California 2011-2012 Regular Session Status: Enacted

AB 105 — Transportation.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 6, Statutes of 2011.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Assembly
  4. ✓
    Passed Senate
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 10, 2011. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 70% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 4 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Summary

(1) Existing law provides for payment of current general obligation bond debt service for specified voter-approved transportation bonds from gasoline excise tax revenue in the Highway Users Tax Account and revenue in the Public Transportation Account, and requires the Controller to make specified transfers of revenues in that regard to the Transportation Debt Service Fund. Existing law, pursuant to the Budget Act of 2010, provides for a loan of $761,639,000 from gasoline excise tax revenue in the Highway Users Tax Account to the General Fund, to be repaid with interest by June 30, 2013. Proposition 22, approved by the voters on November 2, 2010, amends the California Constitution to, among other things, impose new restrictions on the use of fuel excise tax revenues allocated to the state and revenues deposited in the Public Transportation Account. This bill, in fiscal years 2010–11 and 2011–12, would require the Controller to transfer specified amounts of revenues deposited in the State Highway Account from vehicle weight fees to the Transportation Debt Service Fund to be used for reimbursement of the General Fund for payment of current general obligation bond debt service for specified voter-approved transportation bonds, in lieu of the previously authorized gasoline excise tax revenues and Public Transportation Account revenues. In subsequent years, the bill would require all vehicle weight fee revenues to be transferred for this purpose. The bill would make appropriations in this regard. The bill would require the Department of Finance to notify the Controller of the amount of debt service relating to expenditures for eligible mass transit guideway projects that may be paid from revenues restricted by Article XIX of the California Constitution. This bill, in fiscal year 2010–11, would require the Controller to transfer specified amounts of revenues deposited in the State Highway Account from vehicle weight fees to the General Fund as a loan, in lieu of the previously authorized loan of gasoline excise tax revenues. The loan amount for 2010–11 would be repaid over 3 years beginning on June 30, 2014. The bill would also authorize an additional loan in fiscal year 2011–12 of specified vehicle weight fee revenues, to be repaid by June 30, 2015. The bill would make appropriations in this regard. This bill would require the Controller to take various other conforming actions as of November 2, 2010, due to voter approval of Proposition 22 and to the extent the Controller has previously taken actions inconsistent with the requirements imposed by this bill. (2) Existing law, in the 2011–12 fiscal year, requires certain revenues deposited in the State Highway Account that are not restricted as to expenditure by Article XIX of the California Constitution to be transferred to the Transportation Debt Service Fund for payment of current year debt service on certain mass transportation bonds. Thereafter, these revenues are to be transferred to the Public Transportation Account. This bill would, instead, transfer these revenues to the Transportation Debt Service Fund for payment of current year debt service on certain mass transportation bonds in the 2011–12 and 2012–13 fiscal years. Beginning in 2013–14, these revenues would be retained in the State Highway Account until appropriated by the Legislature. (3) Proposition 26, approved by the voters on November 2, 2010, amends the California Constitution to, among other things, require a 23 vote of both houses of the Legislature for any change in statute that results in any taxpayer paying a higher tax. Proposition 26 also provides that any tax adopted after January 1, 2010, but prior to November 3, 2010, that was not adopted in compliance with the 23 vote requirement shall be void on November 3, 2011, unless the tax is reenacted by the Legislature with a 23 vote. Existing law, as of July 1, 2010, eliminates the state sales and use tax on motor vehicle fuel (gasoline) and increases the excise tax. Existing law, as of July 1, 2011, increases the sales and use tax on diesel and decreases the excise tax. Existing law requires the State Board of Equalization to annually modify both the gasoline and diesel excise tax rates on a going-forward basis so that the various changes in the taxes imposed on gasoline and diesel, as described above, are revenue neutral. Existing law enacts other provisions related to the implementation of these provisions. This bill would repeal all of these provisions. The bill would enact new, similar replacement provisions, and state the intent of the Legislature that the changes are being made in order to comply with Proposition 26. The bill would also increase the new diesel sales and use tax rates to be applicable in fiscal years 2011–12, 2012–13, and 2013–14 above the rates currently in effect that the bill would repeal. These increases in the diesel sales and use tax rates would be offset by a reduction in the diesel excise tax rate as of July 1, 2011, and a requirement for the State Board of Equalization to adjust diesel excise tax rates on a going-forward basis to ensure that the overall changes in these diesel fuel taxes are revenue neutral. (4) Existing statutory law provides that 75% of diesel sales tax revenues at the 4 ¾% rate are to be allocated by the Controller from the Public Transportation Account to local agencies for public transportation purposes pursuant to the State Transit Assistance Program, with the remaining 25% of revenues to made available for mass transit programs at the state level. Proposition 22, approved by the voters on November 2, 2010, amends the California Constitution to require these Public Transportation Account revenues to be divided equally between the State Transit Assistance Program and the state-level programs. This bill would conform the statutory provisions to the requirements of Proposition 22. The bill would appropriate $23,000,000 to the Controller from the Public Transportation Account in the 2011–12 fiscal year for allocation to the State Transit Assistance Program. The bill would also continuously appropriate all of the diesel sales revenues above the 4 ¾% rate to the Controller for allocation to that program. (5) Existing law provides for a loan of $135,000,000 from the State Highway Account to the General Fund that is to be repaid by June 30, 2012. This bill would instead require that loan to be repaid by June 30, 2013. (6) Existing law, until July 1, 2011, authorizes the Department of Transportation to transfer funds as short-term loans between various transportation accounts. This bill would extend the operation of these provisions until July 1, 2014. The bill would also eliminate the authority of the department to transfer funds as short-term loans to and from the Transportation Investment Fund, the Transportation Deferred Investment Fund, and the Public Transportation Account. (7) Existing law creates the California Transportation Commission, with various duties and responsibilities relative to the programming and allocation of funds for transportation capital projects. Existing law requires the commission to submit, by December 15 of each year, an annual report to the Legislature summarizing the commission's prior-year decisions in allocating transportation capital funds and identifying timely and relevant transportation issues facing the state. Existing law, the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006, authorizes the issuance of $19.25 billion of general obligation bonds for specified purposes, including $2 billion to be transferred to the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund to be available, upon appropriation in the annual Budget Act by the Legislature and subject to such conditions and criteria as the Legislature may provide by statute, for allocation by the commission. Existing law requires the Department of Transportation to, on or before February 18, 2009, report to specified committees of the Legislature a summary of any memorandum of understanding or any other agreement executed between a railroad company and any state or local transportation agency relative to any project funded with moneys allocated from the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund. This bill would instead require the commission to provide that report to specified committees of the Legislature within 30 days of receiving such a memorandum of understanding or executed agreement. The bill would also, commencing January 1, 2012, require the commission to provide semiannual reports to those committees on the status of all railroad projects programmed in the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund program. The bill would make these reporting requirements inoperative on January 1, 2015. (8) The Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 also requires that $1 billion of bond funds be deposited in the Transit System Safety, Security, and Disaster Response Account, administered by the California Emergency Management Agency (Cal EMA) , for capital projects that provide increased protection against a security and safety threat, and for capital expenditures to increase the capacity of transit operators to develop disaster response transportation systems, as specified. Existing law requires 25% of available funds to be allocated to certain regional public waterborne transit agencies. Existing law requires entities receiving funds from that account to expend those funds within 3 fiscal years of the fiscal year in which the funds were allocated and requires that funds remaining unexpended after those 3 years revert to Cal EMA for reallocation in subsequent fiscal years. This bill, notwithstanding these provisions, would provide that entities receiving an allocation of the funds set aside for regional public waterborne transit agencies, relative to allocations of funds made prior to June 30, 2011, shall have 4 fiscal years from the last day of the fiscal year in which the funds were received by that entity to expend those funds. (9) Existing law requires funds from the Local Street and Road Improvement, Congestion Relief, and Traffic Safety Account of 2006 to be made available to the Controller for allocation to cities, counties, and a city and county, for purposes of the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006, as specified. Upon receipt of funds, a city, county, or city and county is required to expend those funds within 3 fiscal years from the date that the funds are allocated to it by the Controller, and any funds not expended within that period are required to be returned to the Controller and