State transportation improvement program.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when SB 1102 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on SB 1102.
You're tracking SB 1102
We'll email you the moment it moves.
SB 1102 — State transportation improvement program.
Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 272, Statutes of 2012.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓Passed Assembly
-
✓To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 16, 2012. Enacted.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
HighHow often bills like it became law.
-
Enacted
Current position in the legislative process.
-
2 sponsors
1 primary, 1 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 6 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 establishes the state transportation improvement program process, pursuant to which the California Transportation Commission generally programs and allocates available funds for transportation capital improvement projects over a multiyear period. Existing law provides that the Department of Transportation is responsible for the state highway system. Existing law requires the department to annually prepare a project delivery report that identifies milestone dates for state highway projects costing $1,000,000 or more for which the department is the responsible agency for project development work. This bill would require the department, beginning not later than November 15, 2014, as part of the annual project delivery report, to report on the difference between the original allocation made by the commission and the actual construction capital and support costs at project close for all state transportation improvement program projects completed during the previous fiscal year. (2) Existing law provides funding for interregional and regional transportation capital improvement projects through the state transportation improvement program process, with 25% of funds available for interregional projects and 75% for regional projects. Existing law requires funds available for regional projects to be programmed by the commission pursuant to the county shares formula, under which a minimum amount of funding is available for programming in each county. Existing law specifies the project costs to be charged against county shares in that regard and, in certain cases, provides for adjustments by the commission if project costs change. This bill would revise these provisions to require project costs to include right-of-way support costs. The bill would require the commission to allocate funds for construction support costs for a project in the state transportation improvement program at the time of allocation of funds for construction capital costs. The bill would require a supplemental project allocation request to be made for all interregional and regional projects that experience construction support costs equal to or more than 120% of the amount originally allocated. The bill would make other related changes.
Bill Text
- Chaptered 09/07/12 - Chaptered Current pdf September 07, 2012
- Enrolled 08/22/12 - Enrolled pdf August 22, 2012
- Amended 05/31/12 - Amended Assembly pdf May 31, 2012
- Introduced 02/16/12 - Introduced pdf February 16, 2012
- SB1102 View text html
Action History
-
Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 272, Statutes of 2012.
-
Approved by the Governor.
-
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4:30 p.m.
-
Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 38. Noes 0. Page 4624.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
-
In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
-
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 79. Noes 0. Page 5967.) Ordered to the Senate.
-
Read second time. Ordered to consent calendar.
-
From committee: Do pass. Ordered to consent calendar. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (August 8).
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 13. Noes 0.) (June 11). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on TRANS.
-
Referred to Com. on TRANS.
-
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
-
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 36. Noes 0. Page 3399.) Ordered to the Assembly.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.
-
Set for hearing April 30.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 3034.) (March 27). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Set for hearing March 27.
-
Referred to Com. on T. & H.
-
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 18.
-
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- Anderson · Cosponsor
- DeSaulnier · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 120 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- DeSaulnier
Co-sponsors (1)
- Anderson
Not signed on (120)
120 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 120 →"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.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 36 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 38 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 95% | 0% | 0% | 5% |
How each member voted (40)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Runner | — | Yea |
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Negrete McLeod | — | Yea |
| Rubio | — | Yea |
| Evans | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Yea |
| Dutton | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Harman | — | Not Voting |
| Blakeslee | — | Yea |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Huff | — | Yea |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Price | — | Yea |
| Simitian | — | Yea |
| Vargas | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Alquist | — | Yea |
| Anderson | — | Yea |
| Lieu | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Wright | — | Yea |
| Cannella | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Emmerson | — | Yea |
| Correa | — | Yea |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| La Malfa | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Not Voting |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 76 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 79 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 99% | 0% | 0% | 1% |
How each member voted (80)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Butler | — | Yea |
| Furutani | — | Yea |
| Hagman | — | Yea |
| Halderman | — | Yea |
| John A. Pérez | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Huber | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Huffman | — | Yea |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Jeffries | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Miller | — | Yea |
| Carter | — | Yea |
| Allen | — | Yea |
| Olsen | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Alejo | — | Yea |
| Ammiano | — | Yea |
| Blumenfield | — | Yea |
| Cedillo | — | Yea |
| Conway | — | Yea |
| Cook | — | Yea |
| Donnelly | — | Yea |
| Silva | — | Yea |
| Solorio | — | Yea |
| Swanson | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Yea |
| Williams | — | Yea |
| Bonilla | — | Yea |
| Fong | — | Yea |
| Fletcher | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Gordon | — | Yea |
| Gorell | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Hayashi | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Not Voting |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Morrell | — | Yea |
| Nestande | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Torres | — | Yea |
| Achadjian | — | Yea |
| Block | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Brownley | — | Yea |
| Buchanan | — | Yea |
| Harkey | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Knight | — | Yea |
| Logue | — | Yea |
| Ma | — | Yea |
| Mansoor | — | Yea |
| Norby | — | Yea |
| Perea | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Smyth | — | Yea |
| Valadao | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Chesbro | — | Yea |
| Eng | — | Yea |
| Feuer | — | Yea |
| Davis | — | Yea |
| Dickinson | — | Yea |
| Yamada | — | Yea |
| Fuentes | — | Yea |
| Garrick | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| Bonnie Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| Roger Hernández | — | Yea |
| V. Manuel Pérez | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 16 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (17)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Harkey | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Yea |
| Fuentes | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Donnelly | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Norby | — | Yea |
| Solorio | — | Yea |
| Blumenfield | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Davis | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 13 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 13 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 93% | 0% | 0% | 7% |
How each member voted (14)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Bonilla | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Miller | — | Yea |
| Norby | — | Yea |
| Achadjian | — | Yea |
| Blumenfield | — | Yea |
| Buchanan | — | Yea |
| Jeffries | — | Yea |
| Logue | — | Yea |
| Solorio | — | Not Voting |
| Eng | — | Yea |
| Furutani | — | Yea |
| Bonnie Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 34 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 36 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| % of votes cast | 90% | 0% | 0% | 10% |
How each member voted (40)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Huff | — | Yea |
| Blakeslee | — | Yea |
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Negrete McLeod | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Yea |
| Rubio | — | Yea |
| Cannella | — | Yea |
| Runner | — | Not Voting |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Anderson | — | Not Voting |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Dutton | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Price | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Yea |
| Wright | — | Yea |
| Alquist | — | Yea |
| Harman | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Lieu | — | Yea |
| Simitian | — | Not Voting |
| Vargas | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Emmerson | — | Yea |
| Correa | — | Yea |
| Evans | — | Yea |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| La Malfa | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 7 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Total | 7 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 78% | 0% | 0% | 22% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Harman | — | Yea |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Rubio | — | Not Voting |
| Lowenthal | — | Not Voting |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Simitian | — | Yea |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 1102 do?
- (1) Existing law establishes the state transportation improvement program process, pursuant to which the California Transportation Commission generally programs and allocates available funds for transportation capital improvement projects over a multiyear period. Existing law provides that the Department of Transportation is responsible for the state highway system. Existing law requires the department to annually prepare a project delivery report that identifies milestone dates for state highway projects costing $1,000,000 or more for which the department is the responsible agency for project development work. This bill would require the department, beginning not later than November 15, 2014, as part of the annual project delivery report, to report on the difference between the original allocation made by the commission and the actual construction capital and support costs at project close for all state transportation improvement program projects completed during the previous fiscal year. (2) Existing law provides funding for interregional and regional transportation capital improvement projects through the state transportation improvement program process, with 25% of funds available for interregional projects and 75% for regional projects. Existing law requires funds available for regional projects to be programmed by the commission pursuant to the county shares formula, under which a minimum amount of funding is available for programming in each county. Existing law specifies the project costs to be charged against county shares in that regard and, in certain cases, provides for adjustments by the commission if project costs change. This bill would revise these provisions to require project costs to include right-of-way support costs. The bill would require the commission to allocate funds for construction support costs for a project in the state transportation improvement program at the time of allocation of funds for construction capital costs. The bill would require a supplemental project allocation request to be made for all interregional and regional projects that experience construction support costs equal to or more than 120% of the amount originally allocated. The bill would make other related changes.
- Who sponsors SB 1102?
- SB 1102 is sponsored by Anderson and DeSaulnier.
- What is the current status of SB 1102?
- This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 16, 2012. Enacted.
- Where can I track SB 1102?
- Track SB 1102 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 1102
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 SB 1102
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →