Laserfiche WebLink
10A <br /> ,,: � Page 19 <br /> t�k 5"'>w!.'9",i.�. �.,�r.,E� ��d C�wau n x i ��� . .. .. . .. e. � ,.. �; ,. n .: i; �.� �' 4i !D <`. ?' '. �� 45 tixr $ ., is : U' dt <br /> . .�.� .�,��� M v K, -. c. y e:. r:.. � f> b+ � .• a4 , <br /> There are a number of bills of particular requirements for implementing the SLPP. Those <br /> interest to cities. Nere is a brief summary on measures are: <br /> some af these measures, and where they cur- <br /> rently stand in the Legisfature: • AB 'i 351 (Levine) <br /> • SB 748 (Corbett) <br /> Proposition 1 B • SB 872 (Ackerman) <br /> Local Street and Road Funds These measures outline the sources of the <br /> iocal eligible match required to compete for the <br /> • SB 286 (Dutton). SB 286 is a League- funding,though not all outline the same source <br /> sponsored bill that defines an alfocation schedule (i.e. voter approved sales taxes vs. parcel taxes <br /> for the$2 billion inciuded in Prop.1 B as a direct vs. bridge tolis vs. other voter approved taxes and <br /> allocation to cities and counties. Specificafly, SB fees dedicated to transportation purposes). <br /> 286 guarantees that every city wiii receive at least <br /> half o#their Prop. �B fu�ds to spend in the next The League is advacating for maximum <br /> two fiscal years (the 2007-08 Prop. 42 "gap"year flexibi(ity for the local match. A comparisan of the <br /> and 2008-09). three measures can be found a#www.cacities.orq/ <br /> infrastructure. <br /> This is extremely impottant for local govern- <br /> ments. Without significant funding in the 2007-08 Goods Movement <br /> Prop 42 "gap"year, cities and counties will not <br /> receive any money#or local streets and roads. . SB 9 (Lowenthai). This bill establishes a <br /> SB 286 allacates any remaining funds (funds not Process for selecting projects under the $2 biifion <br /> spent in 2007-08 and 2008-09}to cities no later ��-ade Carridor Improvement Fund. The measure <br /> than January 1, 2010 for fiscaf years 2009-10 and requires that proposed projects be included in an <br /> 2010-11. approved regional transportation plan. <br /> Recent Activity: SB 2$6 passed out of the Factors in selection include: <br /> Senate Transportation and Housing Committee on <br /> Tuesday,April 24,wifh a 10-1 vote. Next, it wil[be . An estimate of the em�issio��s ,�r;,duc�u <br /> heard in the Senate Appropriations Committee. �uring the construction <br /> The League continues to advocate for accelerated Operation of a proposed project <br /> payments of these funds to cities and will seek a � <br /> full appropriation in the state budget of the $1 • Ongoing monitoring and mitigation of air <br /> billion for cities. impacts of projects funded by these bond <br /> funds <br /> Cities should send support letters on this bill. <br /> For a sample letter, look up S8 286 at Recent Activity: SB 9 passed out of the <br /> www.cacities.orcr/billsearch. Senate Transportation and Housing Committee <br /> and was referred to the Senate Appropria#ions <br /> State-Loca! Partnership Pragram Legisla�ion Committee. <br /> Prop. 1 B includes$1 billion for the State-Local • SB �I9 (Lowenthal). SB 19 specifies <br /> �ar�n�rsh�p Program (SLPP), which requires local projects eligible to receive$1 billion in funding <br /> matching funds to access bond money. There are made avaikable under Prop. 1 B to reduce air <br /> three bills currently moving forward in the Legisla- emissions assocrated with goods movement. <br /> ture that attempt to outline the criteria and eligibility <br /> L',C?i':t1;'-i1';':.:�:..:`ir':3,::: =`i <br /> PAGE 8 - PRIORITY EOCUS Visit the League's Official Website•-www.cacities.org <br /> April Z7, 2007 - Issue#16 <br />