reallocated to other cities, counties, or a city and county, as specified. Existing law establishes the Highway Users Tax Account in the Transportation Tax Fund with revenues in the account restricted to expenditure on various purposes, including public street and highway purposes and certain mass transit guideway purposes. This bill would authorize a city, county, or city and county that receives these funds in a fiscal year in which funds from the Highway Users Tax Account are deferred, suspended, borrowed, or shifted, to expend those funds within 4 fiscal years from the last date of the fiscal year in which the funds are allocated to it by the Controller. (10) Existing law, the California High-Speed Rail Act, creates the High-Speed Rail Authority to develop and implement a high-speed rail system in the state, with specified powers and duties. Existing law provides for appointment of an executive director by the authority, who is exempt from civil service and serves at the pleasure of the authority. Existing law requires the executive director to be paid a salary established by the authority and approved by the Department of Personnel Administration. This bill, for purposes of managing and administering the ongoing work of the authority in implementing the high-speed train project, would authorize the Governor, upon the recommendation of the executive director, to appoint up to 6 additional individuals, exempt from civil service, who would serve in specified positions at the pleasure of the executive director. The bill would require a salary survey to be conducted to determine the compensation for the executive director and additional exempt persons, and would require the salaries to be established by the authority and approved by the Department of Personnel Administration. This bill would impose certain reporting requirements on the authority with respect to a portion of funds appropriated to the authority in the 2010 and 2011 Budget Acts, to be submitted to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee. (11) Existing law provides that the Department of Transportation has full possession and control of the state highway system. Existing law creates various programs to fund transportation capital improvement programs and provides for allocation of those funds. Existing law requires the department to prepare an annual budget, as specified, for submission to the Governor. This bill would require the department to submit specified supplemental information by May 1 of each year to the Legislative Analyst and to the Senate Committee on Appropriations and the Assembly Committee on Appropriations to substantiate the department's proposed capital outlay support budget. (12) Existing law provides for apportionment by the Controller of a specified amount of gasoline excise tax revenues in the Highway Users Tax Account to cities and counties for local street and road purposes, including revenues from the increase in the gasoline excise tax, pursuant to Chapters 11 and 12 of the 8th Extraordinary Session of the Statutes of 2010. These revenues, including the revenues from the increase in the gasoline excise tax, are not subject to expenditure requirements and restrictions that were applicable to revenues from the gasoline sales tax that was repealed by the above-referenced legislation. This bill would clarify that the revenues apportioned to cities and counties from the increase in the gasoline excise tax may be used for any local street and road purpose and are not subject to the requirements and restrictions applicable to the former gasoline sales tax revenues. (13) Under existing law, when the Department of Motor Vehicles determines that an applicant is lawfully entitled to a driver's license, the department is required to issue that license to the applicant. Existing law specifies the contents of a driver's license. Existing law requires that the front of an application for an original or renewal of a driver's license or identification card contain a space for an applicant to give his or her consent to be an organ and tissue donor upon death. This bill would also require the application for a driver's license or identification card to contain a space for an applicant to indicate whether he or she has served in the Armed Forces of the United States and to give his or her consent to be contacted regarding eligibility to receive state or federal veterans benefits. The bill would require the Department of Motor Vehicles to electronically transmit to the Department of Veterans Affairs specified information on an applicant who has identified on his or her application for a driver's license or identification card that he or she has served in the Armed Forces of the United States and consents to being contacted about veterans benefits. (14) The bill would enact other related provisions. (15) The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. Governor Schwarzenegger issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 6, 2010. Governor Brown issued a proclamation on January 20, 2011, declaring and reaffirming that a fiscal emergency exists and stating that his proclamation supersedes the earlier proclamation for purposes of that constitutional provision. This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared and reaffirmed by the Governor by proclamation issued on January 20, 2011, pursuant to the California Constitution. (16) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 6, Statutes of 2011.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 5 p.m.

  4. Urgency clause adopted. Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 69. Noes 4. Page 588.).

  5. Assembly Rule 77 suspended. (Page 585.)

  6. In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after March 18 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.

  7. Read third time. Urgency clause adopted. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 352.).

  8. Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.

  9. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 5.) (March 16).

  10. Re-referred to Com. on B. & F.R. pursuant to Joint Rule 10.5.

  11. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  12. Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  13. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  14. Ordered to second reading.

  15. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  16. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 49. Noes 0. Page 418.)

  17. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  18. Without reference to committee.

  19. From printer. May be heard in committee February 10.

  20. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Committee on Budget · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 1 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Committee on Budget

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Passed 39 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 36001
Republican 1000
Democratic 2000
Total 39001
% of votes cast 98%0%0%3%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Wyland — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Evans — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Runner — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
De León — Yea
Negrete McLeod — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Blakeslee — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Correa — Yea
Harman — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Huff — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Leno — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Dutton — Yea
Walters — Not Voting
Alquist — Yea
Anderson — Yea
Liu — Yea
Price — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Vargas — Yea
Wright — Yea
Emmerson — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
La Malfa — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 69 Yea · 4 Nay · 6 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 65405
Republican 1001
Democratic 3000
Total 69406
% of votes cast 87%5%0%8%
How each member voted (79)
Member Party Vote
Gordon — Yea
Gorell — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Davis — Yea
Portantino — Yea
John A. Pérez — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Fletcher — Yea
Garrick — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Huber — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Jeffries — Yea
Logue — Yea
Nestande — Yea
Perea — Yea
Smyth — Yea
Swanson — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Yamada — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Hagman — Not Voting
Halderman — Not Voting
Campos — Yea
Hall — Yea
Knight — Nay
Lara — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Miller — Nay
Monning — Yea
Beall — Yea
Chesbro — Yea
Conway — Not Voting
Dickinson — Yea
Donnelly — Nay
Morrell — Nay
Nielsen — Yea
Norby — Yea
Pan — Yea
Torres — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Butler — Yea
Carter — Yea
Hill — Yea
Cedillo — Yea
Williams — Yea
Achadjian — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Block — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Brownley — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Hayashi — Yea
Huffman — Yea
Ma — Yea
Mansoor — Not Voting
Olsen — Yea
Silva — Not Voting
Skinner — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Valadao — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Cook — Yea
Eng — Yea
Furutani — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Bonnie Lowenthal — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
V. Manuel Pérez — Yea
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Not Voting

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 11 Yea · 5 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 11500
Total 11500
% of votes cast 69%31%0%0%
How each member voted (16)
Member Party Vote
Evans — Yea
Fuller — Nay
Rubio — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Huff — Nay
Leno — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Anderson — Nay
Simitian — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Liu — Yea
Wright — Yea
Emmerson — Nay
DeSaulnier — Yea
La Malfa — Nay

Official roll call →

Passed 49 Yea · 0 Nay · 30 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 0002
Unaffiliated 460028
Democratic 3000
Total 490030
% of votes cast 62%0%0%38%
How each member voted (79)
Member Party Vote
Fuentes — Yea
Furutani — Yea
Carter — Yea
Cedillo — Yea
Hill — Yea
Huber — Yea
Perea — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Williams — Yea
Yamada — Yea
Garrick — Not Voting
Portantino — Yea
John A. Pérez — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Gorell — Not Voting
Hagman — Not Voting
Butler — Not Voting
Halderman — Not Voting
Bonilla — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Hall — Yea
Harkey — Not Voting
Hayashi — Yea
Campos — Yea
Fletcher — Not Voting
Hueso — Yea
Huffman — Yea
Jeffries — Not Voting
Knight — Not Voting
Beall — Yea
Block — Yea
Chesbro — Yea
Conway — Not Voting
Davis — Yea
Donnelly — Not Voting
Lara — Yea
Logue — Not Voting
Mendoza — Yea
Miller — Not Voting
Monning — Yea
Nestande — Not Voting
Nielsen — Not Voting
Olsen — Not Voting
Pan — Yea
Silva — Not Voting
Smyth — Not Voting
Swanson — Not Voting
Torres — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Achadjian — Not Voting
Alejo — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Brownley — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Ma — Yea
Mansoor — Not Voting
Morrell — Not Voting
Norby — Not Voting
Solorio — Yea
Valadao — Not Voting
Wagner — Not Voting
Cook — Not Voting
Eng — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Dickinson — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Not Voting
Bonnie Lowenthal — Not Voting
Roger Hernández — Yea
V. Manuel Pérez — Yea
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Not Voting
Jones, Brian W. Republican Not Voting

Official roll call →

Subjects

Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 105 do?
(1) Existing law provides for payment of current general obligation bond debt service for specified voter-approved transportation bonds from gasoline excise tax revenue in the Highway Users Tax Account and revenue in the Public Transportation Account, and requires the Controller to make specified transfers of revenues in that regard to the Transportation Debt Service Fund. Existing law, pursuant to the Budget Act of 2010, provides for a loan of $761,639,000 from gasoline excise tax revenue in the Highway Users Tax Account to the General Fund, to be repaid with interest by June 30, 2013. Proposition 22, approved by the voters on November 2, 2010, amends the California Constitution to, among other things, impose new restrictions on the use of fuel excise tax revenues allocated to the state and revenues deposited in the Public Transportation Account. This bill, in fiscal years 2010–11 and 2011–12, would require the Controller to transfer specified amounts of revenues deposited in the State Highway Account from vehicle weight fees to the Transportation Debt Service Fund to be used for reimbursement of the General Fund for payment of current general obligation bond debt service for specified voter-approved transportation bonds, in lieu of the previously authorized gasoline excise tax revenues and Public Transportation Account revenues. In subsequent years, the bill would require all vehicle weight fee revenues to be transferred for this purpose. The bill would make appropriations in this regard. The bill would require the Department of Finance to notify the Controller of the amount of debt service relating to expenditures for eligible mass transit guideway projects that may be paid from revenues restricted by Article XIX of the California Constitution. This bill, in fiscal year 2010–11, would require the Controller to transfer specified amounts of revenues deposited in the State Highway Account from vehicle weight fees to the General Fund as a loan, in lieu of the previously authorized loan of gasoline excise tax revenues. The loan amount for 2010–11 would be repaid over 3 years beginning on June 30, 2014. The bill would also authorize an additional loan in fiscal year 2011–12 of specified vehicle weight fee revenues, to be repaid by June 30, 2015. The bill would make appropriations in this regard. This bill would require the Controller to take various other conforming actions as of November 2, 2010, due to voter approval of Proposition 22 and to the extent the Controller has previously taken actions inconsistent with the requirements imposed by this bill. (2) Existing law, in the 2011–12 fiscal year, requires certain revenues deposited in the State Highway Account that are not restricted as to expenditure by Article XIX of the California Constitution to be transferred to the Transportation Debt Service Fund for payment of current year debt service on certain mass transportation bonds. Thereafter, these revenues are to be transferred to the Public Transportation Account. This bill would, instead, transfer these revenues to the Transportation Debt Service Fund for payment of current year debt service on certain mass transportation bonds in the 2011–12 and 2012–13 fiscal years. Beginning in 2013–14, these revenues would be retained in the State Highway Account until appropriated by the Legislature. (3) Proposition 26, approved by the voters on November 2, 2010, amends the California Constitution to, among other things, require a 23 vote of both houses of the Legislature for any change in statute that results in any taxpayer paying a higher tax. Proposition 26 also provides that any tax adopted after January 1, 2010, but prior to November 3, 2010, that was not adopted in compliance with the 23 vote requirement shall be void on November 3, 2011, unless the tax is reenacted by the Legislature with a 23 vote. Existing law, as of July 1, 2010, eliminates the state sales and use tax on motor vehicle fuel (gasoline) and increases the excise tax. Existing law, as of July 1, 2011, increases the sales and use tax on diesel and decreases the excise tax. Existing law requires the State Board of Equalization to annually modify both the gasoline and diesel excise tax rates on a going-forward basis so that the various changes in the taxes imposed on gasoline and diesel, as described above, are revenue neutral. Existing law enacts other provisions related to the implementation of these provisions. This bill would repeal all of these provisions. The bill would enact new, similar replacement provisions, and state the intent of the Legislature that the changes are being made in order to comply with Proposition 26. The bill would also increase the new diesel sales and use tax rates to be applicable in fiscal years 2011–12, 2012–13, and 2013–14 above the rates currently in effect that the bill would repeal. These increases in the diesel sales and use tax rates would be offset by a reduction in the diesel excise tax rate as of July 1, 2011, and a requirement for the State Board of Equalization to adjust diesel excise tax rates on a going-forward basis to ensure that the overall changes in these diesel fuel taxes are revenue neutral. (4) Existing statutory law provides that 75% of diesel sales tax revenues at the 4 ¾% rate are to be allocated by the Controller from the Public Transportation Account to local agencies for public transportation purposes pursuant to the State Transit Assistance Program, with the remaining 25% of revenues to made available for mass transit programs at the state level. Proposition 22, approved by the voters on November 2, 2010, amends the California Constitution to require these Public Transportation Account revenues to be divided equally between the State Transit Assistance Program and the state-level programs. This bill would conform the statutory provisions to the requirements of Proposition 22. The bill would appropriate $23,000,000 to the Controller from the Public Transportation Account in the 2011–12 fiscal year for allocation to the State Transit Assistance Program. The bill would also continuously appropriate all of the diesel sales revenues above the 4 ¾% rate to the Controller for allocation to that program. (5) Existing law provides for a loan of $135,000,000 from the State Highway Account to the General Fund that is to be repaid by June 30, 2012. This bill would instead require that loan to be repaid by June 30, 2013. (6) Existing law, until July 1, 2011, authorizes the Department of Transportation to transfer funds as short-term loans between various transportation accounts. This bill would extend the operation of these provisions until July 1, 2014. The bill would also eliminate the authority of the department to transfer funds as short-term loans to and from the Transportation Investment Fund, the Transportation Deferred Investment Fund, and the Public Transportation Account. (7) Existing law creates the California Transportation Commission, with various duties and responsibilities relative to the programming and allocation of funds for transportation capital projects. Existing law requires the commission to submit, by December 15 of each year, an annual report to the Legislature summarizing the commission's prior-year decisions in allocating transportation capital funds and identifying timely and relevant transportation issues facing the state. Existing law, the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006, authorizes the issuance of $19.25 billion of general obligation bonds for specified purposes, including $2 billion to be transferred to the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund to be available, upon appropriation in the annual Budget Act by the Legislature and subject to such conditions and criteria as the Legislature may provide by statute, for allocation by the commission. Existing law requires the Department of Transportation to, on or before February 18, 2009, report to specified committees of the Legislature a summary of any memorandum of understanding or any other agreement executed between a railroad company and any state or local transportation agency relative to any project funded with moneys allocated from the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund. This bill would instead require the commission to provide that report to specified committees of the Legislature within 30 days of receiving such a memorandum of understanding or executed agreement. The bill would also, commencing January 1, 2012, require the commission to provide semiannual reports to those committees on the status of all railroad projects programmed in the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund program. The bill would make these reporting requirements inoperative on January 1, 2015. (8) The Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 also requires that $1 billion of bond funds be deposited in the Transit System Safety, Security, and Disaster Response Account, administered by the California Emergency Management Agency (Cal EMA) , for capital projects that provide increased protection against a security and safety threat, and for capital expenditures to increase the capacity of transit operators to develop disaster response transportation systems, as specified. Existing law requires 25% of available funds to be allocated to certain regional public waterborne transit agencies. Existing law requires entities receiving funds from that account to expend those funds within 3 fiscal years of the fiscal year in which the funds were allocated and requires that funds remaining unexpended after those 3 years revert to Cal EMA for reallocation in subsequent fiscal years. This bill, notwithstanding these provisions, would provide that entities receiving an allocation of the funds set aside for regional public waterborne transit agencies, relative to allocations of funds made prior to June 30, 2011, shall have 4 fiscal years from the last day of the fiscal year in which the funds were received by that entity to expend those funds. (9) Existing law requires funds from the Local Street and Road Improvement, Congestion Relief, and Traffic Safety Account of 2006 to be made available to the Controller for allocation to cities, counties, and a city and county, for purposes of the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006, as specified. Upon receipt of funds, a city, county, or city and county is required to expend those funds within 3 fiscal years from the date that the funds are allocated to it by the Controller, and any funds not expended within that period are required to be returned to the Controller and reallocated to other cities, counties, or a city and county, as specified. Existing law establishes the Highway Users Tax Account in the Transportation Tax Fund with revenues in the account restricted to expenditure on various purposes, including public street and highway purposes and certain mass transit guideway purposes. This bill would