department completes acost-benefit analysis on behalf
of the state that may include a review of route continuity,
market value assessments of the proposed relinquishment and
associated parcels, a review of historical and estimated future
maintenance costs of the proposed relinquishment, or any other
quantifiable economic impacts.
(C) The commission holds a public hearing on the proposed
relinquishment.
(3) Upon relinquishment of a portion of a state highway under
this subdivision, the county or city accepting the relinquished
former portion of state highway shall maintain within its
jurisdiction signs directing motorists to the continuation of the
remaining portions of the state highway, if any, to the extent
deemed necessary by the department.
(f) Relinquishment shall be by resolution. A certified copy of
the resolution shall be filed with the board of supervisors or the
city clerk, as the case may be. A certified copy of the resolution
shall also be recorded in the office of the recorder of the county
where the land is located and, upon its recordation, all right, title,
97
7.a
Packet Pg. 36
5 SB 254
1 and interest of the state in and to that portion of state highway shall
2 vest in the county or city, as the case may be, and that highway or
3 portion thereof shall thereupon constitute a county road 'or city
4 street, as the case may be.
5 (g) The vesting of all right, title, and interest of the state in and
6 to portions of state highways heretofore relinquished by the
7 commission, in the county or city to which it was relinquished, is
8 hereby confirmed.
9 (h) Not later than April 1, 2016, and biennially thereafter, the
10 department shall report to the commission on which state highway
11 routes or segments primarily serve regional travel and do not
12 primarily facilitate interregional movement of people and goods.
13 The department may identify these routes or segments by one or
14 more categories and shall indicate which routes and segments are
15 the best candidates for relinquishment. The report shall include an
16 aggregate estimate of future maintenance and preservation costs
17 of the identified routes and segments. The commission, in
18 consultation with the department, shall develop guidelines for this
19 report.
20 (i) (1) Prior to relinquishing a portion of a state highway to a
21 county ora
. ,city,
22 the department shall give 90 days' notice In writing of intention
23 to relinquish to the board of supervisors, or the city council, as the
24 case may be, of both the jurisdiction and location of the portion
25 of the state highway to be relinquished and the jurisdictions
26 immediately adjacent to the route where the state highway
27 continues. Where the resolution of relinquishment contains a recital
28 as to the giving of the notice, adoption of the resolution of
29 relinquishment shall be conclusive evidence that the notice has
30 been given.
31 (2) With respect to a relinquishment pursuant to
32 subdivision (b), within the 90 -day period, the board of supervisors
33 or the city council may protest in writing to the commission stating
34 the reasons therefor, including, but not limited to, objections that
35 the highway is not in a state of good repair, or is not needed for
36 public use and should be vacated by the commission. If the
37 commission does not comply with the requests of the protesting
38 body, it may proceed with the relinquishment only after a public
39 hearing given to the protesting body on 10 days' written notice.
97
7.4.
Packet Pg. 37
SB 254 6
1 (j) The commission shall compile a list of all portions of the
2 state highway system relinquished in the previous 12 months and
3 include this information in its annual report to the Legislature
4 pursuant to Section 14535 of the Government Code.
Al
97
7.a
Packet Pg. 38