AB 2788

(1) Existing law authorizes a city or county in which a planned transportation facility was to be located on State Highway Route 238 in the City of Hayward and the County of Alameda to develop and file with the California Transportation Commission a local alternative transportation improvement program that addresses transportation problems and opportunities in the county, and provides for the use of revenues from the sale of excess properties acquired for the planned state facility in order to fund the local alternative transportation improvement program. Existing law prohibits the commission from approving a local alternative transportation improvement program submitted under these provisions after July 1, 2010. Existing law requires revenues from excess property sales for State Highway Route 238 to be deposited into a separate account in the Special Deposit Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, to be available for expenditure by local agencies for projects designated in the local alternative transportation improvement program. This bill would authorize the Alameda County Transportation Commission to file an amendment to the local alternative transportation improvement program for approval by the commission, and would authorize that amendment to propose to revise the projects listed in the program. Before filing the proposed amendment with the commission, the bill would require the Alameda County Transportation Commission to obtain the approval of the amendment from the city council of each city located in the County of Alameda. By authorizing the commission to approve a revised list of projects, the bill would expand the purposes for which continuously appropriated funds may be expended, thereby making an appropriation. (2) Existing law makes it a crime for a person to pilot a vessel through the Golden Gate and into or out of a harbor in the Bays of San Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun, unless the person has a license as a pilot, as provided. Existing law defines “Bays of San Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun” as all the waters of the Bay of San Francisco, Bay of San Pablo, and Bay of Suisun, and of the tributaries, ports, and harbors of those bays, including the water areas from the south end of San Francisco Bay and from the Ports of Sacramento and Stockton to the Golden Gate Bridge. Existing law requires a pilot that provides pilotage service in the Bays of San Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun to be insured, as provided, and requires a vessel, owner, operator, or demise or bareboat charterer hiring the pilot to either defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the pilot or provide trip insurance, as provided. This bill would clarify that the Bays of San Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun includes the Ports of Sacramento and Stockton. The bill would also clarify that those insurance provisions apply to any portion of a vessel transit that occurs within the waters of the Ports of Sacramento and Stockton. To the extent the bill would expand the definition of the Bays of San Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun, it would increase the scope of a crime and impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law specifies standards and requirements for the equipment of motor vehicles. Existing law generally requires motor carriers, drivers, and vehicles to comply with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations related to safety requirements for commercial motor vehicle operations, subject to department regulations. Under existing law, it is an infraction for a person to violate, or fail to comply with, a provision of the Vehicle Code, unless otherwise specified. This bill would additionally require motor carriers, drivers, vehicles, and shippers to comply with specified federal regulations related to the transportation of hazardous materials to the extent that they relate to transportation by highway unless the motor carrier, driver, vehicle, or shipper is an agency of the federal government. The bill would clarify that motor carriers, drivers, vehicles, and shippers not subject to the federal regulations described above are required to comply with those regulations unless specifically exempted from that compliance pursuant to department regulations. Because a violation of these provisions would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) Existing law authorizes a city, county, or city and county to establish an automated traffic enforcement system program to use those systems to detect a violation of a traffic control signal, if the system meets specified requirements. Existing law makes photographic, video, and administrative records made by a system confidential and specifies that data about the number of violations issued is not an administrative record required to be disclosed. Existing law establishes an administrative hearing process for notices of violations issued under these provisions and authorizes a contestant to seek review of the final decision by filing an appeal to the small claims division of the superior court or the traffic division of the superior court, as specified. Existing law provides that the conduct of the hearing on appeal is a subordinate duty that may be performed by a commissioner or other subordinate judicial officer, as specified. This bill would instead specify that data about the number of violations issued is not an administrative record prohibited from disclosure and is subject to disclosure. The bill would delete references to the small claims division or traffic division of a superior court in the above-described provisions and instead authorize a contestant to file an appeal to the superior court. The bill would provide that the conduct of the hearing on appeal may be a subordinate duty. The bill would also make a conforming change. (5) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.