Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-18-2015 Item 12 Sustainable Transportation Funding Meeting Date: 8/18/2015 FROM: Daryl Grigsby, Director of Public Works Prepared By: Timothy Scott Bochum, Deputy Director of Public Works SUBJECT: SUPPORT NEW SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING FOR ALL TRANSPORTATION MODES BY SUPPORTING EFFORTS OF THE FIX OUR ROAD COALITION AND SB-16 (BEALL). RECOMMENDATION Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, urging the State to provide new sustainable funding for state and local transportation infrastructure, participation in a statewide - Fix Our Roads Coalition, and endorsing SB-16 (Beall).” DISCUSSION In June 2015 Governor Brown called a special session of the State Legislature to discuss the issues of sustainable transportation funding. Specifically, the session was to consider and act upon legislation necessary to enact pay-as-you-go, permanent and sustainable funding to: a. Adequately and responsibly maintain and repair the state's transportation and other critical infrastructure; and b. Improve the state's key trade corridors; and c. Complement local efforts for repair and improvements of local transportation infrastructure. Following Governor Jerry Brown’s proclamation calling for a special session on transportation and infrastructure, both the Senate and Assembly have held hearings to discuss the current conditions of highways, streets, and roads as well as the current funding structure. Local streets and roads received significant attention at both hearings. In response to Governor Brown’s proclamation, the League of California Cities (League) Board of Directors formally adopted a resolution urging the Governor and the State Legislature to provide new sustainable funding for State and local transportation infrastructure. The League has been actively lobbying this year for a significant investment in transportation infrastructure. The League feels it is time for the Legislature to act and is asking cities to engage in the process by supporting its recently adopted Transportation Funding Principles and by joining the Fix Our Roads coalition. 12 Packet Pg. 120 Background The Governor’s June proclamation for an Extraordinary Session on Transportation and Infrastructure called on the Legislature to consider “…permanent and stable funding to adequately and responsibly maintain and repair the state’s transportation and infrastructure.” Unfortunately, the Governor made no mention of priorities for local streets and roads or other important transportation assets such as transit buses or service. Ultimately any transportation funding proposal will be decided by the Governor and 2/3 vote of the Legislature, requiring a bi- partisan agreement. Many legislators have indicated their support for funding local streets and roads in any transportation package. While several funding proposals have been introduced, including League-supported SB 16, it is likely that a final funding package will be the result of negotiations between the Governor and legislators from both sides of the aisle. The League wants to ensure that all discussions on transportation funding include provisions of maintenance and sustainability of our local streets, roads, and other transportation infrastructure. The League’s Board of Directors adopted the following Transportation Funding Principles to help guide the legislative special session. The basics (details discussed in Attachment 2) of these principles are: 1. Make a significant investment in transportation infrastructure. 2. Focus on maintaining and rehabilitating the current system. 3. Invest a portion of diesel tax and/or cap & trade revenue to high-priority goods movement projects. 4. Raise revenues across a broad range of options. 5. Equal split between state and local projects. 6. Strong accountability requirements to protect the taxpayers’ investment. 7. Provide consistent annual funding levels. Additionally, the League has joined a coalition with the California Association of Counties and the California Alliance for Jobs called “Fix Our Roads.” The League is asking its member cities to pass a resolution urging for sustainable funding and to join the “Fix our Roads Coalition” as soon as possible so that Legislators will have listed support from their districts when they return from their summer recess on August 17th. According to the coalition, California has the second-highest share of roads in “poor-condition” in the nation. Some 58% of state roads need rehabilitation or pavement maintenance. In addition, the state has 6 of the 10 cities with the worst road conditions in the nation. With ongoing congestion in nearly 70% of California’s urban roads and highways, without additional funding, ¼ of local streets and roads will be in failed condition by 2024. Lastly, the State lacks adequate funding to address deficiencies in local streets and roads and face an estimated annual shortfall of 7.8 billion in deferred maintenance. The City of San Luis Obispo has roadway conditions that are in a state of good repair, however, annually we struggle to provide sufficient funding for deferred maintenance and other basic infrastructure needs. Measure G will help in this endeavor but funding for these critical services continues to be below that needed to meet our adopted goals for roadway conditions particularly for large scale pavement rehabilitation and overlay projects. Issues beyond the control of the City 12 Packet Pg. 121 will also affect our long term revenue stream for streets and road purposes. The primary sources of revenue to maintain, repair and rehabilitate roads are State and Federal gas taxes. However, increasing fuel efficiency has resulted in vehicles that are traveling more miles on less gas thus generating far fewer gas tax dollars to repair roads. The sales and excise tax on fuels has not been adjusted to reflect increased costs for capital or maintenance needs. In addition, positive growth in electric and hybrid vehicles benefits clean air objectives but negatively effects transportation funding. This is because even though the impact of vehicle usage on roadways continues, the payment of gas tax or license fees for these types of vehicles is substantially lower than convention motor vehicles. If we meet our GHG and clean air objective the forecast is that California will be facing a significant deficiency in funding if not addressed. Staff has reviewed the League’s Transportation Funding Principles and concludes they are an appropriate framework for the State Legislature to consider as they discuss long term transportation funding strategies for California. Adjusting taxes is never easy. However, public and private stakeholders across all facets of California have identified the need to work towards a modified sustainable, long term solution to transportation funding strategy for our state if we are to accomplish our air quality goals and address the needs of aging infrastructure. In addition, staff is recommending that the City join the Fix Our Roads coalition as an additional stakeholder group to represent the City’s interests in transportation funding. The coalition not only looks to advance issues of local roads infrastructure but also promotes enhanced bicycle and pedestrian improvements as part of a balanced approach to infrastructure maintenance needs. SB 16 (Beall) Attempts to address the transportation funding shortfall are already working their way through the Legislature. One such bill is SB 16 (Beall) which proposes to modify fuel taxes and vehicle license (VLF) and registration (VRF) fees to address the immediate needs in streets and roads maintenance needs. The bill would increase the gasoline excise tax by $.10 a gallon, $.12 for diesel and adjust the VLF and VRF to stay current with price increases. It proposes a standard $100 VRF for zero emission vehicles. The bill proposes to split revenue 50/50 between the state and local projects with the local project funding being allocated pursuant to an existing statutory formula where 50% goes to cities based upon population. Finally, the Bill has two accountability provisions. First, the bill requires cities and counties, to maintain their historic commitment to funding street and highway purposes by annually expending no less than the average of its expenditures for the 2009-10 through 2011-12 fiscal years. Additionally, it requires the California Transportation Commission to annually evaluate each agency receiving funds to ensure that funds are spent accordingly. The bill has a sunset provision of five years unless the Legislature reauthorizes the program in FY 2019-20. Staff has reviewed SB 16 and believes it provides a balanced approach at beginning to address the long term needs of a sustainable transportation funding. It follows many of the provisions in 12 Packet Pg. 122 the principles outlined by the League. As such, staff recommends that the city support SB 16 when the Legislature meets in special session in August. Attachment 3 is a summary of SB 16 in its current form. FISCAL IMPACT If SB 16 is passed in its current form it would result in substantial increases in funding to the City for streets and roads funding. Current estimates (if existing statutory formulas are used) would result in approximately $2,080,000 in additional funding to the City for use in maintaining infrastructure. The Bill does not include specific language regarding supplanting existing funding but solves that issue in two ways. First, since all new funding is specifically tied to being “above” the existing tax basis, trying to supplant existing funding would be highly problematic for the State if they tried to do that in future years. Secondly, due to the requirement that jurisdictions guarantee to keep spending an streets and roads average the average amount from FY 20010- FY 2012, if existing funding were diverted, jurisdictions would not be able to meet this provision and the new funding would become moot. The potential for this to happen is non- existent because it would likely result in the discontinuation of the law and render any additional tax unusable by the same jurisdictions it targets to help. ALTERNATIVES Support for the League of California Cities transportation funding principles, support for the Fix our Roads Coalition and support for SB 16 are discretionary decisions for the Council. As such, the Council may choose to endorse all, part or none of the recommendations of this report. Attachments: 1 - Resolution 2 - Fix Our Roads Fact Sheet One Page 3 - SB 16 Senate Floor Analyses 12 Packet Pg. 123 R ______ RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2015 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO URGING THE STATE TO PROVIDE NEW SUSTAINABLE FUNDING FOR STATE AND LOCAL TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE, PARTICIPATION IN A STATEWIDE - FIX OUR ROADS COALITION, AND ENDORSING SB-16 (BEALL) WHEREAS, Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. has called an extraordinary session to address the immense underfunding of California’s transportation infrastructure; and WHEREAS, cities and counties own and operate more than 81 percent of streets and roads in California, and from the moment we open our front door to drive to work, bike to school, or walk to the bus station, people are dependent upon a safe, reliable local transportation network; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo has participated in efforts with the League of California Cities, San Luis Obispo Council of Governments and California’s Regional Transportation Planning Agencies to study unmet funding needs for local roads and bridges, including sidewalks and other essential components; and WHEREAS, the resulting 2014 California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment, which provides critical analysis and information on the local transportation network’s condition and funding needs, indicates that the condition of the local transportation network is deteriorating as predicted in the initial 2008 study; and WHEREAS, the results show that California’s local streets and roads are on a path of significant decline. On a scale of 0 (failed) to 100 (excellent), the statewide average pavement condition index (PCI) is 66, placing it in the “at risk” category where pavements will begin to deteriorate much more rapidly and require rehabilitation or rebuilding rather than more cost-effective preventative maintenance if funding is not increased; and WHEREAS, the results show that the City of San Luis Obispo’s streets range from 66% in a “Good” condition for local street category to only 54% for Arterial; and WHEREAS, if funding remains at the current levels, in 10 years, 25 percent of local streets and roads in California will be in “failed” condition; and WHEREAS, cities and counties need an additional $1.7 billion just to maintain a status quo pavement condition of 66, and much more revenue to operate the system with Best Management Practices, which would reduce the total amount of funding needed for maintenance in the future; and WHEREAS, models show that an additional $3 billion annual investment in the local streets and roads system is expected to improve pavement conditions statewide from an average “at risk” condition to an average “good” condition; and Packet Pg. 124 At t a c h m e n t : 1 - R e s o l u t i o n [ R e v i s i o n 1 ] ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g ) Resolution No. _____ (2015 Series) Page 2 WHEREAS, if additional funding isn’t secured now, it will cost taxpayers twice as much to fix the local system in the future, as failure to act this year will increase unmet funding needs for local transportation facilities by $11 billion in five years and $21 billion in ten years; and WHEREAS, modernizing the local street and road system provides well-paying construction jobs and boosts local economies; and WHEREAS, the local street and road system is also critical for farm to market needs, interconnectivity, multimodal needs including bicycle, transit and pedestrian amenities, and commerce; and WHEREAS, police, fire, and emergency medical services all need safe reliable roads to react quickly to emergency calls and a few minutes of delay can be a matter of life and death; and WHEREAS, maintaining and preserving the local street and road system in good condition will reduce drive times and traffic congestion, improve bicycle safety, and make the pedestrian experience safer and more appealing, which leads to reduce vehicle emissions helping the State achieve its air quality and greenhouse gas emissions reductions goals; and WHEREAS, restoring roads before they fail also reduces construction time which results in less air pollution from heavy equipment and less water pollution from site run-off; and WHEREAS, in addition to the local system, the state highway system needs an additional $5.7 billion annually to address the state’s deferred maintenance; and WHEREAS, in order to bring the local system back into a cost-effective condition, at least $7.3 billion annually in new money going directly to cities and counties; and WHEREAS, SB-16 (BEALL), Transportation Funding, as Amended on June 1, 2015, proposes to address the crisis of insufficient transportation infrastructure maintenance funding by modifying existing fuels taxes and vehicle registration and licensing fees to make it fairer to all users of the transportation system; and WHEREAS, State Legislators will return to the Capitol in August 2015 to discuss, in special session, sustainable transportation funding initiatives including SB-16. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. The City strongly urges the Governor and Legislature to identity a sufficient and stable funding source for Local Street and road and state highway maintenance and rehabilitation to ensure the safe and efficient mobility of the traveling public and the economic vitality of California. Packet Pg. 125 At t a c h m e n t : 1 - R e s o l u t i o n [ R e v i s i o n 1 ] ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g ) Resolution No. _____ (2015 Series) Page 3 Section 2. The City strongly urges the Governor and Legislature to adopt the following priorities for funding California’s streets and roads: 1. Make a significant investment in transportation infrastructure. Any package should seek to raise at least $6 billion annually and should remain in place for at least 10 years or until an alternative method of funding our transportation system is agreed upon. 2. Focus on maintaining and rehabilitating the current system. Repairing California’s streets and highways involves much more than fixing potholes. It requires major road pavement overlays, fixing unsafe bridges, providing safe access for bicyclists and pedestrians, replacing storm water culverts, as well as operational improvements that necessitate the construction of auxiliary lanes to relieve traffic congestion choke points and fixing design deficiencies that have created unsafe merging and other traffic hazards. Efforts to supply funding for transit in addition to funding for roads should also focus on fixing the system first. 3. Equal split between state and local projects. We support sharing revenue for roadway maintenance equally (50/50) between the state and cities and counties, given the equally-pressing funding needs of both systems, as well as the longstanding historical precedent for collecting transportation user fees through a centralized system and sharing the revenues across the entire network through direct subventions. Ensuring that funding to local governments is provided directly, without intermediaries, will accelerate project delivery and ensure maximum accountability. 4. Raise revenues across a broad range of options. Research by the California Alliance for Jobs and Transportation California shows that voters strongly support increased funding for transportation improvements. They are much more open to a package that spreads potential tax or fee increases across a broad range of options, including fuel taxes, license fees, and registration fees, rather than just one source. Additionally, any package should move California toward an all-users pay structure, in which everyone who benefits from the system contributes to maintaining it – from traditional gasoline-fueled vehicles, to new hybrids or electric vehicles, to commercial vehicles. 5. Invest a portion of diesel tax and/or cap & trade revenue to high-priority goods movement projects. While the focus of a transportation funding package should be on maintaining and rehabilitating the existing system, California has a critical need to upgrade the goods movement infrastructure that is essential to our economic well- being. Establishing a framework to make appropriate investments in major goods movement arteries can lay the groundwork for greater investments in the future that will also improve air quality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Packet Pg. 126 At t a c h m e n t : 1 - R e s o l u t i o n [ R e v i s i o n 1 ] ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g ) Resolution No. _____ (2015 Series) Page 4 6. Strong accountability requirements to protect the taxpayers’ investment. Voters and taxpayers must be assured that all transportation revenues are spent responsibly. Local governments are accustomed to employing transparent processes for selecting road maintenance projects aided by pavement management systems, as well as reporting on the expenditure of transportation funds through the State Controller’s Local Streets and Roads Annual Report. 7. Provide Consistent Annual Funding Levels. Under current statute, the annual gas tax adjustment by the Board of Equalization is creating extreme fluctuations in funding levels – a $900 million drop in this budget year alone. A transportation funding package should contain legislation that will create more consistent revenue projections and allow Caltrans and transportation agencies the certainty they need for longer term planning. Section 3. That the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby: 1. Authorizes the Mayor to sign a letter (Exhibit A) indicating the City’s support for the Fix Our Roads Coalition and League of California Cities’ Principles for New Transportation Funding: and, 2. Authorizes the City Manager or her designee(s) to participate in the Fix Our Roads Coalition in order to promote the City’s interests in local transportation funding and multimodal investment needs. 3. Supports SB-16 (Beall), as amended June 1, 2015, and recommends the Legislature discuss the Bill and its funding provisions at the Special Session to be held in August 2015. Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 20xx. ____________________________________ Mayor Jan Marx Packet Pg. 127 At t a c h m e n t : 1 - R e s o l u t i o n [ R e v i s i o n 1 ] ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g ) Resolution No. _____ (2015 Series) Page 5 ATTEST: ____________________________________ Anthony Mejia City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________. ______________________________ Anthony J. Mejia City Clerk Packet Pg. 128 At t a c h m e n t : 1 - R e s o l u t i o n [ R e v i s i o n 1 ] ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g ) We Support the Fix Our Roads Coalition Principles for New Transportation Funding in the Legislative Special Session Yes, I/my organization support(s) efforts to secure new sources of stable, accountable funding to fix California’s highways and road infrastructure. I/we sign-on to join the “Fix our Roads” coalition and in support of the following principles that should guide the legislative special session on transportation. 1. Make a significant investment in transportation infrastructure. 2. Focus on maintaining and rehabilitating the current system. 3. Invest a portion of diesel tax and/or cap & trade revenue to high-priority goods movement projects. 4. Raise revenues across a broad range of options. 5. Equal split between state and local projects. 6. Strong accountability requirements to protect the taxpayers’ investment. 7. Provide consistent annual funding levels. Please select a category:  Organization  Company  Elected official City of San Luis Obispo Company or Organization Name Jan Howell Marx Mayor Name Title/Occupation 990 Palm Street Street address San Luis Obispo, California 93401 City State Zip County (805) 781- 7120 Phone number Fax number jmarx@slocity.org E-mail Address 08/18/2015 Signature (Required) Date Email or fax this form to: acelesius@bcfpublicaffairs.com or 916-442-3510 (fax) Packet Pg. 129 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - F i x O u r R o a d s S u p p o r t L e t t e r ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g ) Problem: California lacks adequate funding to fix crumbling roads, highways, bridges and transportation infrastructure. California’s network of roads and highways are critical to our quality of life and economy. Yet the condition of our deteriorating network of roads is staggering:  Our crumbling roads cost motorists nearly $600 a year per driver for vehicle maintenance.  California has the second highest share of roads in “poor condition” in the nation.  58% of state roads need rehabilitation or pavement maintenance.  California has 6 of 10 cities with the worst road conditions in the nation.  55% of local bridges require rehabilitation or replacement.  Nearly 70% of California’s urban roads and highways are congested.  Without additional funding, 1/4 of local streets and roads will be in failed condition by 2024. Our state lacks adequate funding to address these critical deficiencies:  Local streets and roads face an estimated shortfall of $78 billion in deferred maintenance and an annual shortfall of $7.8 billion.  CalTrans faces a $59 billion backlog in deferred maintenance and an annual shortfall in the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) of $5.7 billion. Solution: A responsible, accountable solution to fix our roads. A broad coalition of cities, counties, labor, business, public safety and transportation advocates has formed to meet the Governor’s call to address California’s chronic transportation infrastructure funding shortfall. During the 2015 special session on transportation, we support the following priorities: 1. Make a significant investment in transportation infrastructure. If we are to make a meaningful dent that demonstrates tangible benefits to taxpayers and drivers, any package should seek to raise at least $6 billion annually and should remain in place for at least 10 years or until an alternative method of funding our transportation system is agreed upon. 2. Focus on maintaining and rehabilitating the current system. Repairing California’s streets and highways involves much more than fixing potholes. It requires major road pavement overlays, fixing unsafe bridges, providing safe access for bicyclists and pedestrians, replacing storm water culverts, as well as operational improvements that necessitate, among other things, the construction of auxiliary lanes to relieve traffic congestion choke points and fixing design deficiencies that have created unsafe merging and other traffic hazards. Efforts to supply funding for transit in addition to funding for roads should also focus on fixing the system first. 3. Invest a portion of diesel tax and/or cap & trade revenue to high-priority goods movement projects. While the focus of a transportation funding package should be on maintaining and rehabilitating the existing system, California has a critical need to upgrade the goods movement infrastructure that is essential to our economic well-being. Establishing a framework to make appropriate investments in major goods movement arteries can lay the groundwork for greater investments in the future that will also improve air quality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 4. Raise revenues across a broad range of options. Research by the California Alliance for Jobs and Transportation California shows that voters strongly support increased funding for transportation improvements. They are much more open to a package that spreads potential tax or fee increases across a broad range of options rather than just one source. Additionally, any package should move California toward an all-users pay structure in which everyone who benefits from the system contributes to maintaining it - from traditional gasoline-fueled vehicles, to hybrids, alternative fuel and or electric vehicles, to commercial vehicles. Our coalition supports: Packet Pg. 130 At t a c h m e n t : 2 - F i x O u r R o a d s F a c t S h e e t O n e P a g e ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g )  Reasonable increases in: o Gasoline and diesel excise taxes. o Vehicle registration and vehicle license fees.  Dedicating a portion of the cap and trade revenue paid by motorists at the pump to transportation projects that reduce greenhouse emissions.  Ensuring existing transportation revenues are invested in transportation-related purposes (i.e. truck weight fees and fuel taxes for off-road vehicles that are currently being diverted into the general fund).  User charge for electric and other non-fossil fuel powered vehicles that currently do not contribute to road upkeep. 5. Equal split between state and local projects. We support sharing revenue for roadway maintenance equally (50/50) between the state and cities and counties. Funding to local governments should be provided directly (no intermediaries) to accelerate projects and ensure maximum accountability. 6. Strong accountability requirements to protect the taxpayers’ investment. Voters and taxpayers must be assured that all transportation revenues are spent responsibly. Authorizing legislation should:  Constitutionally protect transportation revenues for transportation infrastructure only. Time and again (Prop 42, 2002; Prop 1A, 2006; Prop 22, 2010), voters have overwhelmingly supported dedicating and constitutionally protecting transportation dollars for those purposes. We strongly support protections that prohibit using transportation dollars for other purposes.  Repay existing transportation loans and end ongoing diversions of transportation revenues, including approximately $850 million in loans to the general fund and the annual loss of approximately $140 million in off-highway vehicle fuel taxes.  Establish performance and accountability criteria to ensure efficient and effective use of all funding. All tax dollars should be spent properly, and recipients of new revenues should be held accountable to the taxpayers, whether at the state or local level. Counties and cities should adopt project lists at public hearings and report annually to the State Controller’s Office regarding all transportation revenues and expenditures. Local governments should also commit to ensuring any new revenues supplement revenues currently invested in transportation projects. Both Caltrans and local governments can demonstrate and publicize the benefits associated with new transportation investments.  Caltrans reform and oversight. To increase Caltrans effectiveness, provide stronger oversight by the state transportation commission of the programs funded by new revenues and establish an Inspector General office to provide accountability. Reduce Caltrans administrative budgets through efficiency reviews with all savings to be spent on road improvements.  Expedite project delivery. More should be done to streamline project delivery, including but not limited to: o Establishing timelines for actions required by state agencies and eliminating other permit delays. o Increased implementation of alternative delivery systems that encourage more investment from the private sector. o Reforms to speed project completion. 7. Provide Consistent Annual Funding Levels. Under current statute, the annual gas tax adjustment by the Board of Equalization is creating extreme fluctuations in funding levels -- a $900 million drop in this budget year alone. A transportation funding package should contain legislation that will create more consistent revenue projections and allow Caltrans and transportation agencies the certainty they need for longer term planning. While this change would not provide any new revenue to transportation, it would provide greater certainty for planning and project delivery purposes. Packet Pg. 131 At t a c h m e n t : 2 - F i x O u r R o a d s F a c t S h e e t O n e P a g e ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g ) SENATE RULES COMMITTEE Office of Senate Floor Analyses (916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478 SB 16 THIRD READING Bill No: SB 16 Author: Beall (D) Amended: 6/1/15 Vote: 27 - Urgency SENATE TRANS. & HOUSING COMMITTEE: 6-1, 4/28/15 AYES: Beall, Allen, Leyva, McGuire, Mendoza, Wieckowski NOES: Gaines NO VOTE RECORDED: Cannella, Bates, Galgiani, Roth SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE: 5-1, 5/6/15 AYES: Hertzberg, Beall, Hernandez, Lara, Pavley NOES: Moorlach NO VOTE RECORDED: Nguyen SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-2, 5/28/15 AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza NOES: Bates, Nielsen SUBJECT: Transportation funding SOURCE: Author DIGEST: This bill increases several taxes and fees to raise roughly $3.5 billion in new transportation revenues annually for five years with the funding used to address deferred maintenance on the state highways and local streets and roads. Specifically, this bill imposes (1) a $0.10 per gallon excise tax on gasoline, (2) a $0.12 per gallon excise tax on diesel fuel, and (3) increased vehicle license fees and registration fees for five years. ANALYSIS: Existing law imposes state taxes and fees related to transportation as follows: Gasoline excise tax: $0.36/gallon; Packet Pg. 132 At t a c h m e n t : 3 - S B 1 6 S e n a t e F l o o r A n a l y s e s ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g ) SB 16 Page 2 Diesel excise tax: $0.11/gallon; Diesel sales tax: $0.27/gallon; Vehicle license fee (VLF): 0.65% of market value; Vehicle registration fee (VRF): $43 per vehicle; and Weight fees, for commercial vehicles only, up to a maximum amount of $2,271. This bill: 1) Increases taxes and fees, and creates new fees, over time as follows: Gasoline excise tax: $0.10/gallon; Diesel excise tax: $0.12/gallon; VLF: for non-commercial vehicles, 0.07% each year so that the VLF is 1.00% by July 1, 2019; and VRF: $35 per vehicle plus an additional $100 for zero-emission vehicles. 2) Allocates the new funds formulaically to both state and local projects. Five percent is set aside for counties which pass local sales and use taxes for transportation purposes, and which have not previously passed such taxes. The remainder is split 50/50 between state and local projects. The local project funding is allocated pursuant to an existing statutory formula where 50% goe s to cities based on population and 50% goes to counties based on a combination of the number of registered vehicles and the miles of county roads. 3) Requires the city and county, in order to receive these funds, to maintain their historic commitment to funding street and highway purposes by annually expending not less than the average of its expenditures for the 2009-10, 2010- 11 and 2011-12 fiscal years. 4) Requires the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to annually evaluate each agency receiving funds to ensure that the funds are spent appropriately. 5) Redirects truck weight fees from the General Fund to road maintenanc e purposes, phased in over five years. The loss to the General Fund is backfilled by the VLF increase. Comments The Governor, in his 2015 inaugural address, noted that the state faces a $59 billion shortfall over the next 10 years to adequately maintain the existing state Packet Pg. 133 At t a c h m e n t : 3 - S B 1 6 S e n a t e F l o o r A n a l y s e s ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g ) SB 16 Page 3 highway system. Local governments have estimated the funding shortfall for maintaining existing local streets, highways and bridges is $78 billion over the same time period. Purpose of bill. According to the author, this bill solves a crisis that threatens our deteriorating streets and highways. California faces a $59 billion backlog in deferred maintenance that will grow by billions every year. The state transportation system is critical to California's economic well-being, as it enables us to move goods, people, and ideas around the state. SB 16 creates a much- needed, temporary funding plan to address the maintenance backlog of our aging systems. Under this bill, everyone who uses the roads will share in paying for the cost of these essential repairs. What will this cost me? For an average driver, using a typical vehicle value, average fuel efficiency, and driving 12,000 miles per year, the extra fees and taxes will result in direct cost increases of about $120/year or $0.33/day. Individuals with more expensive cars or who use more gas or diesel will pay more. Pay now or pay more later. Engineers have observed that the cost of fixing roads is relatively low initially, but at some point the road wear starts to accelerate, greatly increasing the cost of repair. A study commissioned by the League of California Cities and the California State Association of Counties notes that many California streets are at the point of accelerating road wear. Without additional funding, the percentage of roads in failed condition will increase from 6% to 25% by 2024, greatly increasing the cost of repair. Inaction is costly. A good start, not a final solution. As vehicle fuel efficiency rises and fossil fuel alternatives become available, gasoline and diesel taxes become less reliable and less fair mechanisms to pay for the cost of roads. SB 1077 (DeSaulnier, Chapte r 835, Statutes of 2014) required the CTC to study alternatives to fuel taxes, such as a road usage charge. That effort is underway, but new mechanisms for paying for roads aren’t expected for several years; legislation will be required. The author’s expectation is that whatever mechanisms the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) develops will be ready to be implemented statewide in time to take effect as this bill sunsets. In the meantime, the funding deficit for repairing and maintaining existing roads and bridges continues to grow. This bill is an effort to stop the deterioration and start improving the overall condition of state and local roads. This bill will not raise sufficient funds to bridge the entire combined $137 billion gap in state and local transportation maintenance needs. Packet Pg. 134 At t a c h m e n t : 3 - S B 1 6 S e n a t e F l o o r A n a l y s e s ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g ) SB 16 Page 4 Sunset. The road maintenance program established in this bill sunsets at the end of the 2019-20 fiscal year. If the Legislature does not reauthorize the program beyond that fiscal year, then the increases in the gasoline and diesel fuel taxes and the $35 increase in the vehicle registration fee terminate. Other states. California’s transportation funding shortfalls are shared by other states. According to the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials database, 14 states have increased taxes and fees and dedicated that funding to transportation projects, including Georgia, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Utah and Wyoming. Congress is also considering the issue. Another idea. In February, the Speaker of the Assembly announced her plan to increase transportation funding by $2 billion annually by establishing a road user charge or a flat annual fee for access to the road system, returning weight fees to transportation purposes, and accelerating the repayment of transportation loans. A bill to enact that proposal has not yet been introduced. Helping themselves. As previously noted, this bill allocates 5% of revenues to counties whose voters approve a sales tax for transportation purposes, and who have not approved such a tax before. Each fiscal year, unallocated funds revert back and are split 50/50 between the state and local governments. This provision may need further work on its mechanisms and definitions. FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Yes Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No According to the Senate Appropriations Committee: The Board of Equalization (BOE) estimates that total revenues (excise and sales tax) from the gasoline and diesel tax rate increases would lead to revenue gains of $1.048 billion in 2015-16 and $1.863 billion in 2016-17 (General Fund and special funds). The proposed $100 fee on zero emission vehicles would generate $10.8 million annually (special funds). The proposed $35 increase in the vehicle registration fee would generate $1.085 billion annually (special funds). Packet Pg. 135 At t a c h m e n t : 3 - S B 1 6 S e n a t e F l o o r A n a l y s e s ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g ) SB 16 Page 5 Assuming no other changes beyond the increased VLF rate itself, the rate increase to 1.0% would generate $1.216 billion annually when fully phased-in (General Fund). BOE would incur one-time and ongoing administration costs to implement this bill, at a minimum in the hundreds of thousands of dollars annually (special funds). The Department of Motor Vehicles would incur one-time programming costs of $350,000, and ongoing costs of under $25,000 with each change in the VLF (special funds). This bill results in $577,000 (special funds) ongoing in new administration costs to the CTC. Caltrans would incur one-time administration costs that are unknown, but likely to be in the tens of thousands of dollars minimally. The costs of administering the provisions of this bill are paid out of the new revenues raised by the bill. SUPPORT: (Verified 5/29/15) American Society of Civil Engineers Associated General Contractors California Alliance for Jobs California Association of Councils of Governments California Contract Cities Association California State Association of Counties California Infill Federation City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County City of Calexico City of Cathedral City City of Claremont City of Bellflower City of Brisbane City of Burbank City of Capitola City of Clearlake City of Cloverdale City of Daly City Packet Pg. 136 At t a c h m e n t : 3 - S B 1 6 S e n a t e F l o o r A n a l y s e s ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g ) SB 16 Page 6 City of Downey City of Fountain Valley City of Fowler City of Gilroy City of Hanford City of Hayward City of Hercules City of Hughson City of Huntington Park City of Indian Wells City of Lafayette City of Lake Elsinore City of Lakeport City of Lakewood City of Los Altos City of Los Altos Hills City of Livermore City of Martinez City of Mill Valley City of Modesto City of Montclair City of Montebello City of Monterey Park City of Morgan Hill City of Napa City of Novato City of Pacifica City of Palos Verdes Estates City of Pico Rivera City of Pleasant Hill City of Rancho Cucamonga City of Rancho Mirage City of Rosemead City of Sacramento City of San Jose City of Santa Ana City of Santa Clara City of Santa Maria City of San Gabriel City of Sanger Packet Pg. 137 At t a c h m e n t : 3 - S B 1 6 S e n a t e F l o o r A n a l y s e s ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g ) SB 16 Page 7 City of San Mateo City of Santa Barbara City of Santa Rosa City of Seaside City of Shasta Lake City of Soledad City of South El Monte City of Temecula City of Thousand Oaks City of Turlock City of Ventura City of Watsonville City of West Sacramento City of Whittier County of Humboldt CTM Construction Glendale City Employees Association Laborers’ International Union of North America Laborers ’ International Union of North America Locals 777 & 792 League of California Cities Los Angeles County Division of the League of Cities Marin County Board of Supervisors Marin County Council of Mayors and Council Members Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Monterey County Board of Supervisors Northern California Carpenters Regional Council Organization of SMUD Employees Professional Engineers in California Government Riverside County Board of Supervisors San Benito County Board of Supervisors San Bernardino Public Employees Association San Luis Obispo County Employees Association San Joaquin Valley Regional Transportation Authority San Diego County Court Employees Association Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors Santa Clara Open Space Authority Silicon Valley Leadership Group Town of Colma Town of Danville Town of Moraga Packet Pg. 138 At t a c h m e n t : 3 - S B 1 6 S e n a t e F l o o r A n a l y s e s ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g ) SB 16 Page 8 OPPOSITION: (Verified 5/29/15) Association of California Car Clubs Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association Six individuals Prepared by: Randy Chinn / T. & H. / (916) 651-4121 6/1/15 18:52:14 **** END **** Packet Pg. 139 At t a c h m e n t : 3 - S B 1 6 S e n a t e F l o o r A n a l y s e s ( 1 0 7 0 : S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d i n g )