NMA California Alert: Governor Vetoes Anti-Motorist Bills

via email from NMA

Dear California Member,

Gov. Brown has vetoed a series of anti-motorist bills that were opposed by the NMA and its coalition partners in California. Here’s a brief rundown of the vetoed bills:

  • Assembly Bill 2398—Would have imposed added penalties for injuring “vulnerable road users” such as pedestrians and bicyclists.  Only protected non-motorized road users.
  • Assembly Bill 1646—Would have added a point for cell phone violations.
  • Assembly Bill 1532—Would have imposed massive new penalties on passengers when the vehicle they are riding in does not stop as required when involved in a collision.
  • Senate Bill 1151—Would have enhanced penalties for numerous infractions and misdemeanors committed in school zones.

You can learn more about these bills from our previous legislative alert here.

Thanks to all California members who contact Gov. Brown and urged him to take a more reasonable stance on motorists’ issues.

John Bowman
National Motorists Association

http://www.motorists.org/

Gov. Brown signs bills promoting bike paths

: latimes – excerpt

Gov. Jerry Brown on Saturday signed into law two measures aimed at helping cities and counties expand and improve bike paths and trails, including one allowing voters to consider whether to increase some fees to pay for the work.

Local agencies, including cities and park districts, could place proposals on the ballot that, with a two-thirds vote from local residents, would impose a motor vehicle registration surcharge of up to $5 in those districts, with the proceeds going to developing and maintaining bikeway networks.

Sen. Mark DeSaulnier (D-Concord) said his bill will allow communities to provide a transportation alternative to driving cars on congested streets. He cited a study that found the more bike lanes provided per square mile in a city, the more commuters took bikes rather than cars.

“Upgrading bike infrastructure will help public safety, the environment and the quality of life in cities across California,” DeSaulnier said of SB 1183.

Brown also agreed to give local governments more flexibility in designing bikeways.

Under existing law, bike lanes must fit precise standards set by the state’s transportation department. AB 1193 by Assemblyman Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) allows cities to plan such lanes that may not meet the state’s standards, as long as the designs meet the guidelines set by a national association of public transportation officials… (more)

If you object and you haven’t yet complained to Governor Brown, Ting and DeSaulnier and the other state reps who are following the dictates of the non-profit bike coalitions, you may want to do so now. Contact info: http://discoveryink.wordpress.com/ca-legislation/state-legislators/

 

 

California Legislation Watch: Weekly Update

Among the flurry of votes, the following bills passed out of both the Assembly and the Senate and are now waiting for the governor to sign—or veto:

  • Vehicle registration surcharge for bike paths and trailsSB 1183 from Senator Mark DeSaulnier (D-Concord) would allow local jurisdictions–cities, park districts–to place initiatives on the ballot to fund bike paths and trails with a local vehicle registration surcharge. Because this fits Brown’s ideals about fiscal responsibility—that is, the surcharge cannot be imposed unless 2/3 of voters approve—let’s say this one is likely to be signed.
  • Bike racks on buses: AB 2707, from Assemblymember Ed Chau (D-Monterey Park), would allow newer, longer buses to carry bike racks that fit three bikes. Right now buses are generally restricted to two-bike racks, except in a few places that argued for an exception. This would make the rules consistent statewide.
  • Traffic violation fines in school zones: S.B. 1151, from Senator Anthony Canella (R-Ceres). Despite unanimous passage in both houses and all the committees it passed through, advocates are worried that Brown may decline to sign this bill because it uses fines to generate revenue. In this case the revenue would have been used for active transportation projects.
    The bill originally called for fines to be doubled, to match fines in construction zones. However, the original language would have required new signage and legislators balked at burdening locals with those costs. Now, the bill merely adds a mandatory $35 increase to any other fines a scofflaw motorist would incur for unsafe driving in a school zone.

Meanwhile the following bills passed the Senate and returned to the Assembly for approval of Senate amendments:

  • Higher fines for hit-and-run convictions: A.B. 1532 from Assemblymember Mike Gatto (D-Los Angeles).
  • Yellow Alert on hit-and-run perpetrators:A.B. 47, also from Gatto.
  • Vulnerable users defined:A.B. 2398, from Assemblymember Marc Levine (D-San Rafael). This bill was amended in committee to lower the fine for violations against vulnerable users from $1000 to $300. This is still over three times the current fine which is either $70 or $95 pending the severity of the crash.
  • Active Transportation Program list approved: At its monthly meeting, the California Transportation Commission approved the list of projects its staff recommended to receive funding—a total of 145 projects out of 771 submitted applications. Can you say: woefully underfunded?

Cap-and-Trade Auctions on Track: On Monday, the California Air Resources Board held a successful quarterly cap-and-trade auction, selling out all the available pollution credits at a price slightly above the minimum set by the board. The list of bidders included plenty of fuel companies, who will be subject to the cap come January—unless legislative attempts to delay that, such as A.B. 69 from Assemblymember Henry Perea (D-Fresno), gain some traction in the next week. Perea’s bill is awaiting its turn to be heard on the Senate floor.

Closing hit-and-run loopholes: The L.A. City Attorney and the L.A. Times endorsed A.B. 2673 from Assemblymember Steven Bradford (D-Gardena), which would end the use of civil compromises to remove criminal charges for hit-and-run crimes .

Protected Bike Lane Bill Still Being Amended: A.B. 1193 from Assemblymember Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) is the bill that would add protected bike lanes, or “cycletracks,” to the four types of bike facilities defined in the California Street and Highways Code, and would require Caltrans to create engineering standards for them by January of 2016.

A secondary aspect of the bill, which allows local jurisdictions to choose a different safety criteria than that created by Caltrans, is meeting some resistance on both sides of the liability debate (cities don’t want liability, and consumer advocates want someone to take responsibility). The bill actually passed on the Senate floor on Wednesday, but it was pulled back to make amendments to address those concerns.

The California Bicycle Coalition, the bill’s sponsor, is pleased with the results of negotiations. “We have come to an agreement with both sides of the debate,” said Dave Snyder, CalBike’s director. “We’ve agreed to new language and that this bill will not affect liability.”

A.B. 1193 will be heard again in the Senate. It’s expected to pass, but the Assembly will have to approve the new amendments.

.. (more)

Not all of these are problematic, but people should know all the laws our representatives are working on a decide for themselves which to support and which to oppose.

Anyone who is considering donations to the reps may want to find out where they stand.

Note that not one of these bills has anything to do with public transit. These are the bills that are being tracked by the California Bicycle Coalition. They obviously don’t care about public transit.

How California is planning growth for a prosperous economy and clean environment

Kaid Benfield’s Blog – excerpt

A thorough new report developed by my colleagues at the Natural Resources Defense Council, together with Move LA, a transportation and smart development partnership in southern California, documents the impressive progress made over the last four years to ensure that our nation’s most populous state will absorb future growth in a sensible way.  Called Bold Plans for California Communities, the report traces the history and implementation of the state’s landmark planning framework, adopted by the state legislature and signed by then-governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2008.

California’s planning framework
In California, laws tend to be known by bureaucratic names or abbreviations and numbers (think Proposition 13 or AB 32).  The planning legislation, known by most as Senate Bill 375 or simply “SB 375,” wisely takes account  of the growth pressures facing the state – population is expected to increase about ten percent in each coming decade – and directs each of its metropolitan planning organizations to coordinate transportation investment, land use and housing so that growth occurs efficiently while minimizing emissions and  other environmental impacts.  The most significant environmental provisions of the law direct the California Air Resources Board to develop and assign transportation emissions targets for each region, and then requires each region to develop a detailed strategy to assure that those targets are met.  The Air Board must review the plans and certify that each is adequate to meet the targets.  It’s not quite that simple, of course, but that’s the general idea…. (more)

%d bloggers like this: