Department of Transportation: project studies reports.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when AB 1780 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 AB 1780.
You're tracking AB 1780
We'll email you the moment it moves.
AB 1780 — Department of Transportation: project studies reports.
Last action — In committee: Held under submission.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
3Passed Assembly
-
4Passed Senate
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2011-2012 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
Existing law requires the Department of Transportation, in consultation with transportation planning agencies, county transportation commissions, counties, and cities, to carry out long-term state highway planning. Existing law authorizes the department, to the extent that it does not jeopardize the delivery of projects in the adopted state transportation improvement program, to prepare a project studies report for capacity-increasing state highway projects. Existing law requires the department to review and approve project studies reports performed by an entity other than the department. Existing law authorizes a local entity to request the department to prepare a project studies report for a capacity-increasing state highway project that is being proposed for inclusion in a future state transportation improvement program. If the department determines that it cannot complete the report in a timely fashion, existing law authorizes the requesting entity to prepare the report. Existing law makes specified guidelines adopted by the California Transportation Commission applicable to project studies reports commenced after October 1, 1991. This bill would revise these provisions to authorize the department to prepare project study reports or equivalent planning documents for any projects on the state highway system, limited by the resources available to the department. The bill would require the department to pay for the costs of its review and approval of project study reports or equivalent planning documents that are prepared by other entities for projects that are in an adopted regional transportation plan, a voter-approved county sales tax measure expenditure plan, or other voter-approved transportation program. In other cases, the bill would require the cost of the department's review and approval to be paid by the entity preparing the project study report or equivalent planning document. The bill would delete the provisions relating to the guidelines adopted by the California Transportation Commission and would instead require open and continuous communications between the parties during the development of project study reports or equivalent planning documents. The bill would make other related changes.
Bill Text
- Amended 03/29/12 - Amended Assembly Current pdf March 29, 2012
- Introduced 02/21/12 - Introduced pdf February 21, 2012
- AB1780 View text html
Action History
-
In committee: Held under submission.
-
In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (July 3). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Referred to Com. on T. & H.
-
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
-
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 75. Noes 1. Page 5047.)
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 5.) (May 25).
-
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 1.) (April 23). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Re-referred to Com. on TRANS.
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on TRANS. Read second time and amended.
-
Referred to Com. on TRANS.
-
From printer. May be heard in committee March 23.
-
Read first time. To print.
Sponsors
- Bonilla · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Bonilla
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.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Lieu | — | Yea |
| Price | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Yea |
| Alquist | — | Yea |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Dutton | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 8 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 8 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 89% | 0% | 0% | 11% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Harman | — | Not Voting |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Rubio | — | Yea |
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Simitian | — | Yea |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 72 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 75 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| % of votes cast | 94% | 1% | 0% | 5% |
How each member voted (80)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Butler | — | Yea |
| Feuer | — | Yea |
| Furutani | — | Yea |
| Fong | — | Yea |
| Carter | — | Yea |
| Allen | — | Yea |
| Garrick | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Gordon | — | Yea |
| Hagman | — | Yea |
| Chesbro | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| John A. Pérez | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Halderman | — | Yea |
| Hayashi | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Conway | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Bonilla | — | Yea |
| Ammiano | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Cook | — | Yea |
| Davis | — | Yea |
| Huffman | — | Yea |
| Knight | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Logue | — | Yea |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Miller | — | Yea |
| Nestande | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Norby | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Silva | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Swanson | — | Yea |
| Torres | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Yea |
| Williams | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Fletcher | — | Not Voting |
| Gorell | — | Nay |
| Hall | — | Not Voting |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Not Voting |
| Morrell | — | Yea |
| Cedillo | — | Not Voting |
| Donnelly | — | Yea |
| Solorio | — | Yea |
| Achadjian | — | Yea |
| Alejo | — | Yea |
| Block | — | Yea |
| Blumenfield | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Brownley | — | Yea |
| Buchanan | — | Yea |
| Harkey | — | Yea |
| Huber | — | Yea |
| Jeffries | — | Yea |
| Ma | — | Yea |
| Mansoor | — | Yea |
| Olsen | — | Yea |
| Perea | — | Yea |
| Smyth | — | Yea |
| Valadao | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Eng | — | Yea |
| Dickinson | — | Yea |
| Fuentes | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Yamada | — | 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 | 11 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 12 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 71% | 29% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (17)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Harkey | — | Nay |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Ammiano | — | Yea |
| Donnelly | — | Nay |
| Norby | — | Nay |
| Solorio | — | Yea |
| Blumenfield | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Nay |
| Wagner | — | Nay |
| Davis | — | Yea |
| Fuentes | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 11 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Total | 11 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 79% | 7% | 0% | 14% |
How each member voted (14)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bonilla | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Carter | — | Yea |
| Jeffries | — | Not Voting |
| Logue | — | Not Voting |
| Solorio | — | Yea |
| Achadjian | — | Nay |
| Blumenfield | — | Yea |
| Buchanan | — | Yea |
| Miller | — | Yea |
| Norby | — | Yea |
| Eng | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Bonnie Lowenthal | — | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does AB 1780 do?
- Existing law requires the Department of Transportation, in consultation with transportation planning agencies, county transportation commissions, counties, and cities, to carry out long-term state highway planning. Existing law authorizes the department, to the extent that it does not jeopardize the delivery of projects in the adopted state transportation improvement program, to prepare a project studies report for capacity-increasing state highway projects. Existing law requires the department to review and approve project studies reports performed by an entity other than the department. Existing law authorizes a local entity to request the department to prepare a project studies report for a capacity-increasing state highway project that is being proposed for inclusion in a future state transportation improvement program. If the department determines that it cannot complete the report in a timely fashion, existing law authorizes the requesting entity to prepare the report. Existing law makes specified guidelines adopted by the California Transportation Commission applicable to project studies reports commenced after October 1, 1991. This bill would revise these provisions to authorize the department to prepare project study reports or equivalent planning documents for any projects on the state highway system, limited by the resources available to the department. The bill would require the department to pay for the costs of its review and approval of project study reports or equivalent planning documents that are prepared by other entities for projects that are in an adopted regional transportation plan, a voter-approved county sales tax measure expenditure plan, or other voter-approved transportation program. In other cases, the bill would require the cost of the department's review and approval to be paid by the entity preparing the project study report or equivalent planning document. The bill would delete the provisions relating to the guidelines adopted by the California Transportation Commission and would instead require open and continuous communications between the parties during the development of project study reports or equivalent planning documents. The bill would make other related changes.
- Who sponsors AB 1780?
- AB 1780 is sponsored by Bonilla.
- What is the current status of AB 1780?
- This bill died with 2011-2012 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track AB 1780?
- Track AB 1780 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on AB 1780
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 1780
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →