HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-07-10 - AGENDA REPORTS - LEGISLATION (2)I
Agenda Item:
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
AGENDA REPORT
CONSENT CALENDAR City Manager Approval:
Item to be presented by:
DATE: July 10, 2007
SUBJECT: LEGISLATION
DEPARTMENT: City Manager's Office
RECOMMENDED ACTION
City Council review legislative bills and direct staff to send letters of support for the following
bills: H.R. 1835/ S. 1053 (Rim of the Valley Corridor Study Act), SCA 12 (Local government:
property -related fees), SB 286 (Transportation bonds: implementation), and support the City of
Long Beach in efforts to encourage Congress to continue funding the C-17 program.
BACKGROUND
H.R. 1835 (Schiff -D -CA -29) / S. 1053 (Feinstein -D -CA) provides for a resource study of the
area known as the Rim of the Valley Corridor in the State of California to evaluate alternatives
for protecting resources of the Corridor. The City Council supported previous versions of this bill
and is asked to continue supporting Senator Feinstein and Congressman Schiff in their efforts to
study this area. The bills directs the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a resource study of and
submit a report on the Rim of the Valley Corridor in California to evaluate a range of alternatives
for protecting the Corridor's resources, including the alternative of establishing all or part of the
Corridor as a unit of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area.
SCA 12 was introduced by Senators Torlakson and Yee. The California Constitution, as
amended by Proposition 218 in 1996, with the exception of fees or charges for sewer, water, and
refuse collection services, conditions the imposition or increase of a property -related fee or
charge upon approval by either a majority vote of the owners of the properties subject to the fee
or charge or, at the option of the agency imposing the fee or'charge, by a 2/3 vote of the voters
residing in the area. This amendment would additionally exclude fees and charges for stormwater
and surface water drainage from these approval requirements for the imposition or increase of a
property -related fee or charge. Proposition 218 set the maximum dollar amount that can be
charged for NPDES and the City is currently charging the maximum amount. This amendment
would allow local governments to increase the fee as needed in order to pay for the overall
' compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit without
going through the currently required approval process. This bill is an amendment to the
California Constitution and requires state-wide electorate approval to be enacted, thus creating a
voter approved exception for stormwater fees.
SB 286 was introduced by State Senator Lowenthal and establishes procedures for the
accelerated allocation of up to $2 billion of bond proceeds from the Highway Safety, Traffic
Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 that are deposited in the Local Street
and Road Improvement, Congestion Relief, and Traffic Safety Account of 2006 for use by cities
and counties. This measure is implementation of Proposition 1B, approved by the voters at the
November 2006 general election. This bill would require the first payments of bond funds for
local street and road purposes to be allocated by the Controller no later than January 1, 2008. It
would require an applicant for these funds to submit a list of projects expected to be funded with
bond funds to the Department of Finance and to report various information to the Department of
Finance. The bill would require funds to be expended within 3 fiscal years from the date of
allocation, and would require unexpended funds to be returned to the Controller for reallocation.
The City of Santa Clarita is allocated to receive $5,545,345 in direct funding from Prop. 1B. The
City has identified several projects that are ready and able to utilize these funds.
The City of Long Beach is asking the City of Santa Clarita to send a letter of support to our
members of Congress to request that they provide the necessary funding for the C-17 program in
the 2007 appropriations legislation. The City of Santa Clarita is home to two major suppliers of
the program, HR Textron and Wesco Aircraft. The City of Long Beach is requesting that the City
Council support efforts to urge the Federal government to continue the program.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. City Council opposes one or more of the measures
2. City Council take no position
3. Other action as determined by the City Council
FISCAL IMPACT
All activities associated with the recommended actions are contained within the approved
2007/2008 budget
ATTACHMENTS
H.R. 1835
S. 1053
SCA 12
SB 286
Letter from the City of Long Beach
1835 IH
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 1835
Pagel of 2
o provide for resource study of the area known as the Rim of the Valley Corridor in
ie State of California to evaluate alternatives for protecting resources of the corridor,
nd for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 29, 2007
. SCHIFF (for himself and Mr. SHERMAN) introduced the following bill; which was
erred to the Committee on Natural Resources
A BILL
provide for a resource study of the area known as the Rim of the Valley Corridor in
State of California to evaluate alternatives for protecting resources of the corridor,
I for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembled,
ON 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the 'Rim of the Valley Corridor Study Act'.
EC. 2. RESOURCE STUDY OF RIM OF THE VALLEY CORRIDOR,
ALIFORNIA.
(a) Study Required- The Secretary of the Interior shall conduct a resource study of
the lands, waters, and interests of the area known as the Rim of the Valley Corridor
in the State of California to evaluate a range of alternatives for protecting
resources of the corridor, including the alternative of establishing all or a portion of
the corridor as a unit of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, The
Rim of the Valley Corridor generally includes the mountains encircling the San
Fernando, La Crescenta, Santa Clarita, Simi, and Conejo Valleys in California:
(b) Study Topics- In conducting the study, the Secretary shall seek to achieve the
following objectives:
(1) Protecting wildlife populations in the Santa Monica Mountains National
Recreation Area by preserving habitat linkages and wildlife movement
corridors between large blocks of habitat in adjoining regional open space.
file:HC:\DOCUME-1\jperrino\LOCALS-1\Temp\5COMC2YZ.htm 6/28/2007
Page 2 of 2
(2) Establishing connections along the State -designated Rim of the Valley Trail
System, with the aim of creating a single contiguous Rim of the Valley Trail
and encompassing major feeder trails connecting adjoining communities and
regional transit to the trail system.
(3) Preserving recreational opportunities and facilitating access to open space
for a variety of recreational users.
(4) Protecting rare, threatened, or endangered plant and animal species, and
rare or unusual plant communities and habitats.
(5) Protecting historically significant landscapes, districts, sites, and
structures.
(6) Respecting the needs of communities within, or in the vicinity of, the Rim
of the Valley Corridor.
(c) Private Property- As part of the study, the Secretary shall analyze the potential
impact that establishment of all or a portion of the Rim of the Valley Corridor as a
unit of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area is likely to have on
land within or bordering the area that is privately owned at the time the study is
conducted. The report required by subsection (g) shall discuss the concerns of „
private landowners within the existing boundaries of the Santa Monica Mountains
National Recreation Area.
r.
(d) Cost Effectiveness- As part of evaluating each alternative considered under the
study, the Secretary shall estimate the impact of implementing the alternative on
staffing and other potential costs to Federal, State, and local agencies and other.
organizations.
(e) Consultation- The Secretary shall conduct the study in consultation with
appropriate Federal, State, county, and local government entities.
(f) Study Criteria- In addition to the special considerations specified in this section,
the Secretary shall conduct the study using the criteria prescribed for the study of
areas for potential inclusion In the National Park System in section 8(c) of Public
Law 91-383 (16 U.S.C. 1a -5(c)).
(g) Transmission of Study- Within three years after funds are first made available
for the study, the Secretary shall transmit a report containing the results of the
study to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and to the
Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives.
IH K&E-H-mg I QQrAP.a I Accessibility, I Leap! I USA9QY
file:HC:\DOCUME—I\jperrino\LOCALS—I\Temp\5COMC2YZ.htm 6/28/2007
Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress) Pagel of 2
10531S
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
S-1053
provide for a resource study of the area known as the Rim of the Valley Corridor in
State of California to evaluate alternatives for protecting resources of the corridor,
Ifor other purposes.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
March 29, 2007
rs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mrs. BOXER) introduced the following bill; which was
!ad twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
A BILL
o provide for a resource study of the area known as the Rim of the Valley Corridor in
ie State of California to evaluate alternatives for protecting resources of the corridor,
nd for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembled,
ON 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the 'Rim of the Valley Corridor Study Act'.
EC. 2. RESOURCE STUDY OF RIM OF THE VALLEY CORRIDOR,
ALIFORNIA.
(a) Study Required- The Secretary of the Interior shall conduct a resource study of
the lands, waters, and interests of the area known as the Rim of the Valley Corridor
in the State of California to evaluate a range of alternatives for protecting
resources of the corridor, including the alternative of establishing all or a portion of
the corridor as a unit of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area. The
Rim of the Valley Corridor generally includes the mountains encircling the San
Fernando, La Crescenta, Santa Clarita, Simi, and Conejo Valleys in California:
(b) Study Topics- In conducting the study, the Secretary shall seek to achieve the
following objectives:
(1) Protecting wildlife populations in the Santa Monica Mountains National
Recreation Area by preserving habitat linkages and wildlife movement
corridors between large blocks of habitat in adjoining regional open space.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?c 1 10:./temp/—c I I OeBwcTF 6/28/2007
Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
Page 2 of 2
(2) Establishing connections along the State -designated Rim of the Valley Trail
System, with the aim of creating a single contiguous Rim of the Valley
and encompassing major feeder trails connecting adjoining communities and
regional transit to the trail system.
(3) Preserving recreational opportunities and facilitating access to open space
for a variety of recreational users.
(4) Protecting rare, threatened, or endangered plant and animal species, and
rare or unusual plant communities and habitats.
(5) Protecting historically significant landscapes, districts, sites, and
structures.
(6) Respecting the needs of communities within, or in the vicinity of, the Rim
of the Valley Corridor.
(c) Private Property- As part of the study, the Secretary shall analyze the potential
impact that establishment of all or a portion of the Rim of the Valley Corridor,as'a'
unit of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area is likely to have on
land within or bordering the area that is privately owned at the time the study is,
conducted. The report required by subsection (g) shall discuss the concerns of
private landowners within the existing boundaries of the Santa Monica Mountains
National Recreation Area.
(d) Cost Effectiveness- As part of evaluating each alternative considered under the
study, the Secretary shall estimate the impact of implementing the alternative on
staffing and other potential costs to Federal, State, and local agencies and other
organizations.
(e) Consultation- The Secretary shall conduct the study in consultation with
appropriate Federal, State, county, and local government entities.
(f) Study Criteria- In addition to the special considerations specified in this section,
the Secretary shall conduct the study using the criteria prescribed for the study of
areas for potential inclusion in the National Park System in section 8(c) of Public
Law 91-383 (16 U.S.C. la -5(c)).
(g) Transmission of Study- Within three years after funds are first made available
for the study, the Secretary shall transmit a report containing the results of the
study to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and to the
Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives.
TH-0MA-5-Mgm I C=ad I As4e5!j�illitx 1 Legal 1 lLSA,as2v
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?cl10:Jtemp/ cll0eBwcTF 6/28/2007
CL
(L 0.
E
rio
& 1 8
... .. ....
.. .. .... ..
... .. .... -
... . .... ...
. . .... ....
... .. .... . ..
AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 18, 2007
Senate Constitutional Amendment No. 12
Introduced by Senators Torlakson and Yee
(Coauthor. Senator Kuehl)
May 21, 2007
Senate Constitutional Amendment No. 12—A resolution to propose
to the people of the State of California an amendment to the Constitution
of the State, by amending Section 6 of Article XIII D thereof, relating
to local government finance.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
SCA 12, as amended, Torlakson. Local government: property -related
fees.
The California Constitution, with the exception of fees or charges for
sewer, water, and refuse collection services, conditions the imposition
or increase of a property -related fee or charge upon approval by either
a majority vote of the owners of the properties subject to the fee or
charge or, at the option of the agency imposing the fee or charge, by a
vote of the voters residing in the area affected by the fee or charge.
This measure would additionally exclude fees and charges for
stormwater andstmfitee water drairiage urban runoff management from
these approval requirements for the imposition or increase of a
property -related fee or charge.
Vote: 2/3. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no.
State -mandated local program: no.
1 Resolved by the Senate, the Assembly concurring, That the
2 Legislature of the State of California at its 2007-08 Regular
3 Session commencing on the fourth day of December 2006,
98
SCA 12
—2-
1 two-thirds of the membership of each house concurring, hereby
2 proposes to the people of the State of California, that the
3 Constitution of the State be amended as follows:
4 That Section 6 of Article XIII D thereof is amended to read:
5 SEC. 6. Property Related Fees and Charges. (a) Procedures
6 for New or Increased Fees and Charges. An agency shall follow
7 the procedures pursuant to this section in imposing or increasing
8 any fee or charge as defined pursuant to this article, including, but
9 not limited to, the following:
10 (1) The parcels upon which a fee or charge is proposed for
11 imposition shall be identified. The amount of the fee or charge
12 proposed to be imposed upon each parcel shall be calculated. The
13 agency shall provide written notice by mail of the proposed fee or
14 charge to the record owner of each identified parcel upon which
15 the fee or charge is proposed for imposition, the amount of the fee
16 or charge proposed to be imposed upon each, the basis upon which
17 the amount of the proposed fee or charge was calculated, the reason
18 for the fee or charge, together with the date, time, and location of
19 a public hearing on the proposed fee or charge.
20 (2) The agency shall conduct a public hearing upon the proposed
21 fee or charge not less than 45 days after mailing the notice of the
22 proposed fee or charge to the record owners of each identified
23 parcel upon which the fee or charge is proposed for imposition.
24 At the public hearing, the agency shall consider all protests against
25 the proposed fee or charge. If written protests against the proposed
26 fee or charge are presented by a majority of owners of the identified
27 parcels, the agency shall not impose the fee or charge.
28 (b) Requirements for Existing, New or Increased Fees and
29 Charges. A fee or charge shall not be extended, imposed, or
30 increased by any agency unless it meets all of the following
31 requirements:
32 (1) Revenues derived from the fee or charge shall not exceed
33 the funds required to provide the property related service.
34 (2) Revenues derived from the fee or charge shall not be used
35 for any purpose other than that for which the fee or charge was
36 imposed.
37 (3) The amount of a fee or charge imposed upon any parcel or
38 person as an incident of property ownership shall not exceed the
39 proportional cost of the service attributable to the parcel.
98
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
-3— SCA 12
(4) No fee or charge may be imposed for a service unless that
service is actually used by, or immediately available to, the owner
of the property in question. Fees or charges based on potential or
future use of a service are not permitted. Standby charges, whether
characterized as charges or assessments, shall be classified as
assessments and shall not be imposed without compliance with
Section 4.
(5) No fee or charge may be imposed for general governmental
services including, but not limited to, police, fire, ambulance or
library services, where the service is available to the public at large
in substantially the same manner as it is to property owners.
Reliance by an agency on any parcel map, including, but not
limited to, an assessor's parcel map, may be considered a
significant factor in determining whether a fee or charge is imposed
as an incident of property ownership for purposes of this article.
In any legal action contesting the validity of a fee or charge, the
burden shall be on the agency to demonstrate compliance with this
article.
(c) Voter Approval for New or Increased Fees and
Charges. Except for fees or charges for sewer, water, stormwater
andsur&ee watei drainage urban runoff management, or refuse
collection services, a property -related fee or charge shall not be
imposed or increased unless and until that fee or charge is
submitted and approved by a majority vote of the property owners
of the property subject to the fee or charge or, at the option of the
agency, by a two-thirds vote of the electorate residing in the
affected area. The election shall be conducted not less than 45 days
after the public hearing. An agency may adopt procedures similar
to those for increases in assessments in the conduct of elections
under this subdivision.
(d) Beginning July 1, 1997, all fees or charges shall comply
with this section.
M
98
AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 4, 2007
AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 14, 2007
AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 2, 2007
AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 9, 2007
SENATE BILL No. 286
Introduced by Senators Lowenthal and Dutton
February 15, 2007
An act to amend Sections 8879.23 and 8879.28 of the Government
Code, relating to transportation bonds, and declaring the urgency thereof,
to take effect immediately.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
SB 286, as amended, Lowenthal. Transportation bonds:
implementation.
Proposition 1 B, approved by the voters at the November 2006, general
election, enacts the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality,
and Port Security Bond Act of 2006, which authorizes the issuance of
$19.925 billion of general obligation bonds for various transportation
purposes, including $2 billion to be allocated by the Controller to cities
and counties, by formula, for local street and road purposes, subject to
appropriation by the Legislature.
This bill would require the first payments of bond funds for local
street and road purposes to be allocated by the Controller =-
total alloeation amount to be made during the first eyele of payments
net no later than January 1, 2008, as speei€red. The bill would -also
require the Controller to use the population figures from the Department
of Finance as of January 1, 2007, in making allocations to cities. The
95
SB 286
—2—
bill would require an applicant for these funds to submit a list of projects
expected to be funded with bond funds to the Department of Finance,
as specified, and to report various information to the Department of
Finance. The bill would require funds to be expended within 3 fiscal
years from the date of allocation, and would require unexpended funds
to be returned to the Controller for reallocation. The bill would make
other related changes.
This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an
urgency statute.
Vote: 2/3. 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 8879.23 of the Government Code is
2 amended to read:
3 8879.23. The Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality,
4 and Port Security Fund of 2006 is hereby created in the State
5 Treasury. The Legislature intends that the proceeds of bonds
6 deposited in the fund shall be used to fund the mobility, safety,
7 and air quality improvements described in this article over the
8 course of the next decade. The proceeds of bonds issued and sold
9 pursuant to this chapter for the purposes specified in this chapter
10 shall be allocated in the following manner:
I (a) (1) Four billion five hundred million dollars
12 ($4,500,000,000) shall be deposited in the Corridor Mobility
13 Improvement Account, which is hereby created in the fund. Funds
14 in the account shall be available to the California Transportation
15 Commission, upon appropriation in the annual Budget Bill by the
16 Legislature, for allocation for performance improvements on highly
17 congested travel corridors in California. Funds in the account shall
18 be used for performance improvements on the state highway
19 system, or major access routes to the state highway system on the
20 local road system that relieve congestion by expanding capacity,
21 enhancing operations, or otherwise improving travel times within
22 these high -congestion travel corridors, as identified by the
23 department and regional or local transportation agencies, pursuant
24 to the process in paragraph (3) or (4), as applicable.
25 (2) The commission shall develop and adopt guidelines, by
26 December 1, 2006, including regional programming targets, for
95
-3— SB 286
I the program funded by this subdivision, and shall allocate funds
2 from the account to projects after reviewing project nominations
3 submitted by the Department of Transportation and by regional
4 transportation planning agencies or county transportation
5 commissions or authorities pursuant to paragraph (4).
6 (3) Subject to the guidelines adopted pursuant to paragraph (2),
7 the department shall nominate, by no later than January 15, 2007,
8 projects for the allocation of funds from the account on a statewide
9 basis. The department's nominations shall be geographically
10 balanced and shall reflect the department's assessment of a program
11 that best meets the policy objectives described in paragraph (1).
12 (4) Subject to the guidelines adopted pursuant to paragraph (2),
13 a regional transportation planning agency or county transportation
14 commission or authority responsible for preparing a regional
15 transportation improvement plan under Section 14527 may
16 nominate projects identified pursuant to paragraph (1) that best
17 meet the policy objectives described in that paragraph for funding
18 from the account. Projects nominated pursuant to this paragraph
19 shall be submitted to the commission for consideration for funding
20 by no later than January 15, 2007.
21 (5) All nominations to the California Transportation Commission
22 shall be accompanied by documentation regarding the quantitative
23 and qualitative measures validating each project's consistency
24 with the policy objectives described in paragraph (1). All projects
25 nominated to the commission for funds from this account shall be
26 included in a regional transportation plan.
27 (6) After review of the project nominations, and supporting
28 documentation, the commission, by no later than March 1, 2007,
29 shall adopt an initial program of projects to be funded from the
30 account. This program may be updated every two years in
31 conjunction with the biennial process for adoption of the state
32 transportation improvement program pursuant to guidelines adopted
33 by the commission. The inclusion of a project in the program shall
34 be based on a demonstration that the project meets all of the
35 following criteria:
36 (A) Is a high-priority project in the corridor as demonstrated by
37 either of the following: (i) its inclusion in the list of nominated
38 projects by both the department pursuant to paragraph (3) and the
39 regional transportation planning agency or county transportation
40 commission or authority, pursuant to paragraph (4); or (ii) if needed
95
SB 286
—4—
I to fully fund the project, the identification and commitment of
2 supplemental funding to the project from other state, local, or
3 federal funds.
4 (B) Can commence construction or implementation no later
5 than December 31, 2012.
6 (C) Improves mobility in a high -congestion corridor by
7 improving travel times or reducing the number of daily vehicle
8 hours of delay, improves the connectivity of the state highway
9 system between rural, suburban, and urban areas, or improves the
10 operation or safety of a highway or road segment.
11 (D) Improves access to jobs, housing, markets, and commerce.
12 (7) Where competing projects offer similar mobility
13 improvements to a specific corridor, the commission shall consider
14 additional benefits when determining which project shall be
15 included in the program for funding. These benefits shall include,
16 but are not limited to, the following:
17 (A) A finding that the project provides quantifiable air quality
18 benefits.
19 (B) A finding that the project substantially increases the safety
20 for travelers in the corridor.
21 (8) In adopting a program for funding pursuant to this
22 subdivision, the commission shall make a finding that the program
23 is (i) geographically balanced, consistent with the geographic split
24 for funding described in Section 188 of the Streets and Highways
25 Code; (ii) provides mobility improvements in highly traveled or
26 highly congested corridors in all regions of California; and (iii)
27 targets bond proceeds in a manner that provides the increment of
28 funding necessary, when combined with other state, local or federal
29 funds, to provide the mobility benefit in the earliest possible
30 timeframe.
31 (9) The commission shall include in its annual report to the
32 Legislature, required by Section 14535, a summary of its activities
33 related to the administration of this program. The summary should,
34 at a minimum, include a description and the location of the projects
35 contained in the program, the amount of funds allocated to each
36 project, the status of each project, and a description of the mobility
37 improvements the program is achieving.
38 (b) One billion dollars ($1,000,000,000) shall be made available,
39 upon appropriation in the annual Budget Bill by the Legislature,
40 to the department for improvements to State Route 99. Funds may
95
-5— SB 286
1 be used for safety, operational enhancements, rehabilitation, or
2 capacity improvements necessary to improve the State Route 99
3 corridor traversing approximately 400 miles of the central valley
4 of this state.
5 (c) Three billion one hundred million dollars ($3,100,000,000)
6 shall be deposited in the California Ports Infrastructure, Security,
7 and Air Quality Improvement Account, which is hereby created
8 in the fund. The money in the account shall be available, upon
9 appropriation by the Legislature and subject to such conditions
10 and criteria as the Legislature may provide by statute, as follows:
I 1 (1) (A) Two billion dollars ($2,000,000,000) shall be transferred
12 to the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund, which is hereby created.
13 The money in this fund shall be available, upon appropriation in
14 the annual Budget Bill by the Legislature and subject to such
15 conditions and criteria as the Legislature may provide by statute,
16 for allocation by the California Transportation Commission for
17 infrastructure improvements along federally designated "Trade
18 Corridors of National Significance" in this state or along other
19 corridors within this state that have a high volume of freight
20 movement, as determined by the commission. In determining
21 projects eligible for funding, the commission shall consult the trade
22 infrastructure and goods movement plan submitted to the
23 commission by the Secretary of Business, Transportation and
24 Housing and the Secretary for Environmental Protection. No
25 moneys shall be allocated from this fund until the report is
26 submitted to the commission for its consideration, provided the
27 report is submitted no later than January 1, 2007. The commission
28 shall also consult trade infrastructure and goods movement plans
29 adopted by regional transportation planning agencies, adopted
30 regional transportation plans required by state and federal law, and
31 the statewide port master plan prepared by the California Marine
32 and Intermodal Transportation System Advisory Council
33 (Cal-MITSAC) pursuant to Section 1760 of the Harbors and
34 Navigation Code, when determining eligible projects for funding.
35 Eligible projects for these funds include, but are not limited to, all
36 of the following:
37 (i) Highway capacity improvements and operational
38 improvements to more efficiently accommodate the movement of
39 freight, particularly for ingress and egress to and from the state's
40 seaports, including navigable inland waterways used to transport
95
SB 286 —6-
1 freight between seaports, land ports of entry, and airports, and to
2 relieve traffic congestion along major trade or goods movement
3 corridors.
4 (ii) Freight rail system improvements to enhance the ability to
5 move goods from seaports, land ports of entry, and airports to
6 warehousing and distribution centers throughout California,
7 including projects that separate rail lines from highway or local
8 road traffic, improve freight rail mobility through mountainous
9 regions, relocate rail switching yards, and other projects that
10 improve the efficiency and capacity of the rail freight system.
I 1 (iii) Projects to enhance the capacity and efficiency of ports.
12 (iv) Truck corridor improvements, including dedicated truck
13 facilities or truck toll facilities.
14 (v) Border access improvements that enhance goods movement
15 between California and Mexico and that maximize the state's
16 ability to access coordinated border infrastructure funds made
17 available to the state by federal law.
18 (vi) Surface transportation improvements to facilitate the
19 movement of goods to and from the state's airports.
20 (B) The commission shall allocate funds for trade infrastructure
21 improvements from the account in a manner that (i) addresses the
22 state's most urgent needs, (ii) balances the demands of various
23 ports (between large and small ports, as well as between seaports,
24 airports, and land ports of entry), (iii) provides reasonable
25 geographic balance between the state's regions, and (iv) places
26 emphasis on projects that improve trade corridor mobility while
27 reducing emissions of diesel particulate and other pollutant
28 emissions. In addition, the commission shall also consider the
29 following factors when allocating these funds:
30 (i) "Velocity," which means the speed by which large cargo
31 would travel from the port through the distribution system.
32 (ii) "Throughput," which means the volume of cargo that would
33 move from the port through the distribution system.
34 (iii) "Reliability," which means a reasonably consistent and
35 predictable amount of time for cargo to travel from one point to
36 another on any given day or at any given time in California.
37 (iv) "Congestion reduction," which means the reduction in
38 recurrent daily hours of delay to be achieved.
39 (C) The commission shall allocate funds made available by this
40 paragraph to projects that have identified and committed
95
-7— SB 286
1 supplemental funding from appropriate local, federal or private
2 sources. The commission shall determine the appropriate amount
3 of supplemental funding each project should have to be eligible
4 for moneys from this fund based on a project -by -project review
5 and an assessment of the project's benefit to the state and the
6 program. Except for border access improvements described in
7 clause (v) of subparagraph (A), improvements funded with moneys
8 from this fund shall have supplemental funding that is at least equal
9 to the amount of the contribution from the fund. The commission
10 may give priority for funding to projects with higher levels of
11 committed supplemental funding.
12 (D) The commission shall include in its annual report to the
13 Legislature, required by Section 14535, a summary of its activities
14 related to the administration of this program. The summary should,
15 at a minimum, include a description and the location of the projects
16 contained in the program, the amount of funds allocated to each
17 project, the status of each project, and a description of the mobility
18 and air quality improvements the program is achieving.
19 (2) One billion dollars ($1,000,000,000) shall be made available,
20 upon appropriation by the Legislature and subject to such
21 conditions and criteria contained in a statute enacted by the
22 Legislature, to the State Air Resources Board for emission
23 reductions, not otherwise required by law or regulation, from
24 activities related to the movement of freight along California's
25 trade corridors. Funds made available by this paragraph are
26 intended to supplement existing funds used to finance strategies
27 and public benefit projects that reduce emissions and improve air
28 quality in trade corridors commencing at the state's airports,
29 seaports, and land ports of entry.
30 (3) One hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) shall be
31 available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to the Office of
32 Emergency Services to be allocated, as grants, for port, harbor,
33 and fent' terminal security improvements. Eligible applicants shall
34 be publicly owned ports, harbors, and ferryboat and ferry terminal
35 operators, which may submit applications for projects that include,
36 but are not limited to, the following:
37 (A) Video surveillance equipment.
38 (B) Explosives detection technology, including, but not limited
39 to, X-ray devices.
40 (C) Cargo scanners.
95
SB 286
—8—
I (D) Radiation monitors.
2 (E) Thermal protective equipment.
3 (F) Site identification instruments capable of providing a
4 fingerprint for a broad inventory of chemical agents.
5 (G) Other devices capable of detecting weapons of mass
6 destruction using chemical, biological, or other similar substances.
7 (H) Other security equipment to assist in any of the following:
8 (i) Screening of incoming vessels, trucks, and incoming or
9 outbound cargo.
10 (ii) Monitoring the physical perimeters of harbors, ports, and
11 fent' terminals.
12 (iii) Providing or augmenting onsite emergency response
13 capability.
14 (I) Overweight cargo detection equipment, including, but not
15 limited to, intermodal crane scales and truck weight scales.
16 (J) Developing disaster preparedness or emergency response
17 plans.
18 The Office of Emergency Services shall report to the Legislature
19 on March 1 of each year on the manner in which the funds available
20 pursuant to this paragraph were expended for that fiscal year.
21 (d) Two hundred million dollars ($200,000,000) shall be
22 available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for schoolbus
23 retrofit and replacement to reduce air pollution and to reduce
24 children's exposure to diesel exhaust.
25 (e) Two billion dollars ($2,000,000,000) shall be available for
26 projects in the state transportation improvement program, to
27 augment funds otherwise available for this purpose from other
28 sources. The funds provided by this subdivision shall be deposited
29 in the Transportation Facilities Account which is hereby created
30 in the fund, and shall be available, upon appropriation by the
31 Legislature, to the Department of Transportation, as allocated by
32 the California Transportation Commission in the same manner as
33 funds allocated for those projects under existing law.
34 (f) (1) Four billion dollars ($4,000,000,000) shall be deposited
35 in the Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and
36 Service Enhancement Account, which is hereby created in the
37 fund. Funds in the account shall be made available, upon
38 appropriation by the Legislature, to the Department of
39 Transportation for intercity rail projects and to commuter or urban
40 rail operators, bus operators, waterborne transit operators, and
95
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
-9— SB 286
other transit operators in California for rehabilitation, safety or
modernization improvements, capital service enhancements or
expansions, new capital projects, bus rapid transit improvements,
or for rolling stock procurement, rehabilitation, or replacement.
(2) Of the funds made available in paragraph (1), four hundred
million dollars ($400,000,000) shall be available, upon
appropriation by the Legislature, to the department for intercity
rail improvements, of which one hundred twenty-five million
dollars ($125,000,000) shall be used for the procurement of
additional intercity railcars and locomotives.
(3) Of the funds remaining after the allocations in paragraph
(2), 50 percent shall be distributed to the Controller, for allocation
to eligible agencies using the formula in Section 99314 of the
Public Utilities Code, and 50 percent shall be distributed to the
Controller, for allocation to eligible agencies using the formula in
Section 99313 of the Public Utilities Code, subject to the provisions
governing funds allocated under those sections.
(g) One billion dollars ($1,000,000,000) shall be deposited in
the State -Local Partnership Program Account, which is hereby
created in the fund. The funds shall be available, upon
appropriation by the Legislature and subject to such conditions
and criteria as the Legislature may provide by statute, for allocation
by the California Transportation Commission over a five-year
period to eligible transportation projects nominated by an applicant
transportation agency. A dollar for dollar match of local funds
shall be required for an applicant transportation agency to receive
state funds under this program.
(h) One billion dollars ($1,000,000,000) shall be deposited in
the Transit System Safety, Security, and Disaster Response
Account, which is hereby created in the fund. Funds in the account
shall be made available, upon appropriation by the Legislature and
subject to such conditions and criteria as the Legislature may
provide by statute, for capital projects that provide increased
protection against a security and safety threat, and for capital
expenditures to increase the capacity of transit operators, including
waterborne transit operators, to develop disaster response
transportation systems that can move people, goods, and emergency
personnel and equipment in the aftermath of a disaster impairing
the mobility of goods, people, and equipment.
95
SB 286
—10-
1 (i) One hundred twenty-five million dollars ($125,000,000)
2 shall be deposited in the Local Bridge Seismic Retrofit Account,
3 which is hereby created in the fund. The funds in the account shall
4 be used, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to provide the 11.5
5 percent required match for federal Highway Bridge Replacement
6 and Repair funds available to the state for seismic work on local
7 bridges, ramps, and overpasses, as identified by the Department
8 of Transportation.
9 0) (1) Two hundred fifty million dollars ($250,000,000) shall
10 be deposited in the Highway -Railroad Crossing Safety Account,
11 which is hereby created in the fund. Funds in the account shall be
12 available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to the Department
13 of Transportation for the completion of high-priority grade
14 separation and railroad crossing safety improvements. Funds in
15 the account shall be made available for allocation pursuant to the
16 process established in Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 2450)
17 of Division 3 of the Streets and Highways Code, except that a
18 dollar for dollar match of nonstate funds shall be provided for each
19 project, and the limitation on maximum project cost in subdivision
20 (g) of Section 2454 of the Streets and Highways Code shall not
21 be applicable to projects funded with these funds.
22 (2) Notwithstanding the funding allocation process described
23 in paragraph (1), in consultation with the department and the Public
24 Utilities Commission, the California Transportation Commission
25 shall allocate one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) of the
26 funds in the account to high-priority railroad crossing
27 improvements, including grade separation projects, that are not
28 part of the process established in Chapter 10 (commencing with
29 Section 2450) of Division 3 of the Streets and Highways Code.
30 The allocation of funds under this paragraph shall be made in
31 consultation and coordination with the High -Speed Rail Authority
32 created pursuant to Division 19.5 (commencing with Section
33 185000) of the Public Utilities Code.
34 (k) (1) Seven hundred fifty million dollars ($750,000,000) shall
35 be deposited in the Highway Safety, Rehabilitation, and
36 Preservation Account, which is hereby created in the fund. Funds
37 in the account shall be available, upon appropriation by the
38 Legislature, to the Department of Transportation, as allocated by
39 the California Transportation Commission, for the purposes of the
95
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
-11- SB 286
state highway operation and protection program as described in
Section 14526.5.
(2) The department shall develop a program for distribution of
two hundred fifty million dollars ($250,000,000) from the funds
identified in paragraph (1) to fund traffic light synchronization
projects or other technology-based improvements to improve
safety, operations and the effective capacity of local streets and
roads.
(n (1) Two billion dollars ($2,000,000,000) shall be deposited
in the Local Street and Road Improvement, Congestion Relief,
and Traffic Safety Account of 2006, which is hereby created in
the fund. The proceeds of bonds deposited into that account shall
be available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for the
purposes specified in this subdivision, to the Controller for
administration and allocation in the fiscal year in which the bonds
are issued and sold. The Controller shall allocate the funds to
eligible loca ageneies, at a minimurn, ill two eyeles that coy"
agencies. Thefirst payments
shall be made no later than January 1, 2008. Each city shall receive
at least four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000), as described in
subparagraph (B), from the portion of bond funds available to
cities under this subdivision, not later than January 1, 2008. The
money in the account, and any interest or other return on money
in the account, shall be allocated in the following manner:
(A) Fifty percent to the counties, including a city and county,
in accordance with the following formulas:
(i) Seventy-five percent of the funds payable under this
subparagraph shall be apportioned among the counties in the
proportion that the number of fee -paid and exempt vehicles that
are registered in the county bears to the number of fee -paid and
exempt vehicles registered in the state.
(ii) Twenty-five percent of the funds payable under this
subparagraph shall be apportioned among the counties in the
proportion that the number of miles of maintained county roads
in each county bears to the total number of miles of maintained
county roads in the state. For the purposes of apportioning funds
under this clause, any roads within the boundaries of a city and
95
SB 286
—12-
1 county that are not state highways shall be deemed to be county
2 roads.
3 (B) Fifty percent to the cities, including a city and county,
4 apportioned among the cities in the proportion that the total
5 population of the city bears to the total population of all the cities
6 in the state, provided, however, that the Controller shall allocate
7 a minimum of four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000) to each
8 city, pursuant to this subparagraph.
9 (2) Funds received under this subdivision shall be deposited as
10 follows in order to avoid the commingling of those funds with
1 I other local funds:
12 (A) In the case of a city, into the city account that is designated
13 for the receipt of state funds allocated for local streets and roads.
14 (B) In the case of an eligible county, into the county road fund.
15 (C) In the case of a city and county, into a local account that is
16 designated for the receipt of state funds allocated for local streets
17 and roads.
18 (3) For the purpose of allocating funds under this subdivision
19 to cities and a city and county, the Controller shall use the
20 population estimates prepared by the Demographic Research Unit
21 of the Department of Finance as of January 1, 2007. For a city that
22 incorporated after January 1, 1998, that does not appear on the
23 most recent population estimates prepared by the Demographic
24 Research Unit, the Controller shall use the population determined
25 for that city under Section 11005.3 of the Revenue and Taxation
26 Code.
27 (4) Funds apportioned to a city, county, or city and county under
28 this subdivision shall be used for improvements to transportation
29 facilities that will assist in reducing local traffic congestion and
30 further deterioration, improving traffic flows, or increasing traffic
31 safety that may include, but not be limited to, street and highway
32 pavement maintenance, rehabilitation, installation, construction
33 and reconstruction of necessary associated facilities such as
34 drainage and traffic control devices, or the maintenance,
35 rehabilitation, installation, construction and reconstruction of
36 facilities that expand ridership on transit systems, safety projects
37 to reduce fatalities, or as a local match to obtain state or federal
38 transportation funds for similar purposes. Projects to be funded
39 pursuant to this subdivision shall be consistent with the
40 requirements applicable to funds subject to Section 1 ofArticleXIX
95
-13— SB 286
1 of the California Constitution or shall be other transit projects
2 consistent with this paragraph, but may not include the funding of
3 transit operating costs.
4 (5) A city, county, or city and county shall submit to the
5 Department of Finance, upon appropriation of bond funds by the
6 Legislature, a list of projects expected to be funded with bond
7 funds pursuant to an adopted city or county budget. The list shall
8 not limit the flexibility of the applicant to fund projects in
9 accordance with local needs and priorities consistent with
10 paragraph (4). All projects funded with these bond funds shall be
11 included within the city, county, or city and county budget that is
12 adopted by the applicable city council or board of supervisors at
13 a regular public meeting.
14 (6) A city, county, or city and county shall submit documentation
15 of expenditure of bond funds made available under this subdivision
16 to the Department of Finance, including the name of each project,
17 the location, the amount of the expenditure, and the completion
18 date and estimated useful life. The documentation shall be made
19 available at the end of each fiscal year until the bond funds are
20 accounted for. The information provided shall be posted on the
21 Internet Web site of the Department of Finance.
22 (7) At the conclusion of each fiscal year during which a city or
23 county expends the funds it has received under this subdivision,
24 the Controller may verify the city's or county's compliance with
25 paragraph (4). Any city or county that has not complied with
26 paragraph (4) shall reimburse the state for all ineligible
27 expenditures for that fiscal year. Any funds withheld or returned
28 as a result of a failure to comply with paragraph (4) shall be
29 reallocated to the other counties and cities whose expenditures are
30 in compliance.
31 (8) A city or county receiving funds pursuant to this subdivision
32 shall have three fiscal years to expend the funds from the date that
33 the funds are allocated by the Controller, and any funds not
34 expended within that period shall be returned to the Controller and
35 be reallocated to cities or counties, as applicable, pursuant to the
36 allocation formulas set forth in subparagraph (A) or (B) of
37 paragraph (1), but excluding the requirement for a minimum city
38 allocation as described in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1).
39 SEC. 2. Section 8879.28 of the Goverment Code is amended
40 to read:
95
SB 286 —14-
1
14-
1 8879.28. Upon request of the board stating that funds are
2 needed for purposes of this chapter, the committee shall determine
3 whether or not it is necessary or desirable to issue bonds authorized
4 pursuant to this chapter in order to carry out the actions specified
5 in Section 8879.23, and, if so, the amount of bonds to be issued
6 and sold. Successive issues of bonds may be authorized and sold
7 to cant' out those actions progressively, and are not required to be
8 sold at any one time. Bonds may bear interest subject to federal
9 income tax. For purposes of this section, the committee shall
10 consider the request of the Controller relative to issuance of bonds
I 1 authorized pursuant to subdivision (n of Section 8879.23,
12 SEC. 3. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the
13 immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within
14 the meaning of Article IV of the Constitution and shall go into
15 immediate effect. The facts constituting the necessity are:
16 In order to ensure that the funds made available by this act are
17 appropriated in the Budget Act of 2007, it is necessary that this
18 act take effect immediately.
IC
95
N �
PoRA n
MAYOR BOB FOSTER
CITY OF )ANG BEACH
May 10, 2007
The Honorable Mayor Marsha McLean
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd # 300
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Re: Preservation of the United States Air Force (USAF) C-17 Globemaster III
Production Line t
Dear Mayor McLean:
On.behalf of the City of Long Beach, I am writing to request your support for the USAF
C-17 program and our efforts to secure additional ongoing C-17 production commitments
in the federal budget. The C-17 is the Air Force's premier strategic transport aircraft and
remains the military's most reliable and capable airlift aircraft. It the last wide-body
military aircraft production line in the United States, and is a true national asset.
Santa Clarita hosts major suppliers that help produce this incredible airplane. If
the C-17 program slows or closes, Santa Clarita will lose jobs, businesses, locally
generated revenues and industrial'capability. .
The following companies produce C-17 parts in Santa Clarita:
* H R TEXTRON INC; WESCO AIRCRAFT HARDWARE CORP
The C-17 workforce and suppliers in your city and Across the Nation possess unique
knowledge and skills developed over the life of this program. If C-17 production ceases,
that valuable talent.will be lost. Moreover, once closed, it would be nearly impossible
and cost prohibitive to start up the production line if this capability is ever needed in the
future, as many experts have predicted. In addition to the loss of a valuable national
security asset,, any closure would have a devastating economic impact throughout the
country. The C-17 program has over 650 suppliers in 42 states, employs approximately
30,000 people and has a national economic impact of over $8.4 billion.
In order to save the C-17 line, the Congress must provide $3 to $4 billion in funding in-
the
nthe next few months. If that does not happen, Boeing will be forced to close the line;
with possible impacts to Santa Clarita beginning as early as the end of 2007.
333 WEST OCEAN BOULEVARD, LONG BEACH, CALtFORNIA 90802
TELEPHONE 562-570-6801 FAx 562-570-6538 MAYOR@LONGBEACH.GOV
The Honorable Mayor McLean
C-17
May 10, 2007
Page 2
I ask that you join our City's lobbying efforts by immediately writing letters of support to
your members of Congress, emphasizing the importance of the U.S. Air Force C-17
program and its national significance, and asking your members of Congress to provide
the necessary funding. Attached is a fact sheet on the C-17 and sample resolution that
you can pass to demonstrate Santa Clarita's strong support for the C-17.
Thank you for your help to preserve this critical national security asset.
Sincerely,
Mayor.Bob Foster
City of Long Beach
Attachments
Draft Resolution
A RESOLUTION OF THE SUPPORTING THE
PROCUREMENT OF ADDITIONAL C-17 AIRCRAFT
WHEREAS, the C-17 Globemaster III Transport Jet is a critical component of our
armed force's ability to effectively deploy strategic military assets in crucial
locations around the world in a timely fashion; and
WHEREAS the C-17 is a proven workhorse of Air Mobility Command and is the
only aircraft capable of performing all airlift missions;
WHEREAS the highly flexible C-17 is indispensable in the .Global War on
Terrorism, countless humanitarian missions, numerous peacekeeping missions
and most recently In aiding victims of Hurricane Katrina;
WHEREAS, the C-17 is the last wide-body military aircraft production line in the
United States;
WHEREAS, 'Congress had previously authorized a purchase of 222 C-17
transport planes;
WHEREAS Boeing has delivered 164 of the 190 C-17 transport planes under its
current Pentagon contract, with the last C-17 currently scheduled to be delivered
in August 2009;
WHEREAS the Boeing C-.17 manufacturing facility and Its nationwide supplier
network is critical to our regional, state and national economies;
WHEREAS, the C-17 program has over 650. suppliers in 42 states, .employs
approximately 30,000 people and has a national economic impact of over $B.4
billion.
WHEREAS, the City of has suppliers located in our city that
help produce this incredible aircraft. ,
WHEREAS unless Boeing gets a solid commitment from the U.S. Government in
the next few moths to produce additional C-17s,.job' fosses and other impacts to
the regional and national economy will begin as early as this year;
WHEREAS, as stated by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in a November 3,
2005 letter to the President, "The C-17 is performing superbly in the Global War
on Terrorism. Our war fighting commanders have testified repeatedly about the
importance of the C-17. Despite the obvious need for more C -17s, the Pentagon
is delaying its commitment to future orders and threatening the viability of the
program;" and
C-17 FACT SHEET
MAY 2007
« The C-17 is the Air Force's premier strategic transport aircraft and remains the military's
most reliable and capable airlift aircraft.
« Time and time again, the Air Force Chief of Staff and high-ranking generals have testified
before the Congress on the importance of the C-17 to our Nation's defense. mission.
« It delivers more cargo, troops, and humanitarian supplies than any other aircraft and flies
more than 80 percent of all U.S. airlift missions, even though it comprises only'55 percent
of the airlift fleet.
« Given its strategic capabilities, the C-17 is being used .at 172 percent of its planned usage
rate.
« Last year, our joint advocacy efforts helped convince the Congress to include $2.1 billion'in
the federal FY 07 Defense Appropriations Bill for 10 additional C-1 7s. This :was-: a
significant step in preserving the C-171ine —however, further action Is needed.
« If the Air Force does not extend Its order for additional C-17 cargo planes beyond the
current 190 planes, Boeing will be forced to shutter the C-17 line in. August 2009 when
production of the 190 planes is complete.
« Impacts from such a decision would be felt as early as this year in cities across the country,
as the C-17 has a total build time of approximately 33 months.
« Closing this program would cede our Nation's leadership in the field of aerospace airlift
manufacturing to. the Europeans, making us reliant on foreign nations to provide us with
future airlift capability.
« In addition to the loss .of a valuable national security asset, any closure would 'have' a
devastating economic impact throughout the country.
« The C-17 program has over 650 suppliers in 42 states, employs approximately 30,000
people and has a national economic impact of over $8.4 billion.
« The C-17 production line sustains well -paying jobs help support middle class families and
combat urban poverty, which is plaguing many communities throughout our nation.
« The City of Long Beach has been working diligently with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
and our members of Congress to secure additional C-17 orders and continue the prosperity
of this national security asset and economic engine for our community, region, and the
Nation.
« Long Beach urges your city to immediately write letters of support to your members of
Congress and pass a resolution to demonstrate your City's strong support for the C-17.