CC - Item 4F - SB64 (Perata) - State Local Transportation Partnership Program M
c00fm
4 V %'' stat
teport
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR
AND MEMBERS
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
FROM: FRANK G. TRIPEPI, CITY MANAGER J"-7
DATE: APRIL 8, 1999
RE: SB 364 (PERATA) - STATE-LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PARTNERSHIP
PROGRAM
Current law allows the Department of Transportation to implement the State-Local Transportation
Partnership Program (SLTPP) until July 1. 1999. The program provides cities additional funding
for transportation improvement projects, such as signal construction and necessary street work.
During the current fiscal year, the City of Rosemead received $221,000 in SLTPP funds. SB 364
(Perata) is an urgency statute that would extend the sunset for those funds until July 1, 2000.
Attached for the Council's review is a copy of SB 364. The bill is scheduled to considered next by
the Senate Appropriations Committee. No hearing date has been set.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council support SB 364 (Perata) and authorize the Mayor to send
the appropriate correspondence.
ccn m snee<rgt
COUNCIL. 01:3Li:_ 1
r
APR 13 1999
ITEM No. • ee_,cf
2
2 I \ ( «° C
~ - ( f \ H ,-H"° ( m / @ 9702 § .
m / } K = } / \ : \ &
• (• t ( \ 0 .7..2 T 0 � 2 \
} / \ } > § @EK2.ES ;» \ } \ . \ )
( : G\ g0- ° -a - §
c. ) ) ^ �n1/4 p: ° ° \{ { . ` > f -
: m § / \ * « c^ \ § � ,
a -• \ ) / EDi� - ® » / ( ` _ fl 2
- - 0 - 0 :2 c >
7 /; ; JJ ; _ a
, - ' ® -▪ - ; m § - — /
C• . _ \ \ \ \ .0c = C §
\ - \ 7
0 \ ,
CD▪ 6 / ~ ` \ \• � 0c\ \ ON
OC . z
O cit O
W LOW W W W W W W W N N N NJ NJ N N N N Np
'C' OO J M U A W N --• O U a-, V .'1 t..) A W N - c ao V .T V, A W N - _,-..-... ..° W V Oi to . W N -`
00D° p� 8 r^ 3 'a 3. a on 0 0 0 o c o - < � ° --. _g9 fir. aN g..-• N71 a
m- =I acc "_',o -. - 711a r o9 OC�-a . , 2 Cnn ^•D ^. 0 mvo' O �v cE n
a ,- a - - 0 ^ - a n,' - 3 0 <' =. ,-. --] - " _-1• n. -2 - CO ry -< rn`- 3 =� shy .
_ „, rn .-a. r - ranpgn '- "' 5 - -
. o ^ 'y „ 3
' , o= w 'og
N
mOpinoxo -J0s -+ aQnm _s.m n � 5o o .. ooam;� ” n = o mm O 'J. . Ci o J n- --2- _ dt -n _ ' -
- = S S -i, Ny O - R = N i O2 ? N• O O ^'O L a C n 'D � _ 0O
` . p OC .n nGG 00 -a 3 a co ^ -
f - i N `G
n �^ " " tJ O s . _ n 0i o 'J O _ 0 n^ yO ^ _ n N o D
n. 0 a-= a0 ^ N ' = 3 n - ^ n 2 '' '< S - 3 .-. n = ' yoe
O n .n ri •- w r. G i „=. „ ,„ 0 _ ,40 n -r 0 m 0 _
_ off 'wnan < = 3 -7 (5 n 3 - -
n ^ 0a : n3 � xn i n j
.
5 n Sn n n .) o 1 : CA n , = 0
:� J N tG r- n c
a3 - _ = 0 n a0 i o -, O an < - `
=
p n 'O
yin 21 _ �". o3LL '' < = .ntoo moO-'
-. j - n0 _ 0 No
o w s : < O n <'
'
<y - On -n 0 nn -= ,, O N i J]
n 9 O = <. On � n ( _
_
o _
n O 2 (D 'fl O m N _ r - _ .. n Nr. n n_ m
0
s
m _ n 'J^ 0 n n .
n -, - pp, 0 a co a `< n co
A t... W W W W W W W W W NJ N N N NJ NJ NJ N N N
O .0 VTVIAWN OV. DOVCTsAWN - O 'UDV a VIAWN O0 00 --.3 O. s A WN
_' O n .. -o n 0 0 N., -O `< m n -J o O - a O 7 -a ^ op -t n -. N O r;......)
Cm ? Na. npa,-
o
y
^n .- - cm -a= ?. CO0 - � =. " - " � a � 00 - fi rn ni 0 . P.O = n - o = 'O n3 7 oin n n = < n 0m _ = _ - n ^ n7sCa _ N " ^ = Hn - 3' 3Can - 032 ' -,, = , _ > c3 `= a
- = _ '� -j: ^ rn 'O J J = . ' J ' n Ln ^. w
- P < o n . 0 ' = n_ n ? ' 'v = --Jj :' o- _
' nO = J ^ aS �- n = t - No0O ( _ _n „-i .. 7j0 o< - arto 2 y � - . nnnoOno- n0 ' n 3 - 'J :: _ n m " O - n < . _nx r- On -n
_ 0 �. _ ' - t n ^ c 0. :n � 0
nooy33 < ' ,oa - O7t �nn = - nno ' J3 - � - - - -' 3 = � -
on 23. - n 7 - 03n
o `' 0' = oao - _ 0 = = r
n � 0 -33 r' n � ^ 74 " _ 2 ^ rJ ; n mn _ ° 3
on v.n - - nm - r
LS
o
o, ' r,n :,� ' ten -' � 3 �' nnoo
rt a. 'r' n n =O - -- n -t o O <j O �'
--
Cr1 < r' 3 n n ... O o n - n n n R c 1 r < Ste_ 3 - - rn = n
n n o` n y 3, _ j n 3 N n 2 < p (� fe `< o = p n 0" - y O = O n 'J.
a o o _ o d 3 _ o - 3 n - i - n ^ --''- 0 0 o i - __ '
n 6 Ei - c..)'.9. n r o -- n = 0 o -. = = O' 3 -. $ 2 m
' -c " c � = n " - o" n n ='9 7 > V , =• . i n n Q 0Ln
ti Un _ _
hsn - nO 000 o - ^• ^ oOoo = ? o - _ = -. 3 v n ._ .- ._ 7.
*. an - n = d ,t - nm r, .-� - s n � - - a CTO n � - ,n .. - ., L.
A , ,y �, la W W la NJ NJ N NJ N NJ NJ IJ IJ !J
r" ..0 '' J � AWIJ -. = Cbr' V � V1AW N - r•- C JJ J 'T Vi 0- :a N --- = C 1J J1 [n A 4+ N -` b
gi v^ t O C ,= C R n 0 - -J R n 2 0 2 2 (i o R j -.=? A
� no' ' ojc z 2R _._ s Goy G = aZ � rto = _ _ � � � G m O "V
^ O = L = = nOc O , O y _b £ v O £ r _704 _ E C. .n.. 5• n _ o O C' O
r-. .7 .. n_ = J n .-. 5' R :Y5. Er.. Al " Q7 i-• ,•n 22r..
n.. '3 @ J n' n '.i] ^ J R 0 ° :n
Dn
e.
in
"
OO G N
J _ O n
_ =G _ 0 yW Y pre O A O -n O_ n _n ( S 7,-.. - ^ ^ ca _ - n >
: l ,, � ou rt > OC +. i
Sl1R tp G _ ^an rnOR �3 h CD y U =
_ 22
- n _ ny -O f -. R O m ,= '_'2 2Crzn n . b9 n = ro y 7FNJ
_.` G r : c T
s
n O 722 I
c 0 ^ ' n
J t ^ n ^ no 7; C ,- om 3m 00 2 o w
Oo J ^ i _ ,/,
t -n
� - n � O 5 ^ 0 =
n - � n n U 'J
= rr
J - 0 !-- n
0 ' 0 75, .< Vo , ^ v , GN O esR >
onp ". O 20 ' "' ` Y n0 - ? 7' ^J O , 03,
G27 2, -. CD 0-, < = - o - ,2 -0 -. C20220 " nJp
_ Ox .. _ - G 2 C " -0
w o- R0 � K - _ _. _ „ o o - 0
�rw
. _ - n o 7 - " 0
- '' = to Oo __ O - r On isJcTh 0.‘-r 57_1: i .nnO n- on o ,n- _ 0 -On
2.
z `< = `C G = `< o cm - - _
• • ea 0
N 1 J N 1 J N
-
, r,.., N - = '0 r V O p- 'A N - = 'J y' J 0 A tat...)
N
- n 2n9 ? O = -� G �: C i, G > ^ =1n _. ''7 =
L l _.
R _ n 3 R ' R R -
_ _ V c_ _ _
o s7c . _ 3
n o '- (7 ..'...
7.
•
00
" o9 - n zno2p, -. �'' i Lc =moo c
n .. .O >e _ - n 0
n0 - 28
_ .2-. -t _. j O_ - - n 2. '� C _ 'S O =
33 _ to
O z n
o - _ •
= = N n o - - '
DD
E. S p n < n _. . o-
-
2 n n r! O - ` n 00 °._ nO . p
G • -. ' O _
y N "
e r- '_ - O _
c - o c -->. _ n - j n a-C S. o w
n =
_ o O
_
r = -0T -H 0 . 3 -
Y) = nAti
7.1,ndi- ro 2 E. - 0 .- - q
n .„ n .0 c 2 Cc
nn n o = 33 - .a - O _ w T
- aOO o _ o - 2 .. a
i = 7. o , rn o - -
sb 364
SENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE BILL NO: SB 364
SENATOR KARNETTE, CHAIR AUTHOR: PERATA
AMENDED: 2111/ ' 99
Analysis by: Steve Schnaidt FISCAL: Yes
SUBJECT:
State-Local Transportation Partnership Program
DESCRIPTION:
This urgency bill would extend the State-Local Transportation Partnership
Program one year until July 1, 2000 in order to maintain the eligibility of
certain transportation projects for state funds.
ANALYSIS:
Chapter 24, Statutes of 1988 ISB 140, Deddeh) , established a state-local
transportation demonstration program to provide state funds to cities,
counties and local transportation entities for highway and mass transit
guideway projects according to specified Procedures, criteria and guidelines .
The measure provided that projects eligible for funding must constitute a
usable segment that would increase the capacity of the highway or guideway,
extend service to new areas or extend a roadway's useful life by at least 10
years. Projects receiving other state funds are not eligible for the
state-local partnership program.
Chapter 24 and subsequent legislation provided for the appropriation of state
transportation funds for the partnership program through the budget in the
amounts of $250,000, 000 in 1990 and 1991, and $200, 000, 000 each year
thereafter, although the actual appropriation amount varied with changes in
the state' s fiscal condition and annual budget process.
Under the State-Local Partnership Program, each local agency can submit
projects for funding. The Department of Transportation receives the
applications and processes them to verify accuracy and eligibility and
informs the Legislature of the total cost of all eligible projects for the
following fiscal year. Once funds are appropriated, the department
distributes the money to all projects on a pro rata share. For example, if
the total cost of all projects for the following fiscal year is $800 million
and the Legislature appropriates $200 million for that purpose, each project
receives a 25% state share.
Once a project is included in the program and funding is appropriated, the
sponsoring agency must award the construction contract by the end of the
fiscal year, and the funds must be expended by the fourth year following the
appropriation. These conditions are to assure the timely use of state funds.
The State-Local Partnership Program is scheduled to expire and be repealed on
July 1, 1999, according to the terms of SB 45 (Kopp, 1997) which eliminated
most separate, categorical capital funding programs in favor of the Regional
Transportation Improvement Program (local) and the Interregional
Transportation Improvement Program (state) , which constitute the State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) .
This bill is intended to extend for one year the funding eligibility of a
particular project or projects under the State-Local Partnership Program. The
language in the bill, however, would have the effect of extending the
deadline for all remaining projects and the program itself. It would extend
by one year both the time period for awarding construction contracts and the
time period for expending the state appropriation (from 4 to 5 years) for
partnership projects .
COMMENTS:
1. In past years, the contract award deadline was extended one year
for several partnership projects which had encountered unexpected
delays due to catastrophic weather, environmental challenges and other
factors beyond the control of the affected local entity. These
extensions were granted legislatively on a case-by-case basis.
2 . Sponsors of the bill indicate their intention is to extend for one
year the deadline to complete a partnership program project involving
the Port of Oakland. The Port is constructing an airport roadway
project to improve access to the Oakland Airport but has encountered
delays in the environmental process. It hopes to receive environmental
clearance this spring. If the environmental document is further
delayed, the Port will be unable to meet the statutory June 30, 1999
contract award deadline.
3 . As written, the bill extends program deadlines for all remaining
partnership projects, whether or not they have encountered delays.
Contract award and construction completion deadlines would be extended
one year each, delaying the ultimate termination of the partnership
program.
Current law states the Legislature's intent to appropriate
$200, 000, 000 to the partnership program during each year of its
existence. Although it does not appear to be the author's intent, the
bill's general extension implies that another $200, 000, 000 should be
appropriated for the program.
Suggested amendments. The bill should be clarified to simply extend
for one year the deadline for the Port of Oakland project to go to
contract. References to program extension would be deleted to allow the
program to terminate as planned, resolve confusion regarding funding and
make any extensions for other projects subject to individual review and
evaluation by the Legislature.
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the Committee before noon on Wednesday,
3/10199)
SUPPORT: Port of Oakland
Alameda County Transportation Authority
OPPOSED: None received.