california statutes affecting mpos
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
California Statutes Affecting MPOs

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 17

California Statutes Affecting MPOs - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 137 Views
  • Uploaded on

California Statutes Affecting MPOs . Therese W. McMillan Deputy Executive Director, Policy Metropolitan Transportation Commission TRB Annual Meeting January 2008. The California Context. CA has long history of state based regional planning directives Federal designations:

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'California Statutes Affecting MPOs' - ojal


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
california statutes affecting mpos

California StatutesAffecting MPOs

Therese W. McMillan

Deputy Executive Director, Policy Metropolitan Transportation Commission

TRB Annual Meeting

January 2008

the california context
The California Context
  • CA has long history of state based regional planning directives
  • Federal designations:

18 Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs)

  • State designations:

26 Regional Transportation Planning Agencies

  • Some overlap
slide4
Mid-1970’s: State Statutes mandated coordination between federal and state planning responsibilities
  • State has independent – and unique – regional participation requirements for fund programming
  • To extent MPO/RTPA designation is shared, augmented state responsibilities strengthen and enhance federal MPO responsibilities
long range planning government code 65030
Long Range Planning:Government Code 65030
  • 1972: State regulations requiring Regional Transportation Plans (RTP)
  • Mid-70’s amendments to require state and federal coordination for regional planning
  • RTP to satisfy both MPO and RTPA responsibilities: California Transportation Commission RTP Guidelines(http://www.catc.ca.gov/RTP/2007_RTP_Guidelines.pdf )
land use transportation planning
Land Use/Transportation Planning
  • State legislation begins with 1989 Transportation Blueprint – county focus
  • Limited regional land use authority / while challenged periodically in legislature, locals still rule
  • Regional “blueprint” planning legislated as voluntary activity (Gov. Code 65080.3)
  • Example in MTC area: Joint Policy Committee legislation
air quality planning
Air Quality Planning
  • California has independent state air quality standards – more stringent than federal standards
  • CA MPOs in non-attainment areas by definition must address both federal and state air quality planning requirements; however federal implementation and adherence more rigorous
climate change
Climate Change
  • Assembly Bill 32: California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006
  • Mandated Greenhouse Gas Reductions – 1990 levels by 2020
  • Will require some role for regional agencies: transportation contributions to GHG
    • 41% - California
    • 50% - San Francisco Bay Area
climate change10
Climate Change
  • Senate Bill 375 currently in legislature anticipates regional role – MPO with state RTPA designation would be in play if passed
  • Irrespective, AB 32 implementation regs are being developed – expect regional transportation responsibilities
senate bill 1435 statutes of 1992
Senate Bill 1435:Statutes of 1992
  • Aligned federal planning and programming est. in ISTEA with state regulations
  • Required subvention of Surface Transportation Program (STP) and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality programming decisions to MPOs/RTPAs
  • Ground breaking provision continued through TEA-21 and SAFETEA-LU authorization periods
senate bill 45 statutes of 1997
Senate Bill 45: Statutes of 1997
  • Established guidelines for regional programming decisions for funds in State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)
    • Roughly $1.2 billion per year (2005-06)
  • 75% of STIP $ to regions for programming
    • Limited state intervention
  • STIP funded through State Highway Account
    • Composed of both state and federal program (e.g. NHS, IM, state share of STP, TEA, etc.)
a case for the california advantage
A Case for the California Advantage
  • Federal Legislative intent reinforced with tradition of state legislation supporting regional transportation planning and programming
  • Additional state responsibilities are consciously meshed with like federal requirements
a case for the california advantage16
A Case for the California Advantage
  • State mandated regional discretionary funding provides impact for regional transportation planning and investment decisions
  • State’s “leading edge” activities (e.g. climate change) provide leadership opportunities for MPOs – and some measure of risk…
slide17
www.mtc.ca.gov

Therese McMillan

Deputy Executive Director, Policy

ad