Intercity rail agreements.
Summary
Existing law authorizes the Department of Transportation to contract with Amtrak for intercity rail passenger services and provides funding for these services from the Public Transportation Account. Existing law, until December 31, 1996, authorized the department, subject to approval of the Secretary of Business, Transportation and Housing, to enter into an interagency transfer agreement under which a joint powers board assumes responsibility for administering the state-funded intercity rail service in a particular corridor. Existing law, with respect to a transferred corridor, requires the board to demonstrate the ability to meet performance standards established by the secretary. This bill would authorize the department, with approval of the secretary, to enter into interagency transfer agreements for additional intercity rail corridors, to be entered into between June 30, 2014, and June 30, 2015. The bill would require the agreements to cover the initial 3-year period after the transfer, and would authorize subsequent extensions by mutual agreement. If agreements are not entered into by the expiration of that period, the bill would require the secretary to report to the Governor and the Legislature by June 30, 2016, as specified. This bill would specifically authorize an additional interagency transfer agreement to be entered into with respect to the LOSSAN Corridor, defined to mean the intercity passenger rail corridor between San Diego, Los Angeles, and San Luis Obispo, if the LOSSAN Agency, an existing joint powers agency, is reconstituted through an amended joint powers agreement approved by the governing boards of its members to enable that agency to enter into an interagency transfer agreement with the secretary relative to the LOSSAN Corridor. Existing law requires the level of service to be funded by the state pursuant to a transfer agreement to not be less than the current number of intercity round trips operated in a corridor and serving the same endpoints. This bill would require the service funded by the state to remain the same during the first 3 years following the effective date of a transfer agreement, and would require the entity assuming responsibility for a corridor to provide that level of service. The bill would prohibit termination of feeder bus services except for specified reasons. Existing law provides for the allocation of state funds by the secretary to a joint powers board under an interagency transfer agreement based on the annual business plan for the intercity rail corridor and subsequent appropriation of state funds. Existing law states that the interagency transfer agreement may provide that any additional funds required to operate the intercity rail service during a fiscal year shall be provided by a joint powers board from jurisdictions that receive service. This bill, if local resources are made available for operating the intercity rail service, would require a vote of the local agency providing the resources, and would require the concurrence of the joint powers board in that regard. This bill would authorize the secretary to adopt new performance standards for intercity rail services. Existing law authorizes the department and any entity that assumes administrative responsibility for passenger rail services through an interagency transfer agreement to contract with specified entities for the use of tracks and other facilities and for the provision of passenger rail services. This bill would require a contractor under an agreement described above to agree that its labor relations shall be governed by a specified federal act relating to labor relations on railroads and would add similar provisions applicable to the LOSSAN Corridor, as specified. This bill would repeal now-obsolete provisions authorizing the Southern California Regional Rail Authority to be a party to an interagency transfer agreement for intercity rail services in specified counties.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2012
Committee Review
Aug 2012
Senate Passage
May 2012
Assembly Passage
Aug 2012
Signed into Law
Sep 2012
Introduced Feb 23, 2012
Signed Sep 29, 2012
Floor votes · Senate May 30, 2012 · Assembly Sep 1, 2012
How they voted
31–0
Passed
Total votes 31
May 30, 2012
D
Democratic20
100% Yea
R
Republican11
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
48
Key actions
11
Committee
10
Amendments
5
Sep 29, 2012
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Sep 1, 2012
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (54-12-4)
assembly
Aug 31, 2012
Upper · Passed
Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 30. Noes 9. Page 5114.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
upper
Aug 31, 2012
Introduced
In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
upper
Aug 29, 2012
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (August 29).
lower
Aug 27, 2012
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on TRANS. pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.2.
lower
Aug 16, 2012
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 12. Noes 5.) (August 16).
lower
Aug 8, 2012
Committee
Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Jul 3, 2012
Committee
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (July 2). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Jun 26, 2012
Committee
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. (Ayes 13. Noes 0.) (June 25). Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.
lower
Jun 18, 2012
Lower · Passed
Hearing postponed by committee.
lower
Jun 7, 2012
Committee
Referred to Coms. on TRANS. and L. GOV.
lower
May 30, 2012
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (31-0)
senate
May 29, 2012
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 3593.) (May 24).
upper
Apr 30, 2012
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0. Page 3314.) (April 24).
upper
Apr 17, 2012
Upper · Passed
Hearing postponed by committee.
upper
Apr 12, 2012
Upper · Passed
Hearing postponed by committee.
upper
Mar 8, 2012
Committee
Referred to Com. on T. & H.
upper
Feb 23, 2012
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 4 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 1225
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 1225. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline