Mayor and Council
100 Gregory Lane, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523-3323 – (925) 671-5270 www.pleasanthillca.org
August 1, 2022
The Honorable Chris Holden
Chair, Assembly Committee on Appropriations
1021 O Street, Suite 8220
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Opposition (unless amended) to SB 932 (Portantino): General plans: circulation element:
bicycle and pedestrian plans and traffic calming plans (As amended June 20, 2022) Dear Assembly Member Holden,
The City of Pleasant Hill must respectfully oppose unless amended SB 932 (Portantino), which would create unfunded mandates for costly improvements to local transportation infrastructure without providing funding for implementation. This bill would expose many local governments to new legal risks that may result in litigation costs to defend and settle.
Local agencies support active transportation projects and have been leading the charge to improve local streets and roads, while also retrofitting them to improve safety for all roadway users.
According to the California Transportation Commission, during just the first two and a half fiscal years when SB 1 (Beall, 2017) funds were available, cities and counties reported spending $1.5 billion to complete over 3,100 projects.
Despite the significant progress that local governments have made to develop active transportation projects in their communities, SB 932 takes a top-down approach that dictates both the type of improvements required and the timing for implementing such improvements. The timeframes in SB 932 do not account for existing funding gaps, much less the additional capital costs of the improvements the bill mandates.
Recent amendments to SB 932 would create new legal risks for the largest ten counties and the cities located within those jurisdictions that fail to meet the bill’s arbitrary implementation timeframes. The provisions of SB 932 upend design immunity in the Tort Claims Act (Government Code § 890) that prohibit a local government from being sued for negligence. SB 932 would create a mandatory duty and thus would establish the concept of “dangerous conditions” for local streets and roads that may jeopardize a city’s liability coverage after being recategorized as very high risk due to the provisions of SB 932.
Simply put, this would establish a new private right of action that would require significant dollars dedicated toward defending against litigation and would diminish those funds available for improving our local streets and roads. Ironically, SB 932 would effectively force the City to cut its annual budget on capital improvement projects and programs to the detriment of public safety in order to combat costly litigation and settle claims.
Senate Bill 932 creates capricious implementation timelines, exposes cities to liability, and lacks an adequate funding mechanism to pay for necessary improvements. The City has identified over $129 million in unfunded projects and programs for the improvement of streets, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and traffic signals. Absent the creation of a grant program, the City would be unable to fund these mandatory infrastructure improvements.
Finally, the Legislature is proposing $1.5 billion in the state budget for active transportation projects, but neglects to provide a funding mechanism for these improvements. Senate Bill 932 should be amended to create a grant program tied to the $1.5 billion allocated for these projects.
For these reasons, the City Pleasant Hill opposes, unless amended, SB 932.
Sincerely,
Michael G. Harris, OD
Mayor
cc: Members, Assembly Committee on Appropriations, [email protected] The Honorable Anthony Portantino, Senator
Jay Dickenson, Chief Consultant, Assembly Committee on Appropriations Daniel Ballon, Fiscal Consultant, Assembly Minority Caucus League of California Cities, [email protected]
Sam Caygill, East Bay Division, Cal Cities, [email protected]