authorize a city, county, or city and county that receives these funds in a fiscal year in which funds from the Highway Users Tax Account are deferred, suspended, borrowed, or shifted, to expend those funds within 4 fiscal years from the last date of the fiscal year in which the funds are allocated to it by the Controller. (10) Existing law, the California High-Speed Rail Act, creates the High-Speed Rail Authority to develop and implement a high-speed rail system in the state, with specified powers and duties. Existing law provides for appointment of an executive director by the authority, who is exempt from civil service and serves at the pleasure of the authority. Existing law requires the executive director to be paid a salary established by the authority and approved by the Department of Personnel Administration. This bill, for purposes of managing and administering the ongoing work of the authority in implementing the high-speed train project, would authorize the Governor, upon the recommendation of the executive director, to appoint up to 6 additional individuals, exempt from civil service, who would serve in specified positions at the pleasure of the executive director. The bill would require a salary survey to be conducted to determine the compensation for the executive director and additional exempt persons, and would require the salaries to be established by the authority and approved by the Department of Personnel Administration. This bill would impose certain reporting requirements on the authority with respect to a portion of funds appropriated to the authority in the 2010 and 2011 Budget Acts, to be submitted to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee. (11) Existing law provides that the Department of Transportation has full possession and control of the state highway system. Existing law creates various programs to fund transportation capital improvement programs and provides for allocation of those funds. Existing law requires the department to prepare an annual budget, as specified, for submission to the Governor. This bill would require the department to submit specified supplemental information by May 1 of each year to the Legislative Analyst and to the Senate Committee on Appropriations and the Assembly Committee on Appropriations to substantiate the department's proposed capital outlay support budget. (12) Existing law provides for apportionment by the Controller of a specified amount of gasoline excise tax revenues in the Highway Users Tax Account to cities and counties for local street and road purposes, including revenues from the increase in the gasoline excise tax, pursuant to Chapters 11 and 12 of the 8th Extraordinary Session of the Statutes of 2010. These revenues, including the revenues from the increase in the gasoline excise tax, are not subject to expenditure requirements and restrictions that were applicable to revenues from the gasoline sales tax that was repealed by the above-referenced legislation. This bill would clarify that the revenues apportioned to cities and counties from the increase in the gasoline excise tax may be used for any local street and road purpose and are not subject to the requirements and restrictions applicable to the former gasoline sales tax revenues. (13) Under existing law, when the Department of Motor Vehicles determines that an applicant is lawfully entitled to a driver's license, the department is required to issue that license to the applicant. Existing law specifies the contents of a driver's license. Existing law requires that the front of an application for an original or renewal of a driver's license or identification card contain a space for an applicant to give his or her consent to be an organ and tissue donor upon death. This bill would also require the application for a driver's license or identification card to contain a space for an applicant to indicate whether he or she has served in the Armed Forces of the United States and to give his or her consent to be contacted regarding eligibility to receive state or federal veterans benefits. The bill would require the Department of Motor Vehicles to electronically transmit to the Department of Veterans Affairs specified information on an applicant who has identified on his or her application for a driver's license or identification card that he or she has served in the Armed Forces of the United States and consents to being contacted about veterans benefits. (14) The bill would enact other related provisions. (15) The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. Governor Schwarzenegger issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 6, 2010. Governor Brown issued a proclamation on January 20, 2011, declaring and reaffirming that a fiscal emergency exists and stating that his proclamation supersedes the earlier proclamation for purposes of that constitutional provision. This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared and reaffirmed by the Governor by proclamation issued on January 20, 2011, pursuant to the California Constitution. (16) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Who sponsors AB 105?
AB 105 is sponsored by Committee on Budget.
What is the current status of AB 105?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 10, 2011. Enacted.
Where can I track AB 105?
Track AB 105 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 105

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Stay ahead of AB 105

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →