San Francisco Bay Area Bridges - - CA Streets And Highways

Section § 30910

This section lists the toll bridges in the area managed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, specifically naming the Antioch, Benicia-Martinez, Carquinez, Dumbarton, Richmond-San Rafael, San Mateo-Hayward, and San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridges. For operational and financial purposes, these bridges are sometimes grouped into northern and southern units but overall are managed as one single entity.

(a) The state-owned toll bridges within the geographic jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission are the following bridges:

(1) Antioch Bridge.

(2) Benicia-Martinez Bridge.

(3) Carquinez Bridges.

(4) Dumbarton Bridge.

(5) Richmond-San Rafael Bridge.

(6) San Mateo-Hayward Bridge.

(7) San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.

(b) The Antioch Bridge, the Benicia-Martinez Bridge, the Carquinez Bridges, and the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge are at times classified as the northern bridge unit, and the Dumbarton Bridge, the San Mateo-Hayward Bridge, and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge are at times classified as the southern bridge unit. For purposes of operation, rehabilitation, maintenance, and financing, all of the bridges are classified as a single enterprise.

toll bridges Metropolitan Transportation Commission Antioch Bridge Benicia-Martinez Bridge Carquinez Bridges Dumbarton Bridge Richmond-San Rafael Bridge San Mateo-Hayward Bridge San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge northern bridge unit southern bridge unit bridge operation bridge maintenance bridge financing single enterprise classification

(Amended by Stats. 2003, Ch. 715, Sec. 58. Effective January 1, 2004.)

Section § 30910.5

This law section simply defines the term “Authority” as referring to the Bay Area Toll Authority.

“Authority” means the Bay Area Toll Authority.

Bay Area Toll Authority Bay Area Toll Authority defined term local governance transportation management toll operations toll management California transportation regional authority authority definition public transit toll collection infrastructure management Bay Area transportation

(Added by Stats. 2003, Ch. 715, Sec. 58.5. Effective January 1, 2004.)

Section § 30910.7

This law allows the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the department responsible for managing the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge to develop a project that opens a third lane. On the eastbound level, this lane will be for car traffic, and on the westbound level, it will cater to cyclists. It also allows the design and environmental review process, required by California law, to happen simultaneously when possible, to speed up the project.

If the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the department develop a project to open the third lane on the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge to automobile traffic on the eastbound level and to bicycle traffic on the westbound level, the lead agency may, to the extent feasible, complete the design work for the project simultaneously with the environmental review conducted pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code).

Richmond-San Rafael Bridge third lane automobile traffic bicycle traffic environmental review California Environmental Quality Act simultaneous project design Metropolitan Transportation Commission transportation development infrastructure project bridge lane opening eastbound lane westbound lane environmental compliance project acceleration

(Added by Stats. 2015, Ch. 393, Sec. 2. (AB 157) Effective October 1, 2015.)

Section § 30911

This section explains how the Bay Area's toll revenues are to be managed. The authority is responsible for controlling the toll account and keeping accurate records. After covering necessary expenses like bonds and assistance for operations, any extra toll money is sent to the commission. The commission can spend these funds on specific projects once it decides the original projects and programs are finished. If the public approves a toll increase, remaining funds may go towards additional projects.

(a) The authority shall control and maintain the Bay Area Toll Account and other subaccounts it deems necessary and appropriate to document toll revenue and operating expenditures in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

(b)

(1) After providing for expenditures pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 30912 and for operating assistance pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 30914 and subdivision (c) of Section 30914.7 and after the requirements of any bond resolution or indenture of the authority for any outstanding revenue bonds have been met, the authority shall transfer on a regularly scheduled basis as set forth in the authority’s annual budget resolution, the revenues defined in subdivision (b) of Section 30913 and Sections 30914 and 30914.7 to the commission. The funds transferred to the commission shall be expended for the purposes specified in subdivision (b) of Section 30913 and Sections 30914 and 30914.7. After the commission makes a determination that the projects and programs funded by the commission have been completed, the revenues transferred to the commission shall be expended by the commission for supplemental funding for the projects and programs identified in subdivision (a) of Section 30914.7 if the voters approve a toll increase authorized pursuant to Section 30923.

(2) For purposes of paragraph (1), the revenues defined in subdivision (b) of Section 30913 and subdivision (a) of Section 30914 include all revenues accruing since January 1, 1989.

Bay Area Toll Account toll revenue management operating expenditures bond resolution revenue bonds fund transfer budget resolution commission spending project funding toll increase approval supplemental funding voter approval expenditure tracking accounting principles

(Amended by Stats. 2018, Ch. 92, Sec. 206. (SB 1289) Effective January 1, 2019.)

Section § 30912

This law explains how the money collected from tolls on bridges can be used. First, it can cover safety measures, operations, and maintenance, especially for toll collection systems. Secondly, toll revenue can fund both the construction and improvement of bridges, like making them earthquake-proof or replacing them. This includes paying back debts or loans taken out for such projects, possibly using toll revenue or money gained from bonds. Lastly, a specific toll increase from 1988 on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge must be used for building rail extensions or paying off bonds related to these rail projects.

(a) Revenue derived from tolls on all bridges may be expended, subject to the adopted annual budget of the authority, for any of the following purposes:

(1) Safety and operational costs, including toll collection and maintenance costs in accordance with Section 188.4.

(2) Costs of bridge construction and improvement projects, including seismic retrofit and replacement projects, and including debt service and sinking fund payments on bonds issued by the authority for those projects. The repayment of any advances from other state funds may be made from the toll revenue or bond proceeds.

(b) The revenue determined by the authority as derived from the toll increase approved in 1988, and authorized by Section 30917 for class I vehicles on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge shall be used, to the extent specified in paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 30914, for the construction of rail extensions specified in Section 30914 or for payment of the principal of, and interest on, bonds issued for those projects, including payments into a sinking fund maintained for that purpose.

toll revenue use bridge maintenance funding safety and operational costs bridge improvement projects seismic retrofit bond payments debt service advances repayment 1988 toll increase San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge rail extensions funding sinking fund rail project bonds

(Amended by Stats. 2005, Ch. 71, Sec. 5. Effective July 18, 2005.)

Section § 30913

This law outlines the use of toll bridge revenues, specifying major projects such as the widening and construction of additional spans for the Benicia-Martinez Bridge, replacement of a span on the Carquinez Bridge, and rehabilitation of the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. It also mentions a toll increase from 1988, where money from tolls was allocated to reduce traffic congestion and improve bridge operations, including supporting bicycle facilities and rapid water transit systems.

The Department of Transportation must ensure no net loss of wetlands due to construction on the Benicia-Martinez Bridge and consider rail transit possibilities for the Benicia-Martinez and Carquinez Bridges. Additionally, new bridge designs must include lanes for pedestrians and bicycles, ensuring that new structures can later accommodate these features.

(a) In addition to any other authorized expenditure of toll bridge revenues, the following major projects may be funded from toll revenues:

(1) Benicia-Martinez Bridge: Widening of the existing bridge.

(2) Benicia-Martinez Bridge: Construction of an additional span parallel to the existing bridge.

(3) Carquinez Bridge: Replacement of the existing western span.

(4) Richmond-San Rafael Bridge: Major rehabilitation of the bridge, and development of a new easterly approach between the toll plaza and Route 80, near Pinole, known as the Richmond Parkway.

(b) The toll increase approved in 1988, which authorized a uniform toll of one dollar ($1) for two-axle vehicles on the bridges and corresponding increases for multi-axle vehicles, resulted in the following toll increases for two-axle vehicles on the bridges:

Bridge

1988 Increase
(Two–axle vehicles)

Antioch Bridge

$0.50

Benicia-Martinez Bridge

.60

Carquinez Bridge

.60

Dumbarton Bridge

.25

Richmond-San Rafael Bridge

.00

San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge

.25

San Mateo-Hayward Bridge

.25

Portions of the 1988 toll increase were dedicated to transit purposes, and these amounts shall be calculated as up to 2 percent of the revenue generated each year by the collection on all bridges of the base toll at the level established by the 1988 toll increase. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall allocate two-thirds of these amounts for transportation projects, other than those specified in Sections 30912 and 30913 and in subdivision (a) of Section 30914, which are designed to reduce vehicular traffic congestion and improve bridge operations on any bridge, including, but not limited to, bicycle facilities and for the planning, construction, operation, and acquisition of rapid water transit systems. The commission shall allocate the remaining one-third solely for the planning, construction, operation, and acquisition of rapid water transit systems. The plans for the projects may also be funded by these moneys. Funds made available for rapid water transit systems pursuant to this subdivision shall be allocated to the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority beginning on the date specified in the adopted transition plan developed by the authority pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 66540.32 of the Government Code.

(c) The department shall not include, in the plans for the new Benicia-Martinez Bridge, toll plazas, highways, or other facilities leading to or from the Benicia-Martinez Bridge, any construction that would result in the net loss of any wetland acreage.

(d) With respect to the Benicia-Martinez and Carquinez Bridges, the department shall consider the potential for rail transit as part of the plans for the new structures specified in paragraphs (2) and (3) of subdivision (a).

(e) At the time the first of the new bridges specified in paragraphs (2) and (3) of subdivision (a) is opened to the public, there shall be a lane for the exclusive use of pedestrians and bicycles available on at least, but not limited to, the original span at Benicia or Carquinez, or the additional or replacement spans planned for those bridges. The design of these bridges shall not preclude the subsequent addition of a lane for the exclusive use of pedestrians and bicycles.

toll bridge revenues Benicia-Martinez Bridge widening Carquinez Bridge span replacement Richmond-San Rafael Bridge rehabilitation 1988 toll increase vehicular traffic congestion bicycle facilities rapid water transit systems Metropolitan Transportation Commission allocations San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority wetland protection rail transit potential exclusive pedestrian and bicycle lanes bridge project planning transportation infrastructure development

(Amended by Stats. 2008, Ch. 387, Sec. 12. Effective January 1, 2009.)

Section § 30914

This section outlines how toll bridge revenues can be spent on major transportation projects to improve mobility and reduce traffic congestion in the San Francisco Bay Area. Key projects include improvements to bridges such as the Dumbarton and San Mateo-Hayward bridges, enhancements to public transportation like BART and MUNI, and developments in ferry and bus services. Specific projects are aimed at expanding capacity, improving infrastructure, and integrating various transit modes. The law also mandates financial planning, reporting, and performance measures to ensure effective use of funds. Additionally, a regional traffic relief plan is mentioned, which includes bond funding for projects across multiple transit modes.

The law emphasizes collaboration with local governments for planning and involves strict criteria for fund allocation and project performance. A mechanism for reallocating funds in case of cost savings or project issues is also included, along with the potential use of additional funds for maintaining and replacing transit vehicles if a toll increase is approved.

(a) In addition to any other authorized expenditures of toll bridge revenues, the following major projects may be funded from toll revenues of all bridges:

(1) Dumbarton Bridge: Improvement of the western approaches from Route 101 if affected local governments are involved in the planning.

(2) San Mateo-Hayward Bridge and approaches: Widening of the bridge to six lanes, construction of rail transit capital improvements on the bridge structure, and improvements to the Route 92/Route 880 interchange.

(3) Construction of West Grand connector or an alternate project designed to provide comparable benefit by reducing vehicular traffic congestion on the eastern approaches to the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. Affected local governments shall be involved in the planning.

(4) Not less than 90 percent of the revenues determined by the authority as derived from the toll increase approved in 1988 for class I vehicles on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge authorized by Section 30917 shall be used exclusively for rail transit capital improvements designed to reduce vehicular traffic congestion on that bridge. This amount shall be calculated as 21 percent of the revenue generated each year by the collection of the base toll at the level established by the 1988 increase on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.

(b) Notwithstanding any funding request for the transbay bus terminal pursuant to Section 31015, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall allocate toll bridge revenues in an annual amount not to exceed three million dollars ($3,000,000), plus a 3.5-percent annual increase, to the department or to the Transbay Joint Powers Authority after the department transfers the title of the Transbay Terminal Building to that entity, for operation and maintenance expenditures. This allocation shall be payable from funds transferred by the Bay Area Toll Authority. This transfer of funds is subordinate to any obligations of the authority, now or hereafter existing, having a statutory or first priority lien against the toll bridge revenues. The first annual 3.5-percent increase shall be made on July 1, 2004. The transfer is further subject to annual certification by the department or the Transbay Joint Powers Authority that the total Transbay Terminal Building operating revenue is insufficient to pay the cost of operation and maintenance without the requested funding.

(c) If the voters approve a toll increase in 2004 pursuant to Section 30921, the authority shall, consistent with the provisions of subdivisions (d) and (f), fund the projects described in this subdivision and in subdivision (d) that shall collectively be known as the Regional Traffic Relief Plan by bonding or transfers to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. These projects have been determined to reduce congestion or to make improvements to travel in the toll bridge corridors, from toll revenues of all bridges:

(1) BART/MUNI Connection at Embarcadero and Civic Center Stations. Provide direct access from the BART platform to the MUNI platform at the above stations and equip new fare gates that are TransLink ready. Three million dollars ($3,000,000). The project sponsor is BART.

(2) MUNI Metro Third Street Light Rail Line. Provide funding for the surface and light rail transit and maintenance facility to support MUNI Metro Third Street Light Rail service connecting to Caltrain stations and the E-Line waterfront line. Thirty million dollars ($30,000,000). The project sponsor is MUNI.

(3) MUNI Waterfront Historic Streetcar Expansion. Provide funding to rehabilitate historic streetcars and construct trackage and terminal facilities to support service from the Caltrain Terminal, the Transbay Terminal, and the Ferry Building, and connecting the Fisherman’s Wharf and northern waterfront. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000). The project sponsor is MUNI.

(4) East to West Bay Commuter Rail Service over the Dumbarton Rail Bridge. Provide funding for the necessary track and station improvements and rolling stock to interconnect the BART and Capitol Corridor at Union City with Caltrain service over the Dumbarton Rail Bridge, and interconnect and provide track improvements for the ACE line with the same Caltrain service at Centerville. Provide a new station at Sun Microsystems in Menlo Park. One hundred thirty-five million dollars ($135,000,000). The project is jointly sponsored by the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, Capitol Corridor, and the Alameda County Transportation Commission.

(5) Vallejo Station. Construct intermodal transportation hub for bus and ferry service, including parking structure, at site of Vallejo’s current ferry terminal. Twenty-eight million dollars ($28,000,000). The project sponsor is the City of Vallejo.

(6) Solano County Express Bus Intermodal Facilities. Provide competitive grant fund source, to be administered by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Eligible projects are Curtola Park and Ride, Benicia Intermodal Facility, Fairfield Transportation Center, and Vacaville Intermodal Station. Priority to be given to projects that are fully funded, ready for construction, and serving transit service that operates primarily on existing or fully funded high-occupancy vehicle lanes. Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). The project sponsor is the Solano Transportation Authority.

(7) Solano County Corridor Improvements near Interstate 80/Interstate 680 Interchange. Provide funding for improved mobility in corridor based on recommendations of joint study conducted by the Department of Transportation and the Solano Transportation Authority. Cost-effective transit infrastructure investment or service identified in the study shall be considered a high priority. One hundred million dollars ($100,000,000). The project sponsor is the Solano Transportation Authority.

(8) Interstate 80: Eastbound High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane Extension from Route 4 to Carquinez Bridge. Construct HOV-lane extension. Fifty million dollars ($50,000,000). The project sponsor is the Department of Transportation.

(9) Richmond Parkway Transit Center. Construct parking structure and associated improvements to expand bus capacity. Sixteen million dollars ($16,000,000). The project sponsor is the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, in coordination with West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee, Western Contra Costa Transit Authority, City of Richmond, and the Department of Transportation.

(10) Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District (SMART) Extension to Larkspur or San Quentin. Extend rail line from San Rafael to a ferry terminal at Larkspur or San Quentin. Thirty-five million dollars ($35,000,000). Up to five million dollars ($5,000,000) may be used to study, in collaboration with the Water Transit Authority, the potential use of San Quentin property as an intermodal water transit terminal. The project sponsor is SMART.

(11) Greenbrae Interchange/Larkspur Ferry Access Improvements. Provide enhanced regional and local access around the Greenbrae Interchange to reduce traffic congestion and provide multimodal access to the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge and Larkspur Ferry Terminal by constructing a new full service diamond interchange at Wornum Drive south of the Greenbrae Interchange, extending a multiuse pathway from the new interchange at Wornum Drive to East Sir Francis Drake Boulevard and the Cal Park Hill rail right-of-way, adding a new lane to East Sir Francis Drake Boulevard and rehabilitating the Cal Park Hill Rail Tunnel and right-of-way approaches for bicycle and pedestrian access to connect the San Rafael Transit Center with the Larkspur Ferry Terminal. Sixty-five million dollars ($65,000,000). The project sponsor is the Marin County Congestion Management Agency.

(12) Direct High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane connector from Interstate 680 to the Pleasant Hill or Walnut Creek BART stations or in close proximity to either station or as an extension of the southbound Interstate 680 High-Occupancy Vehicle Lane through the Interstate 680/State Highway Route 4 interchange from North Main in Walnut Creek to Livorna Road. The County Connection shall utilize up to one million dollars ($1,000,000) of the funds described in this paragraph to develop options and recommendations for providing express bus service on the Interstate 680 High-Occupancy Vehicle Lane south of the Benicia Bridge in order to connect to BART. Upon completion of the plan, the Contra Costa Transportation Authority shall adopt a preferred alternative provided by the County Connection plan for future funding. Following adoption of the preferred alternative, the remaining funds may be expended either to fund the preferred alternative or to extend the high-occupancy vehicle lane as described in this paragraph. Fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000). The project is sponsored by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority.

(13) Rail Extension to East Contra Costa/E-BART. Extend BART from Pittsburg/Bay Point Station to Byron in East Contra Costa County. Ninety-six million dollars ($96,000,000). Project funds may only be used if the project is in compliance with adopted BART policies with respect to appropriate land use zoning in vicinity of proposed stations. The project is jointly sponsored by BART and the Contra Costa Transportation Authority.

(14) Capitol Corridor Improvements in Interstate 80/Interstate 680 Corridor. Fund track and station improvements, including the Suisun Third Main Track and new Fairfield Station. Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000). The project sponsor is the Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority and the Solano Transportation Authority.

(15) Central Contra Costa Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Crossover. Add new track before Pleasant Hill BART Station to permit BART trains to cross to return track towards San Francisco. Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000). The project sponsor is BART.

(16) Benicia-Martinez Bridge: New Span. Provide partial funding for completion of new five-lane span between Benicia and Martinez to significantly increase capacity in the I-680 corridor. Fifty million dollars ($50,000,000). The project sponsor is the Bay Area Toll Authority.

(17) Regional Express Bus North. Competitive grant program for bus service in Richmond-San Rafael Bridge, Carquinez, Benicia-Martinez, and Antioch Bridge corridors. Provide funding for park and ride lots, infrastructure improvements, and rolling stock. Eligible recipients include the Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District, Vallejo Transit, Napa VINE, Fairfield-Suisun Transit, Western Contra Costa Transit Authority, Eastern Contra Costa Transit Authority, and Central Contra Costa Transit Authority. The Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District shall receive a minimum of one million six hundred thousand dollars ($1,600,000). Napa VINE shall receive a minimum of two million four hundred thousand dollars ($2,400,000). Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). The project sponsor is the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.

(18) TransLink. Integrate the bay area’s regional smart card technology, TransLink, with operator fare collection equipment and expand system to new transit services. Twenty-two million dollars ($22,000,000). The project sponsor is the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.

(19) Real-Time Transit Information. Provide a competitive grant program for transit operators for assistance with implementation of high-technology systems to provide real-time transit information to riders at transit stops or via telephone, wireless, or Internet communication. Priority shall be given to projects identified in the commission’s connectivity plan adopted pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 30914.5. Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). The funds shall be administered by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.

(20) Safe Routes to Transit: Plan and construct bicycle and pedestrian access improvements in close proximity to transit facilities. Priority shall be given to those projects that best provide access to regional transit services. Twenty-two million five hundred thousand dollars ($22,500,000). City Car Share shall receive two million five hundred thousand dollars ($2,500,000) to expand its program within approximately one-quarter mile of transbay regional transit terminals or stations. The City Car Share project is sponsored by City Car Share and the Safe Routes to Transit project is jointly sponsored by the East Bay Bicycle Coalition and the Transportation and Land Use Coalition. These sponsors must identify a public agency cosponsor for purposes of specific project fund allocations.

(21) BART Tube Seismic Strengthening. Add seismic capacity to existing BART tube connecting the East Bay with San Francisco. One hundred forty-three million dollars ($143,000,000). The project sponsor is BART.

(22) Transbay Terminal/Downtown Caltrain Extension. A new Transbay Terminal at First and Mission Streets in San Francisco providing added capacity for transbay, regional, local, and intercity bus services, the extension of Caltrain rail services into the terminal, and accommodation of a future high-speed passenger rail line to the terminal and eventual rail connection to the East Bay. Eligible expenses include project planning, design and engineering, construction of a new terminal and its associated ramps and tunnels, demolition of existing structures, design and development of a temporary terminal, property and right-of-way acquisitions required for the project, and associated project-related administrative expenses. A bus- and train-ready terminal facility, including purchase and acquisition of necessary rights-of-way for the terminal, ramps, and rail extension, is the first priority for toll funds for the Transbay Terminal/Downtown Caltrain Extension Project. The temporary terminal operation shall not exceed five years. One hundred fifty million dollars ($150,000,000). The project sponsor is the Transbay Joint Powers Authority.

(23) Oakland Airport Connector. New transit connection to link BART, Capitol Corridor, and AC Transit with Oakland Airport. The Port of Oakland shall provide a full funding plan for the connector. Thirty million dollars ($30,000,000). The project sponsors are the Port of Oakland and BART.

(24) AC Transit Enhanced Bus-Phase 1 on Telegraph Avenue, International Boulevard, and East 14th Street (Berkeley-Oakland-San Leandro). Develop enhanced bus service on these corridors, including bus bulbs, signal prioritization, new buses, and other improvements. Priority of investment shall improve the AC connection to BART on these corridors. Sixty-five million dollars ($65,000,000). The project sponsor is AC Transit.

(25) Transbay Commute Ferry Service. Purchase two vessels for transbay ferry services. Second vessel funds to be released upon demonstration of appropriate terminal locations, new transit-oriented development, adequate parking, and sufficient landside feeder connections to support ridership projections. Twelve million dollars ($12,000,000). The project sponsor is the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority. If the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority demonstrates to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission that it has secured alternative funding for the two vessel purchases described in this paragraph, the funds may be used for terminal improvements or for consolidation of existing ferry operations.

(26) Commute Ferry Service for Berkeley/Albany. Purchase two vessels for ferry services between the Berkeley/Albany Terminal and San Francisco. Parking access and landside feeder connections must be sufficient to support ridership projections. Twelve million dollars ($12,000,000). The project sponsor is the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority. If the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority demonstrates to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission that it has secured alternative funding for the two vessel purchases described in this paragraph, the funds may be used for terminal improvements. If the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority does not have an entitled terminal site within the Berkeley/Albany catchment area by 2010 that meets its requirements, the funds described in this paragraph and the operating funds described in paragraph (7) of subdivision (d) shall be transferred to another site in the East Bay. The City of Richmond shall be given first priority to receive this transfer of funds if it has met the planning milestones identified in its special study developed pursuant to paragraph (28).

(27) Commute Ferry Service for South San Francisco. Purchase two vessels for ferry services to the Peninsula. Parking access and landside feeder connections must be sufficient to support ridership projections. Twelve million dollars ($12,000,000). The project sponsor is the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority. If the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority demonstrates to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission that it has secured alternative funding for the two vessel purchases described in this paragraph, the funds may be used for terminal improvements.

(28) Water Transit Facility Improvements, Spare Vessels, and Environmental Review Costs. Provide two backup vessels for water transit services, expand berthing capacity at the Port of San Francisco, and expand environmental studies and design for eligible locations. Forty-eight million dollars ($48,000,000). The project sponsor is the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority. Up to one million dollars ($1,000,000) of the funds described in this paragraph shall be made available for the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority to study accelerating development and other milestones that would potentially increase ridership at the City of Richmond ferry terminal.

(29) Regional Express Bus Service for San Mateo, Dumbarton, and Bay Bridge Corridors. Expand park and ride lots, improve HOV access, construct ramp improvements, and purchase rolling stock. Twenty-two million dollars ($22,000,000). The project sponsors are AC Transit and the Alameda County Transportation Commission.

(30) I-880 North Safety Improvements. Reconfigure various ramps on I-880 and provide appropriate mitigations between 29th Avenue and 16th Avenue. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000). The project sponsors are the Alameda County Transportation Commission, City of Oakland, and Department of Transportation.

(31) BART Warm Springs Extension. Extension of the existing BART system from Fremont to Warm Springs in southern Alameda County. Ninety-five million dollars ($95,000,000). Up to ten million dollars ($10,000,000) shall be used for grade separation work in the City of Fremont necessary to extend BART. The project would facilitate a future rail service extension to the Silicon Valley. The project sponsor is BART.

(32) I-580 (Tri Valley) Rapid Transit Corridor Improvements. Provide rail or High-Occupancy Vehicle lane direct connector to Dublin BART and other improvements on I-580 in Alameda County for use by express buses. Sixty-five million dollars ($65,000,000). The project sponsor is the Alameda County Transportation Commission.

(33) Regional Rail Master Plan. Provide planning funds for integrated regional rail study pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 30914.5. Six million five hundred thousand dollars ($6,500,000). The project sponsors are Caltrain and BART.

(34) Integrated Fare Structure Program. Provide planning funds for the development of zonal monthly transit passes pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 30914.5. One million five hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000). The project sponsor is the Translink Consortium.

(35) Transit Commuter Benefits Promotion. Marketing program to promote tax-saving opportunities for employers and employees as specified in Section 132(f)(3) or 162(a) of the Internal Revenue Code. Goal is to increase the participation rate of employers offering employees a tax-free benefit to commute to work by transit. The project sponsor is the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Five million dollars ($5,000,000).

(36) Caldecott Tunnel Improvements. Provide funds to plan and construct a fourth bore at the Caldecott Tunnel between Contra Costa and Alameda Counties. The fourth bore will be a two-lane bore with a shoulder or shoulders north of the current three bores. The County Connection shall study all feasible alternatives to increase transit capacity in the westbound corridor of State Highway Route 24 between State Highway Route 680 and the Caldecott Tunnel, including the study of the use of an express lane, high-occupancy vehicle lane, and an auxiliary lane. The cost of the study shall not exceed five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) and shall be completed not later than January 15, 2006. Fifty million five hundred thousand dollars ($50,500,000). The project sponsor is the Contra Costa Transportation Authority.

(d) Not more than 38 percent of the revenues generated from the toll increase shall be made available annually for the purpose of providing operating assistance for transit services as set forth in the authority’s annual budget resolution. The funds shall be made available to the provider of the transit services subject to the performance measures described in Section 30914.5. If the funds cannot be obligated for operating assistance consistent with the performance measures, these funds shall be obligated for other operations consistent with this chapter.

Except for operating programs that do not have planned funding increases and subject to the 38-percent limit on total operating cost funding in any single year, following the first year of scheduled operations, an escalation factor, not to exceed 1.5 percent per year, shall be added to the operating cost funding through the 2015–16 fiscal year, to partially offset increased operating costs. The escalation factors shall be contained in the operating agreements described in Section 30914.5. Subject to the limitations of this paragraph, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission may annually fund the following operating programs as another component of the Regional Traffic Relief Plan:

(1) Golden Gate Express Bus Service over the Richmond Bridge (Route 40). Two million one hundred thousand dollars ($2,100,000).

(2) Napa VINE Service terminating at the Vallejo Intermodal Terminal. Three hundred ninety thousand dollars ($390,000).

(3) Regional Express Bus North Pool serving the Carquinez and Benicia Bridge Corridors. Three million four hundred thousand dollars ($3,400,000).

(4) Regional Express Bus South Pool serving the Bay Bridge, San Mateo Bridge, and Dumbarton Bridge Corridors. Six million five hundred thousand dollars ($6,500,000).

(5) Dumbarton Rail. Five million five hundred thousand dollars ($5,500,000).

(6) San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority, Alameda/Oakland/Harbor Bay, Berkeley/Albany, South San Francisco, Vallejo, or other transbay ferry service. A portion of the operating funds may be dedicated to landside transit operations. Fifteen million three hundred thousand dollars ($15,300,000). Funds historically made available to the City of Vallejo or the City of Alameda shall continue to be allocated to those cities until the date specified in the adopted transition plan developed by the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 66540.32 of the Government Code. The authority may use up to six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) to support development of the transition plan and for transition-related costs, including, but not limited to, reasonable administrative costs incurred by the authority and transferring agencies on or after July 1, 2008, in accordance with subdivision (e) of Section 66540.11 of the Government Code, upon a determination by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission that these costs are reasonable and substantially the result of the transition. After adoption of the transition plan and after formal agreement by the Cities of Alameda and Vallejo to transition their ferry services to the authority in accordance with the transition plan, the authority may use additional funds, above the limits previously referenced in this paragraph, for transition and transition-related activities, incurred before or after the actual transfer of services, as specified in the transition plan and approved by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. The authority may utilize funds from this section for operation of the services transferred from the City of Vallejo or the City of Alameda if approved by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.

(7) Owl Bus Service on BART Corridor. One million eight hundred thousand dollars ($1,800,000).

(8) MUNI Metro Third Street Light Rail Line. Two million five hundred thousand dollars ($2,500,000) without escalation.

(9) AC Transit Enhanced Bus Service on Telegraph Avenue, International Boulevard, and East 14th Street in Berkeley-Oakland-San Leandro. Three million dollars ($3,000,000) without escalation.

(10) TransLink, three-year operating program. Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) without escalation.

(11) San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority, regional planning and operations. Three million dollars ($3,000,000) without escalation.

(e) For all projects authorized under subdivision (c), the project sponsor shall submit an initial project report to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission before July 1, 2004. This report shall include all information required to describe the project in detail, including the status of any environmental documents relevant to the project, additional funds required to fully fund the project, the amount, if any, of funds expended to date, and a summary of any impediments to the completion of the project. This report, or an updated report, shall include a detailed financial plan and shall notify the commission if the project sponsor will request toll revenue within the subsequent 12 months. The project sponsor shall update this report as needed or requested by the commission. No funds shall be allocated by the commission for any project authorized by subdivision (c) until the project sponsor submits the initial project report, and the report is reviewed and approved by the commission.

If multiple project sponsors are listed for projects listed in subdivision (c), the commission shall identify a lead sponsor in coordination with all identified sponsors, for purposes of allocating funds. For any projects authorized under subdivision (c), the commission shall have the option of requiring a memorandum of understanding between itself and the project sponsor or sponsors that shall include any specific requirements that must be met prior to the allocation of funds provided under subdivision (c).

(f) The Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall annually assess the status of programs and projects and shall allocate a portion of funding made available under Section 30921 or 30958 for public information and advertising to support the services and projects identified in subdivisions (c) and (d). If a program or project identified in subdivision (c) has cost savings after completion, taking into account construction costs and an estimate of future settlement claims, or cannot be completed or cannot continue due to delivery or financing obstacles making the completion or continuation of the program or project unrealistic, the commission shall consult with the program or project sponsor. After consulting with the sponsor, the commission shall hold a public hearing concerning the program or project. After the hearing, the commission may vote to modify the program or the project’s scope, decrease its level of funding, or reassign some or all of the funds to another project within the same bridge corridor. If a program or project identified in subdivision (c) is to be implemented with other funds not derived from tolls, the commission shall follow the same consultation and hearing process described above and may vote thereafter to reassign the funds to another project consistent with the intent of this chapter. If an operating program or project as identified in subdivision (d) cannot achieve its performance objectives described in subdivision (a) of Section 30914.5 or cannot continue due to delivery or financing obstacles making the completion or continuation of the program or project unrealistic, the commission shall consult with the program or the project sponsor. After consulting with the sponsor, the commission shall hold a public hearing concerning the program or project. After the hearing, the commission may vote to modify the program or the project’s scope, decrease its level of funding, or to reassign some or all of the funds to another or an additional regional transit program or project within the same corridor. If a program or project does not meet the required performance measures, the commission shall give the sponsor a time certain to achieve the performance measures before reassigning its funding.

(g) If the voters approve a toll increase pursuant to Section 30921, the authority shall within 24 months of the election date include the projects in a long-range plan that are consistent with the commission’s findings required by this section and Section 30914.5. The authority shall update its long-range plan as required to maintain its viability as a strategic plan for funding projects authorized by this section. The authority shall, by January 1, 2007, submit its updated long-range plan to the transportation policy committee of each house of the Legislature for review.

(h) If the voters approve a toll increase pursuant to Section 30921, and if additional funds from this toll increase are available following the funding obligations of subdivisions (c) and (d), the authority may set aside a reserve to fund future rolling stock replacement to enhance the sustainability of the services enumerated in subdivision (d). The authority shall, by January 1, 2020, submit a 20-year toll bridge expenditure plan to the Legislature for adoption. This expenditure plan shall have, as its highest priority, replacement of transit vehicles purchased pursuant to subdivision (c).

toll bridge revenues San Francisco Bay Area public transit improvements Dumbarton Bridge San Mateo-Hayward Bridge BART MUNI ferry services bus services traffic congestion transportation projects financial planning bond funding regional traffic relief project performance

(Amended by Stats. 2010, Ch. 491, Sec. 33. (SB 1318) Effective January 1, 2011.)

Section § 30914.1

This law section authorizes a funding amount of $20 million for the TransLink operating program. It stipulates that the funding should follow the guidelines set out in a specific part of another section, but it specifically waives the usual three-year time limit for this transaction.

Funding of the TransLink operating program in the amount of twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) shall be made pursuant to paragraph (10) of subdivision (d) of Section 30914 without regard to the three-year limitation stated therein.

TransLink funding operating program twenty million dollars three-year limitation waiver paragraph (10) of subdivision (d) Section 30914 public transportation funding California transit funding financial allocation infrastructure support

(Added by Stats. 2009, Ch. 515, Sec. 5. (AB 1175) Effective January 1, 2010.)

Section § 30914.5

This law focuses on how the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) should handle planning and management for regional transit in the San Francisco Bay Area. Before it assigns funds for transit assistance, MTC must create performance standards related to fare recovery and ridership, and reach agreements with transit project sponsors that include these standards. Annual audits are required to ensure compliance.

The law mandates MTC to develop a detailed regional transit connectivity plan that improves connections between different transit services, including creating transit hubs and standards for coordinating schedules and fares. MTC is also tasked with establishing an integrated fare program that makes it easier for commuters traveling across zones and between multiple transit operators in the region.

Additionally, MTC is to adopt a regional rail plan to guide passenger rail service development. This includes proposals to enhance connectivity, improve operations, and coordinate with high-speed rail plans. The plan must consider land use, funding sources, and potential redevelopment opportunities near rail stations.

The effectiveness of several parts of this law depends on voter approval for a toll increase, which would fund these projects and plans.

(a) Prior to the allocation of revenue for transit operating assistance under subdivision (d) of Section 30914, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall adopt performance measures related to fare-box recovery, ridership, and other performance measures as needed. The performance measures shall be developed in consultation with the affected transit operators and the commission’s advisory council.

(b) The Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall execute an operating agreement with the sponsors of the projects described in subdivision (d) of Section 30914. This agreement shall include, at a minimum, a fully funded operating plan that conforms to and is consistent with the adopted performance measures. The agreement shall also include a schedule of projected fare revenues or other operating revenues to indicate that the service is viable in the near term and is expected to meet the adopted performance measures in future years. For any individual project sponsor, this operating agreement may include additional requirements, as determined by the commission, to be met prior to the allocation of transit assistance under subdivision (d) of Section 30914.

(c) Prior to the annual allocation of transit operating assistance funds by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 30914, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall conduct, or shall require the sponsoring agency to conduct, an independent audit that contains audited financial information, including an opinion on the status and cost of the project and its compliance with the approved performance measures. Notwithstanding this requirement, each operator shall be given a one-year trial period to operate new service. In the first year of new service, the sponsor shall develop a reporting and accounting structure for the performance measures. Commencing with the third operating year, sponsors shall be subject to the approved performance measures.

(d) The Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall adopt a regional transit connectivity plan by May 1, 2006. The connectivity plan shall be incorporated into the commission’s Transit Coordination Implementation Plan pursuant to Section 66516.5 of the Government Code. The connectivity plan shall require operators to comply with the plan utilizing commission authority pursuant to Section 66516.5 of the Government Code. The commission shall consult with the Partnership Transit Coordination Council in developing a plan that identifies and evaluates opportunities for improving transit connectivity and shall include, but not be limited to, the following components:

(1) A network of key transit hubs connecting regional rapid transit services to one another, and to feeder transit services. “Regional rapid transit” means long-haul transit service that crosses county lines, and operates mostly in dedicated rights-of-way, including freeway high-occupancy vehicle lanes, crossing a bridge, or on the bay. The identified transit hubs shall operate either as a timed transfer network or as pulsed hub connections, providing regularly scheduled connections between two or more transit lines.

(2) Physical infrastructure and right-of-way improvements necessary to improve system reliability and connections at transit hubs. Physical infrastructure improvements may include, but are not limited to, improved rail-to-rail transfer facilities, including cross-platform transfers, and intermodal transit improvements that facilitate rail-to-bus, rail-to-ferry, ferry-to-ferry, ferry-to-bus, and bus-to-bus transfers. Capital improvements identified in the plan shall be eligible for funding in the commission’s regional transportation plan.

(3) Regional standards and procedures to ensure maximum coordination of schedule connections to minimize transfer times between transit lines at key transit hubs, including, but not limited to, the following:

(A) Policies and procedures for improved fare collection.

(B) Enhanced trip-planning services, including Internet-based programs, telephone information systems, and printed schedules.

(C) Enhanced schedule coordination through the implementation of real-time transit-vehicle location systems that facilitate communication between systems and result in improved timed transfers between routes.

(D) Performance measures and data collection to monitor the performance of the connectivity plan.

The connectivity plan shall focus on, but not be limited to, feeder transit lines connecting to regional rapid transit services, and the connection of regional rapid transit services to one another. The connectivity plan shall be adopted following a Metropolitan Transportation Commission public hearing at least 60 days prior to adoption. The commission shall adopt performance measures and collect appropriate data to monitor the performance of the connectivity plan. The plan shall be evaluated every three years by the commission as part of the update to its regional transportation plan. No agency shall be eligible to receive funds under this section unless the agency is a participant operator in the commission’s regional transit connectivity plan.

The provisions of this subdivision shall only be effective if the voters approve the toll increase as set forth in Section 30921, and the expenditures incurred by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission up to five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) that are related to the requirements of this subdivision, including any study, shall be reimbursed from toll revenues identified in paragraph (33) of subdivision (c) of Section 30914.

(e) The TransLink Consortium, per the TransLink Interagency Participation Agreement, shall, by July 1, 2008, develop a plan for an integrated fare program covering all regional rapid transit trips funded in full or in part by this section. “Regional rapid transit” means long-haul transit services that cross county lines, and operate mostly in dedicated rights-of-way, including freeway high-occupancy vehicle lanes, crossing a bridge, or on the bay. Interregional rail services, originating or terminating from outside the Bay Area, shall not be considered regional rapid transit. The purpose of the integrated fare program is to encourage greater use of the region’s transit network by making it easier and less costly for transit riders whose regular commute involves multizonal travel and may involve the transfer between two or more transit agencies, including regional-to-regional and regional-to-local transfers. The integrated fare program shall include a zonal fare system for the sole purpose of creating a monthly zonal pass (monthly pass), allowing for unlimited or discounted fares for transit riders making a minimum number of monthly transit trips between two or more zones. The number of minimum trips shall be established by the plan. The integrated fare program shall not apply to fare structures that are not purchased on a monthly basis. For the purposes of these zonal fares, geographic zones shall be created in the Bay Area. To the extent practical, zone boundaries for overlapping systems shall be in the same places and shall correspond to the boundaries of the local transit service areas. A regional rapid transit zone may cover more than one local service area, or may subdivide an existing local service area. The monthly pass shall be created in at least the following two forms:

(1) For the use of interzonal regional rapid transit trips without local transit discounts.

(2) For the use of interzonal regional rapid transit trips with local transit discounts. The plan may recommend the elimination of existing transit pass arrangements to simplify the marketing of the monthly pass. The integrated fare program shall establish a monitoring program to evaluate the impact of the integrated fare program on the operating finances of the participating agencies. The integrated fare program shall be adjusted as necessary to ensure that the program does not jeopardize the viability of local or regional rapid transit routes impacted by the program, and to the extent feasible, provide an equitable revenue-sharing arrangement among the participating agencies. This subdivision shall only be effective if the voters approve the toll increase as set forth in Section 30921, and any expenditures related to the implementation of this subdivision incurred by the TransLink Consortium shall be reimbursed by toll revenues designated in paragraph (34) of subdivision (c) of Section 30914.

(f) The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) shall, by September 29, 2007, adopt a Bay Area Regional Rail Plan (plan) for the development of passenger rail services in the San Francisco Bay Area over the short, medium, and long term. Up to six million dollars ($6,000,000) of the funds described in paragraph (33) of subdivision (c) of Section 30914 may be expended by MTC, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART), and the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (Caltrain) for the plan. A project management team comprised of staff from MTC, Caltrain, the High-Speed Rail Authority, and BART shall provide day-to-day project management of the technical development of the plan. The plan shall formulate strategies to integrate passenger rail systems, improve interfaces with connecting services, expand the regional rapid transit network, and coordinate investments with transit-supportive land use. The plan shall be directed by a steering committee consisting of appointees from the Department of Transportation (Caltrans), BART, Caltrain, the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak), the Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority, the Altamont Commuter Express, the High-Speed Rail Authority, MTC, the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District (SMART), the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, the Solano Transportation Authority, the Association of Bay Area Governments, the Transbay Joint Powers Authority, the Port of Oakland, the Alameda County Transportation Commission, the Contra Costa Transportation Authority, the Transportation Authority of Marin, the Napa County Transportation Planning Agency, the San Francisco County Transportation Authority, the San Mateo City-County Association of Governments, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, and the owners of standard gauge rail. Under direction from the steering committee and with input from Bay Area transit agencies, MTC shall act as the fiscal agent for the study and oversee consultant contracts on behalf of the project management team. The plan proposals shall be evaluated using performance criteria, including, but not limited to, transit-supportive land use and access, ridership, cost-effectiveness, regional network connectivity, and capital and operating financial stability. Additional performance criteria shall be developed as necessary. The plan shall include, but not be limited to, all of the following:

(1) Identification of issues in connectivity, access, capacity, operations, and cost-effectiveness.

(2) Identification of opportunities to enhance rail connectivity and to maximize passenger convenience when transferring between systems, including the study of the feasibility and construction of an intermodal transfer hub at Niles (Shinn Street) Junction.

(3) Recommendation of improvements to the interface with shuttles, buses, other rail systems, and other feeder modes.

(4) Identification of potential impacts on capacity constraints and operations on existing passenger and freight carriers.

(5) Identification of bottlenecks where added capacity could cost-effectively increase performance.

(6) Recommendation of potential efficiency improvements through economies of scale, such as through joint vehicle procurement and maintenance facilities.

(7) Recommendation of strategies to acquire right-of-way and station property to preserve future service options.

(8) Identification of potential capital and operating funding sources for proposed actions.

(9) Identification of locations where the presence of passenger rail could stimulate redevelopment and thereby direct growth to the urban core.

(10) Recommendation of technology-appropriate service expansion in specific corridors. Technologies to be considered include conventional rail transit modes, bus rapid transit, and emerging rail technologies. Identify phasing strategies for the implementation of rail services where appropriate.

(11) Examination of how recommendations would integrate with proposed high-speed rail to the Central Valley and southern California. The intent of this element of the study is to help reduce the number of alternatives that the High-Speed Rail Authority would need to evaluate as part of any follow-on environmental assessment of future high-speed rail system access to the Bay Area. Selection of a preferred alignment for the Bay Area shall remain the responsibility of the High-Speed Rail Authority pursuant to Section 185032 of the Public Utilities Code.

(12) Recommendation of a governance strategy to implement and operate future regional rail services.

This subdivision shall only be effective if the voters approve the toll increase as set forth in Section 30921. Any expenditures incurred by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission or the project sponsors identified in paragraph (33) of subdivision (c) of Section 30914 related to the requirements of this subdivision, including any study and administration, shall be appropriate charges against toll revenue to be reimbursed from toll revenues.

Metropolitan Transportation Commission performance measures transit operating assistance regional transit connectivity plan transit hubs schedule coordination integrated fare program zonal fares Bay Area transportation regional rapid transit capital improvements audit requirements Bay Area Regional Rail Plan passenger rail services toll revenue funding

(Amended by Stats. 2010, Ch. 491, Sec. 34. (SB 1318) Effective January 1, 2011.)

Section § 30914.7

This law section outlines how funds raised from a voter-approved toll increase, as part of Regional Measure 3, will be allocated to various transportation projects across the Bay Area to reduce congestion and improve travel in toll bridge corridors. The projects include expanding BART, adding express lanes, improving goods movement, expanding ferry services, and numerous other regional transit and infrastructure enhancements. Key points involve specific funding amounts for each project, responsibilities of different transit authorities, and the requirement for authorities to adjust funding if the toll increase is less than anticipated.

Additionally, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is responsible for overseeing project reporting and funding allocation, ensuring projects meet performance criteria, and holding reserve funds for unrequested allocations. The section also mandates a strategic long-range plan for managing these projects and describes processes for reallocating funds if a project is completed under budget or becomes unfeasible.

(a) If the voters approve a toll increase pursuant to Section 30923, the authority shall, consistent with the provisions of this section fund the projects and programs described in this subdivision that shall collectively be known as the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan by bonding or transfers to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. These projects and programs have been determined to reduce congestion or to make improvements to travel in the toll bridge corridors, from toll revenues of all bridges:

(1) BART Expansion Cars. Purchase new railcars for the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) to expand its fleet and improve reliability. The project sponsor is BART. Five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000).

(2) Bay Area Corridor Express Lanes. Fund the environmental review, design, and construction of express lanes to complete the Bay Area Express Lane Network, including supportive operational improvements to connecting transportation facilities. Eligible projects include, but are not limited to, express lanes on Interstate 80, Interstate 580, and Interstate 680 in the Counties of Alameda and Contra Costa, Interstate 880 in the County of Alameda, Interstate 280 in the City and County of San Francisco, Highway 101 in the City and County of San Francisco and the County of San Mateo, State Route 84 and State Route 92 in the Counties of Alameda and San Mateo, Interstate 80 from Red Top Road to the intersection with Interstate 505 in the County of Solano, and express lanes in the County of Santa Clara. Eligible project sponsors include the Bay Area Infrastructure Financing Authority, and any countywide or multicounty agency in a bay area county that is authorized to implement express lanes. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall make funds available based on performance criteria, including benefit-cost and project readiness. Three hundred million dollars ($300,000,000).

(3) Goods Movement and Mitigation. Provide funding to reduce truck traffic congestion and mitigate its environmental effects. Eligible projects include, but are not limited to, improvements in the County of Alameda to enable more goods to be shipped by rail, access improvements on Interstate 580, Interstate 80, and Interstate 880, and improved access to the Port of Oakland. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall consult and coordinate with the Alameda County Transportation Commission to select projects for the program. Eligible applicants include cities, counties, countywide transportation agencies, rail operators, and the Port of Oakland. The project sponsors are the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Alameda County Transportation Commission. One hundred sixty million dollars ($160,000,000).

(4) San Francisco Bay Trail/Safe Routes to Transit. Provide funding for a competitive grant program to fund bicycle and pedestrian access improvements on and in the vicinity of the state-owned toll bridges connecting to rail transit stations and ferry terminals. Eligible applicants include cities, counties, transit operators, school districts, community colleges, and universities. The project sponsor is the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. One hundred fifty million dollars ($150,000,000).

(5) Ferry Enhancement Program. Provide funding to purchase new vessels, upgrade and rehabilitate existing vessels, build facilities and landside improvements, and upgrade existing facilities. The project sponsor is the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority. Three hundred million dollars ($300,000,000).

(6) BART to San Jose Phase 2. Extend BART from Berryessa Station to San Jose and Santa Clara. The project sponsor is the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. Three hundred seventy-five million dollars ($375,000,000).

(7) Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District (SMART). Provide funding to extend the rail system north of the Charles M. Schulz-Sonoma County Airport to the Cities of Windsor and Healdsburg. The project sponsor is the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District. Forty million dollars ($40,000,000).

(8) Capitol Corridor. Provide funding for track infrastructure that will improve the performance of Capital Corridor passenger rail operations by reducing travel times, adding service frequencies, and improving system safety and reliability. The project sponsor is the Capital Corridor Joint Powers Authority. Ninety million dollars ($90,000,000).

(9) Caltrain Downtown Extension. Extend Caltrain from its current terminus at Fourth Street and King Street to the Transbay Transit Center. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall allocate funding to the agency designated to build the project, which shall be the project sponsor. Three hundred twenty-five million dollars ($325,000,000).

(10) MUNI Fleet Expansion and Facilities. Fund replacement and expansion of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency’s MUNI vehicle fleet and associated facilities. The project sponsor is the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency. One hundred forty million dollars ($140,000,000).

(11) Core Capacity Transit Improvements. Implement recommendations from the Core Capacity Transit Study and other ideas to maximize person throughput in the transbay corridor. Eligible projects include, but are not limited to, transbay bus improvements and high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane access improvements. Priority funding shall be the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District’s (AC Transit) Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects identified in the study. The project sponsors are the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Alameda County Transportation Commission, and AC Transit. One hundred forty million dollars ($140,000,000).

(12) Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit) Rapid Bus Corridor Improvements. Fund bus purchases and capital improvements to reduce travel times and increase service frequency along key corridors. The project sponsors are AC Transit and Alameda County Transportation Commission. One hundred million dollars ($100,000,000).

(13) Transbay Rail Crossing. Fund preliminary engineering, environmental review, and design of a second transbay rail crossing and its approaches to provide additional rail capacity, increased reliability, and improved resiliency to the corridor. Subject to approval by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, funds may also be used for construction, and, if sufficient matching funds are secured, to fully fund a useable segment of the project. The project sponsor is the Bay Area Rapid Transit District. Fifty million dollars ($50,000,000).

(14) Tri-Valley Transit Access Improvements. Provide interregional and last-mile transit connections on the Interstate 580 corridor in the County of Alameda within the Tri-Valley area of Dublin, Pleasanton, and Livermore. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall consult with the Alameda County Transportation Commission, the Bay Area Rapid Transit District, and local jurisdictions to determine the project sponsor. One hundred million dollars ($100,000,000).

(15) Eastridge to BART Regional Connector. Extend Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority light rail from the Alum Rock station to the Eastridge Transit Center. The project sponsor is the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. One hundred thirty million dollars ($130,000,000).

(16) San Jose Diridon Station. Redesign, rebuild, and expand Diridon Station to more efficiently and effectively accommodate existing regional rail services, future BART and high-speed rail service, and Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority light rail and buses. The project sponsor shall consider accommodating a future connection to Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport and prioritizing non-auto access modes. The project sponsor is the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. One hundred million dollars ($100,000,000).

(17) Dumbarton Corridor Improvements. Fund planning, environmental review, design, and construction of capital improvements within Dumbarton Bridge and rail corridor in the Counties of Alameda and San Mateo to relieve congestion, increase person throughput, and offer reliable travel times. Eligible projects include, but are not limited to, the projects recommended in the Dumbarton Corridor Transportation Study and improvements to facilitate rail and transit connectivity among the Altamont Corridor Express, Capitol Corridor, and Bay Area Rapid Transit District, including a rail connection at Shinn Station. The project sponsors are the Bay Area Toll Authority, Alameda County Transportation Commission, the San Mateo County Transit District, and the San Mateo County Transportation Authority. One hundred thirty million dollars ($130,000,000).

(18) Highway 101/State Route 92 Interchange. Fund improvements to the interchange of Highway 101 and State Route 92 in the County of San Mateo. The project is jointly sponsored by the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County and the San Mateo County Transportation Authority. Fifty million dollars ($50,000,000).

(19) Contra Costa Interstate 680/State Route 4 Interchange Improvements. Fund improvements to the Interstate 680/State Route 4 interchange to improve safety and reduce congestion, including, but not limited to, a new direct connector between northbound Interstate 680 and westbound State Route 4, a new direct connector between eastbound State Route 4 and southbound Interstate 680, and widening of State Route 4 to add auxiliary lanes and high-occupancy vehicle lanes. The project sponsor is the Contra Costa Transportation Authority. Two hundred ten million dollars ($210,000,000).

(20) Highway 101-Marin/Sonoma Narrows. Construct northbound and southbound high-occupancy vehicle lanes on Highway 101 between Petaluma Boulevard South in Petaluma and Atherton Avenue in Novato. The project sponsors are the Transportation Authority of Marin and the Sonoma County Transportation Authority. One hundred twenty million dollars ($120,000,000).

(21) Solano County Interstate 80/Interstate 680/State Route 12 Interchange Project. Construct Red Top Road interchange and westbound Interstate 80 to southbound Interstate 680 connector. The project sponsor is the Solano Transportation Authority. One hundred fifty million dollars ($150,000,000).

(22) Interstate 80 Westbound Truck Scales. Improve freight mobility, reliability, and safety on the Interstate 80 corridor by funding improvements to the Interstate 80 Westbound Truck Scales in the County of Solano. The project sponsor is the Solano Transportation Authority. One hundred five million dollars ($105,000,000).

(23) State Route 37 Improvements. Fund near-term and longer-term improvements to State Route 37 to improve the roadway’s mobility, safety, and long-term resiliency to sea level rise and flooding. For the purposes of the environmental review and design, the project shall include the segment of State Route 37 from the intersection in Marin County with Highway 101 to the intersection with Interstate 80 in the County of Solano. Capital funds may used on any segment along this corridor, as determined by the project sponsors. The project is jointly sponsored by the Transportation Authority of Marin, the Napa Valley Transportation Authority, the Solano Transportation Authority, and the Sonoma County Transportation Authority. Funds for this project may be allocated to any of the project sponsors. One hundred million dollars ($100,000,000)

(24) San Rafael Transit Center. Construct a replacement to the San Rafael (Bettini) Transit Center on an existing or new site, or both, in downtown San Rafael. The selected alternative shall be approved by the City of San Rafael, the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District, the Transportation Authority of Marin, and Marin Transit. The project sponsor is the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District. Thirty million dollars ($30,000,000).

(25) Richmond-San Rafael Bridge Access Improvements. Fund eastbound and westbound improvements in the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge corridor, including a direct connector from northbound Highway 101 to eastbound Interstate 580, westbound access and operational improvements in the vicinity of the toll plaza east of the bridge in Contra Costa County, and Richmond Parkway interchange improvements. Of the amount allocated to this project, one hundred thirty-five million dollars ($135,000,000) shall be dedicated to the direct connector from northbound Highway 101 to eastbound Interstate 580 in Marin County and seventy-five million dollars ($75,000,000) shall be dedicated to the projects in Contra Costa County. The project sponsors are the Bay Area Toll Authority, the Contra Costa Transportation Authority, and the Transportation Authority of Marin. Two hundred ten million dollars ($210,000,000).

(26) North Bay Transit Access Improvements. Provide funding for transit improvements, including, but not limited to, bus capital projects, including vehicles, transit facilities, and access to transit facilities, benefiting the Counties of Marin, Sonoma, Napa, Solano, and Contra Costa. Priority shall be given to projects that are fully funded, ready for construction, and serving rail transit or transit service that operates primarily on existing or fully funded high-occupancy vehicle lanes. The project sponsor is the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Eligible applicants are any transit operator providing service in the Counties of Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, Solano, or Sonoma. One hundred million dollars ($100,000,000).

(27) State Route 29. Eligible project expenses include State Route 29 major intersection improvements, including Soscol Junction, and signal and signage improvements, which may include multimodal infrastructure and safety improvements between Carneros Highway (State Route 12/121) and American Canyon Road. The project sponsor is the Napa Valley Transportation Authority. Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000).

(28) Next-Generation Clipper Transit Fare Payment System. Provide funding to design, develop, test, implement, and transition to the next generation of Clipper, the bay area’s transit fare payment system. The next-generation system will support a universal, consistent, and seamless transit fare payment system for the riders of transit agencies in the bay area. The project sponsor is the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Fifty million dollars ($50,000,000).

(29) Interstate 680/Interstate 880/Route 262 Freeway Connector. Connect Interstate 680 and Interstate 880 in southern Alameda County to improve traffic movement, reduce congestion, and improve operations and safety. The project sponsor is the Alameda County Transportation Commission. Fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000).

(30) Interstate 680/State Route 84 Interchange Reconstruction Project. Improve safety and regional and interregional connectivity by conforming State Route 84 to expressway standards between south of Ruby Hill Drive and the Interstate 680 interchange in southern Alameda County and implementing additional improvements to reduce weaving and merging conflicts and help address the additional traffic demand between Interstate 680 and State Route 84. The project sponsor is the Alameda County Transportation Commission. Eighty-five million dollars ($85,000,000).

(31) Interstate 80 Transit Improvements. Fund improvements to support expanded bus service in the Interstate 80 corridor including, but not limited to, bus purchases, expansion of the WestCAT storage yard and maintenance facility. Fund implementation of the San Pablo Avenue Multi-modal Corridor (AC Transit). The project sponsor is the Contra Costa Transportation Authority. Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000).

(32) Byron Highway-Vasco Road Airport Connector. Fund construction of a new connector between Byron Highway and Vasco Road south of Camino Diablo Road as well as shoulder and other improvements to the Byron Highway, including a railroad grade separation, to improve safety and access to the Byron Airport and to facilitate economic development and access for goods movement in East Contra Costa County. The project sponsor is the Contra Costa Transportation Authority. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000).

(33) Vasco Road Safety Improvements. Fund the widening of lanes and construction of a concrete median barrier along 2.5 miles of Vasco Road beginning approximately three miles north of the Contra Costa/Alameda County Line. The project sponsor is the Contra Costa Transportation Authority. Fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000).

(34) East Contra Costa County Transit Intermodal Center. Fund the construction of a Transit Intermodal Center in Brentwood enhancing access to eBART and Mokelumne Bike Trail/Pedestrian Overcrossing at State Route 4. The project sponsor is the Contra Costa Transportation Authority. Fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000).

(35) Interstate 680 Transit Improvements. Fund improvements that will enhance transit service in the Interstate 680 corridor, including, but not limited to, implementing bus operations on shoulder (BOS), technology-based intermodal transit centers/managed parking lots and development of technology to enhance real-time travel information. Fund implementation of Shared Autonomous Vehicles (SAVs) to improve first and last mile transit connectivity. The project sponsor is the Contra Costa Transportation Authority. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000).

(b) Pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 30923, if the authority selects a toll increase to be placed on the ballot in an amount less than three dollars ($3), the funding assigned to the projects and programs identified in subdivision (a) shall be adjusted proportionately to account for reduced funding capacity. The authority shall adopt a resolution detailing the updated Regional Measure 3 capital and operating funding available and listing the revised funding amounts for each project within 90 days of the certification of the election by the last county to certify the election on the toll increase. The authority shall update this resolution as needed to reflect additional tolls approved in subsequent elections.

(c)

(1) Not more than 16 percent, up to sixty million dollars ($60,000,000), of the revenues generated each year from the toll increase approved by the voters pursuant to Section 30923 shall be made available annually for the purpose of providing operating assistance as set forth in the authority’s annual budget resolution for the purposes listed in paragraph (2). The funds shall be made available to the provider of the transit services subject to the performance measures described in paragraph (3).

(2) The Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall annually fund the following operating programs from the revenue generated each year from the toll increase approved by the voters pursuant to Section 30923 as another component of the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan:

(A) The San Francisco Transbay Terminal. Eight percent of the amount available for operating assistance pursuant to paragraph (1), not to exceed five million dollars ($5,000,000). These funds are available for transportation-related costs associated with operating the terminal. The Transbay Joint Powers Authority shall pursue other long-term, dedicated operating revenue to fund its operating costs. To the extent that a portion or all of the toll revenue provided pursuant to this subparagraph is not needed in a given fiscal year, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall reduce the allocation accordingly.

(B)

(i) Expanded Ferry Service. Ten million dollars ($10,000,000) in the first year of allocation, fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000) in the second year of allocation, twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) in the third year of allocation, and twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) in the fourth year of allocation. These allocation amounts shall be subject to the adjustments in subdivision (b). In the fifth year of allocation and thereafter, 58 percent of the amount available for operating assistance pursuant to paragraph (1), not to exceed thirty-five million dollars ($35,000,000). These funds shall be made available to the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) to support expanded ferry service, including increased frequencies of existing routes and the operation of new routes.

(ii) To the extent that funds provided pursuant to clause (i) are not requested for expenditure by WETA in a given year, the funds shall be held by the authority in a reserve account. Those funds shall be made available to WETA for any capital or operating purpose. Before receiving an allocation of those funds, WETA shall submit a request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission detailing how the funds shall be used. An allocation of those funds shall constitute an augmentation of the funding provided in paragraph (5) of subdivision (a) and be treated as such in any reports by the authority regarding the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan.

(C) Regional Express Bus. Thirty-four percent of the amount available for operating assistance pursuant to paragraph (1), not to exceed twenty million dollars ($20,000,000), to be distributed for bus service in the bridge corridors, prioritizing bus routes that carry the greatest number of transit riders. To the extent that a portion or all of the toll revenue provided pursuant to this subparagraph is not needed in a given fiscal year, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall reduce the allocation accordingly.

(3) Before the allocation of revenue for transit operating assistance under subparagraphs (A) and (C) of paragraph (2), the Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall:

(A) Adopt performance measures related to fare-box recovery, ridership, or other indicators, as appropriate. The performance measures shall be developed in consultation with the affected project sponsors.

(B) Execute an operating agreement with the sponsor of the project. This agreement shall include, but is not limited to, an operating plan that is consistent with the adopted performance measures. The agreement shall include a schedule of projected fare revenues or other forecast revenue and any other operating funding that will be dedicated to the service or terminal. For any individual project sponsor, this operating agreement may include additional requirements, as determined by the commission.

(C) In an operating agreement executed pursuant to subparagraph (B), the Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall grant a project sponsor at least five years to achieve the adopted performance measures. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall use a ridership forecast as the basis for performance measures adopted pursuant to subparagraph (A) and to establish performance measures in following years. If the transit service of a project sponsor does not achieve the performance measures within the timeframe granted to the project sponsor, the project sponsor shall notify the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission may revise the performance measures, extend the timeframe to achieve the performance measures, or take action to reduce the funding available for operations if the performance measures are not met within the new timeframe.

(4) Before Metropolitan Transportation Commission providing funding to the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) under subdivision (a) or this subdivision, WETA and the MTC shall do the following, as applicable:

(A) WETA shall adopt a plan that includes systemwide and route-specific performance measures related to fare-box recovery, ridership, and any other measures as deemed appropriate by WETA in consultation with MTC.

(B) WETA and MTC shall execute an operating agreement that establishes a five-year plan for new or enhanced services and outlines incremental steps needed to achieve a reasonable level of service productivity and cost-effectiveness as compared to similar ferry services provided across the bay area.

(C) After the time period identified in subparagraph (B), and if reasonable, but incomplete progress has been achieved to meet the performance measures identified in subparagraph (A), WETA, in consultation with MTC, may propose a new timeframe, not longer than an additional five years, to achieve the performance measures and take needed steps to remedy the service to meet the measures. In the event that the performance measures are not met within the new timeframe, WETA may seek additional time to achieve the measures and MTC may determine whether services should continue and may establish other conditions to service in consultation with WETA. In all cases, funds not spent or made available to WETA shall be returned to the reserve account established pursuant to clause (ii) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2).

(D) WETA shall use the plan identified in subparagraph (A) to prioritize the use of capital funding made available by this section to support its mission as the operator of ferry services.

(E) This section does not restrict WETA with respect to meeting its obligations as the coordinating agency for water transit response to regional emergencies.

(d)

(1) For all projects authorized under subdivision (a), the project sponsor shall submit an initial project report to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission within six months of the election approving the toll increase. This report shall include all information required to describe the project in detail, including the status of any environmental documents relevant to the project, additional funds required to fully fund the project, the amount, if any, of funds expended to date, and a summary of any impediments to the completion of the project. This report, or an updated report, shall include a detailed financial plan and shall notify the commission if the project sponsor will request toll revenue within the subsequent 12 months. The project sponsor shall update this report as needed or requested by the commission. Funds shall not be allocated by the commission for any project authorized by subdivision (a) until the project sponsor submits the initial project report, and the report is reviewed and approved by the commission.

(2) If multiple project sponsors are listed for projects listed in subdivision (a), the commission shall identify a lead sponsor in coordination with all identified sponsors, for purposes of allocating funds. For any projects authorized under subdivision (a), the commission shall have the option of requiring a memorandum of understanding between itself and the project sponsor or sponsors that shall include any specific requirements that must be met before the allocation of funds provided under subdivision (a).

(e) If a program or project identified in subdivision (a) has cost savings after completion, taking into account construction costs and an estimate of future settlement claims, or cannot be completed or cannot continue due to delivery or financing obstacles making the completion or continuation of the program or project unrealistic, the commission shall consult with the program or project sponsor. After consulting with the sponsor, the commission shall hold a public hearing concerning the program or project. After the hearing, the commission may vote to modify the program or the project’s scope, decrease its level of funding, or reassign some or all of the funds to another project within the same bridge corridor. If a program or project identified in subdivision (a) is to be implemented with other funds not derived from tolls, the commission shall follow the same consultation and hearing process described above and may vote thereafter to reassign the funds to another project consistent with the intent of this chapter.

(f) If the voters approve a toll increase pursuant to Section 30923, the authority shall within 24 months of the election date include the projects in a long-range bridge toll plan. The authority shall update its long-range plan as required to maintain its viability as a strategic plan for funding projects authorized by this section. The authority shall, by January 1, 2020, submit its updated long-range bridge toll plan to the transportation policy committee of each house of the Legislature for review. This subdivision, to the extent a plan is prepared under this section, supersedes the requirement to prepare and submit a 20-year toll bridge expenditure plan to the Legislature for adoption pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 30914.

(g) This section does not alter the obligations of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission with respect to the requirements of Section 65080 of the Government Code.

Regional Measure 3 toll increase BART expansion Bay Area Express Lanes goods movement Safe Routes to Transit Ferry Enhancement Program San Francisco Transbay Terminal Metropolitan Transportation Commission fund reallocation transport funding performance criteria long-range bridge toll plan transit projects San Francisco Bay Area transportation

(Amended by Stats. 2018, Ch. 92, Sec. 207. (SB 1289) Effective January 1, 2019.)

Section § 30915

This section mentions that for certain construction and improvement projects, funding should be sought from various sources like the State Highway Account or federal funds. Project sponsors and the department must report to the authority about these funds.

Additionally, local funds already committed to certain projects must not be replaced by new funding unless a complete funding plan is in place, or if the local funds are needed to maintain transit services or address vital safety or maintenance needs.

(a) With respect to all construction and improvement projects specified in Sections 30913, 30914, and 30914.7, project sponsors and the department shall seek funding from all other potential sources, including, but not limited to, the State Highway Account and federal matching funds. The project sponsors and department shall report to the authority concerning the funds obtained under this subdivision.

(b) Local funds that have previously been committed to projects and programs identified in subdivision (a) of Section 30914.7 shall not be supplanted by the funding assigned to projects and programs pursuant to Section 30914.7 unless the project sponsor has secured a full funding plan for the project, or the local funds are needed to maintain transit service levels or fund a critical safety or maintenance need.

construction projects funding State Highway Account federal matching funds project sponsors reporting local funds commitment transit service maintenance safety and maintenance funding full funding plan Section 30914.7 funding compliance requirements

(Amended by Stats. 2017, Ch. 650, Sec. 8. (SB 595) Effective January 1, 2018.)

Section § 30916

This section establishes the toll rates for vehicles crossing state-owned toll bridges based on the number of axles. If voters approve an increase, the tolls can be raised and adjusted for inflation. Revenue from toll increases may fund specific bridge maintenance and related projects. Tolls can only be increased to meet bond obligations, and a public hearing is required before changes. The section also allows for discounted tolls for commuters and special conditions for high-occupancy vehicles.

(a) The base toll rate for vehicles crossing the state-owned toll bridges within the geographic jurisdiction of the commission as of January 1, 2003, is as follows:

Number of Axles

Toll

Two axles

$ 1.00

Three axles

3.00

Four axles

5.25

Five axles

8.25

Six axles

9.00

Seven axles & more

10.50

(b) If the voters approve a toll increase, pursuant to Section 30921, commencing July 1, 2004, the base toll rate for vehicles crossing the bridges described in subdivision (a) is as follows:

Number of axles

Toll

Two axles

$ 2.00

Three axles

4.00

Four axles

6.25

Five axles

9.25

Six axles

10.00

Seven axles & more

11.50

(c)

(1) If the voters approve a toll increase, pursuant to Section 30923, the authority shall increase the base toll rate for vehicles crossing the bridges described in subdivision (a) from the toll rates then in effect by the amount approved by the voters pursuant to Section 30923. The authority may, beginning six months after the election approving the toll increase, phase in the toll increase over a period of time and may adjust the toll increase for inflation based on the California Consumer Price Index after the toll increase has been phased in completely.

(2) Revenue generated from the adjustment of the toll to account for inflation pursuant to paragraph (1) may be expended for the following purposes:

(A) Bridge maintenance and rehabilitation necessary to preserve, protect, and replace the bridge structures consistent with subdivision (b) of Section 30950.3.

(B) Supplemental funding for the projects and programs authorized pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 30914.7.

(d) The authority shall increase the amount of the toll only if required to meet its obligations on any bonds or to satisfy its covenants under any bond resolution or indenture. The authority shall hold a public hearing before adopting a toll schedule reflecting the increased toll charge.

(e) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the adoption of either a discounted commute rate for two-axle vehicles or of special provisions for high-occupancy vehicles under terms and conditions prescribed by the authority in consultation with the department.

state-owned toll bridges number of axles toll rates toll increase voter approval inflation adjustment California Consumer Price Index bridge maintenance bond obligations public hearing discounted commute rate high-occupancy vehicles revenue expenditure bridge rehabilitation toll schedule

(Amended by Stats. 2017, Ch. 650, Sec. 9. (SB 595) Effective January 1, 2018.)

Section § 30917

In a 1988 special election, voters in San Francisco and surrounding counties approved a $1 toll for certain vehicles using state-owned bridges overseen by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. The money from this toll increase is meant to fund bridge construction and significant improvements, as long as it's financially feasible, unless stated otherwise in Section 30914.

Pursuant to a special election in 1988 held in the City and County of San Francisco and the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Solano, the voters approved a uniform toll charge of one dollar ($1) for class I vehicles crossing the state-owned toll bridges within the geographic jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Except as provided in Section 30914, the revenue derived from that toll increase shall be used to finance capital outlay for bridge construction and major bridge improvements as is fiscally practicable.

Bridge tolls Metropolitan Transportation Commission vehicle toll charge state-owned bridges San Francisco Bay Area 1988 special election toll revenue bridge construction capital outlay bridge improvements uniform toll rate class I vehicles San Francisco bridges regional toll transportation funding

(Repealed and added by Stats. 2003, Ch. 715, Sec. 69. Effective January 1, 2004.)

Section § 30918

This law section focuses on how tolls are managed for certain state-owned bridges in California. The authority responsible for these bridges can set and adjust toll rates to ensure they can pay off any bonds or financial obligations linked to toll revenue. Before raising tolls, they must notify the legislature and hold a public hearing.

Additionally, toll rates can be different for each bridge and discounts are possible, especially for high-occupancy vehicles and those paying electronically. Commuters using electronic payments and crossing two bridges in one trip during rush hour can get a 50% discount on the second crossing.

If there are discounts on lanes for high-occupancy vehicles, rules about how many people need to be in the vehicles will be set with the help of transportation departments. All tolls from the mentioned bridges may be pooled together for financial reasons or to back up any bond agreements. Lastly, both electronic and cash toll payment methods should be considered for customer convenience.

(a) It is the intent of the Legislature to maintain tolls on all of the bridges specified in Section 30910 at rates sufficient to meet any obligation to the holders of bonds secured by the bridge toll revenues. The authority shall retain authority to set the toll schedule as may be necessary to meet those bond obligations. The authority shall provide at least 30 days’ notice to the transportation policy committee of each house of the Legislature and shall hold a public hearing before adopting a toll schedule reflecting the increased toll rate.

(b) The authority shall increase the toll rates specified in the adopted toll schedule in order to meet its obligations and covenants under any bond resolution or indenture of the authority for any outstanding toll bridge revenue bonds issued by the authority and the requirements of any constituent instruments defining the rights of holders of related obligations of the authority entered into pursuant to Section 5922 of the Government Code and, notwithstanding Section 30887 or subdivision (d) of Section 30916 of this code, or any other law, may increase the toll rates specified in the adopted toll schedule to provide funds for the planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, rehabilitation, and seismic retrofit of the state-owned toll bridges specified in Section 30910 of this code, to provide funding to meet the requirements of Sections 30884 and 30911 of this code, and to provide funding to meet the requirements of voter-approved regional measures pursuant to Sections 30914, 30921, and 30923 of this code.

(c) Notwithstanding any other law, the authority’s toll structure for the state-owned toll bridges specified in Section 30910 may vary from bridge to bridge and may include discounts consistent with the following:

(1) The authority may include discounts for the following vehicles:

(A) Vehicles classified by the authority as high-occupancy vehicles.

(B) Vehicles that pay for tolls electronically or through other non-cash methods. The authority may charge differential rates based on the chosen method.

(2) The authority shall provide a 50-percent discount on the amount of the toll increase approved pursuant to Section 30923 on the second bridge crossing for those commuters using a two-axle vehicle who pay tolls electronically or through other noncash methods and who cross two bridges specified in Section 30910 during commute hours. The authority shall establish reasonable and practical operating rules to implement this paragraph.

(d) If the authority establishes high-occupancy vehicle lane fee discounts or access for vehicles classified by the authority as high-occupancy vehicles for any bridge or segments of a highway that connect to the bridge, the authority shall establish the occupancy requirements that shall apply on each segment of highway that connects with that bridge, in consultation with the department.

(e) All tolls referred to in this section and Sections 30916, 31010, and 31011 may be treated by the authority as a single revenue source for accounting and administrative purposes and for the purposes of any bond indenture or resolution and any agreement entered into pursuant to Section 5922 of the Government Code.

(f) It is the intent of the Legislature that the authority should consider the needs and requirements of both its electronic and cash-paying customers when it designates toll payment options at the toll plazas for the toll bridges under its jurisdiction.

bridge toll rates bond obligations toll schedule public hearing toll discount high-occupancy vehicles electronic toll payment commuter discounts noncash payment methods toll revenue bonds seismic retrofit funding planning and construction funds regional measures accounting purposes toll payment options

(Amended by Stats. 2017, Ch. 650, Sec. 10. (SB 595) Effective January 1, 2018.)

Section § 30919

This law states that after paying off any debt from toll bridge revenue bonds, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) should use the remaining funds for certain transportation projects. The money should be distributed to eligible public entities and the relevant department.

The goals are to improve rail systems to reduce traffic on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. Specifically, 70% of the funds should go to rail projects in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, like extending rail lines in areas such as Concord-Antioch and Fremont-San Jose. The other 30% should go to rail projects in San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara.

Additionally, the MTC can make long-term funding commitments to maximize support for these projects.

(a) Consistent with its adopted regional transportation plan, after the requirements for debt service on the outstanding toll bridge revenue bonds have been met, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall allocate the revenues identified in subdivision (b) of Section 30913 to eligible public entities and to the department.

(b) The revenues expended pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 30914 shall be expended on rail extension and improvement projects designed to reduce vehicular traffic congestion on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. Seventy percent of the revenues shall be expended on rail extensions and improvement projects in the Counties of Alameda and Contra Costa, including, but not limited to, extending the regional rail system in the Concord-Antioch, Fremont-San Jose, and the Bayfair-Livermore rail transit corridors. The remaining 30 percent shall be expended on rail extensions and improvement projects in the City and County of San Francisco and the Counties of San Mateo and Santa Clara.

(c) The Metropolitan Transportation Commission may commit to multiyear allocations and expenditures for projects over extended time periods to maximize funding opportunities and project progress.

Metropolitan Transportation Commission toll bridge revenue bonds regional transportation plan rail extension projects traffic congestion reduction San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge Alameda County rail Contra Costa County rail San Francisco rail projects San Mateo County rail Santa Clara County rail multiyear allocations funding opportunities project progress Concord-Antioch rail extension Fremont-San Jose rail Bayfair-Livermore rail corridors

(Amended by Stats. 2003, Ch. 715, Sec. 71. Effective January 1, 2004.)

Section § 30920

This law allows the authority to issue bonds to fund toll bridge projects, but only if doing so doesn’t harm the required funding for rail and transit projects that aim to reduce road traffic. The authority’s decision on whether a project affects these funds is final and cannot be challenged.

The authority may issue toll bridge revenue bonds to finance any or all of the projects, including those specified in Sections 30913, 30914, and 30914.7, if the issuance of the bonds does not adversely affect the minimum amount of toll revenue proceeds designated in Section 30913 and in paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of, and subdivision (b) of, Section 30914 for rail extension and improvement projects and transit projects to reduce vehicular traffic. A determination of the authority that a specific project or projects shall have no adverse effect will be binding and conclusive in all respects.

toll bridge revenue bonds project financing toll revenue rail extension projects transit projects vehicular traffic reduction funding requirements bond issuance transportation finance project impact determination toll bridge projects

(Amended by Stats. 2017, Ch. 650, Sec. 11. (SB 595) Effective January 1, 2018.)

Section § 30921

This law discusses the process for increasing bridge tolls by one dollar per vehicle in specific counties of California, including San Francisco. Before implementing this toll hike, a special election must be held in these counties to get voter approval. The increased toll revenue will fund various transportation projects like expanding BART, developing a new commuter rail, expanding bus and ferry services, and enhancing connections between different transit systems.

The special election is to be conducted alongside the March 2, 2004 primary election with a specific question, known as Regional Measure 2, asking voters to approve the toll increase. If the majority support the measure, the toll hike becomes effective July 1, 2004. If not, the measure could be resubmitted in a future election.

The law also outlines how election costs will be reimbursed and specifies that toll rate changes must get legislative approval.

(a) The toll rate for vehicles crossing the bridges described in Section 30916 shall not be increased to the rate described in subdivision (b) of Section 30916 prior to the availability of the results of a special election to be held in the City and County of San Francisco and the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Solano to determine whether the residents of those counties and of the City and County of San Francisco approve a toll increase in the amount of one dollar ($1) per vehicle. The revenue derived from this toll increase shall be used to finance capital outlay for construction improvements, the acquisition of transit vehicles, transit operating assistance, and other improvement projects to reduce congestion and to improve travel options on the bridge corridors as is fiscally practicable.

(b) Notwithstanding any provision of the Elections Code, the board of supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco and of each of the counties described in subdivision (a) shall call a special election to be conducted in the City and County of San Francisco and in each of the counties that shall be consolidated with the March 2, 2004, primary election. The following question shall be submitted to the voters as Regional Measure 2 and stated separately in the ballot from state and local measures: “Shall voters authorize a Regional Traffic Relief Plan that does the following:

(1) Directs revenues generated through the collection of bridge tolls to provide the following projects:

(A) Expand and extend BART.

(B) New transbay commuter rail crossing south of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.

(D) New expanded ferry service.

(E) Better connections between BART, buses, ferries, and rail.

(2) Approves a one dollar ($1) toll increase effective July 1, 2004, on all toll bridges in the bay area, except the Golden Gate Bridge?”

(c) The ballot pamphlet for the special election described in subdivision (b) shall include a detailed description of the Regional Traffic Relief Plan detailing the projects, services, and planning requirements set forth in subdivisions (c) and (d) of Section 30914 and subdivisions (d), (e), and (f) of Section 30914.5. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall prepare this description of the Regional Traffic Relief Plan.

(d) The county clerks shall report the results of the special election to the authority. If a majority of all voters voting on the question at the special election vote affirmatively, the authority shall adopt the increased toll schedule to be effective July 1, 2004.

(e) If a majority of all the voters voting on the question at the special election do not approve the toll increase, the authority may by resolution resubmit the measure to the voters at a subsequent general election. If a majority of all of the voters vote affirmatively on the measure, the authority may adopt the toll increase and establish its effective date and establish the completion dates for all reports and studies required by Sections 30914, 30914.5, and 30950.3.

(f) The authority shall reimburse each county and city and county participating in the election for the incremental cost of submitting the measure to the voters. These costs shall be reimbursed from revenues derived from the tolls if the measure is approved by the voters, or, if the measure is not approved, from any bridge toll revenues administered by the authority.

(g) Except as provided in Section 30918, the toll rates contained in a toll schedule adopted by the authority pursuant to this section shall not be changed without statutory authorization by the Legislature.

bridge toll increase special election Regional Measure 2 BART expansion transbay commuter rail Regional Express bus network ferry service expansion transit connection improvements voter approval Metropolitan Transportation Commission San Francisco counties transportation projects funding traffic relief plan election cost reimbursement legislative authorization for toll changes

(Repealed and added by Stats. 2003, Ch. 715, Sec. 74. Effective January 1, 2004.)

Section § 30922

This law states that if you want to challenge a toll increase, the financing of the related transportation program, or any bonds issued using those tolls, you must start your legal action within 60 days after the toll increase is approved in an election. After that 60-day period has passed, all aspects of the toll, financing, and related processes are considered valid and cannot be contested.

Any action or proceeding to contest, question, or deny the validity of a toll increase provided for in this chapter, the financing of the transportation program contemplated by this chapter, the issuance of any bonds secured by those tolls, or any of the proceedings in relation thereto, shall be commenced within 60 days from the date of the election at which the toll increase is approved. After that date, the financing of the program, the issuance of the bonds, and all proceedings in relation thereto, including the adoption, approval, and collection of the toll increase, shall be held valid and incontestable in every respect.

toll increase challenge transportation program financing bonds issuance 60-day deadline contest toll validity election approval legal action deadline incontestable tolls program financing bond security toll revenue bonds toll adoption toll approval California toll law toll collection validity

(Amended by Stats. 2017, Ch. 650, Sec. 12. (SB 595) Effective January 1, 2018.)

Section § 30923

This law outlines the process for a special election to determine whether to raise tolls by up to $3 on certain California bridges. The election will occur in several counties and must be approved by a majority of voters before any toll increase. The ballot will clearly state the proposed increase and outline how the funds will be used. If voters approve, an independent oversight committee will ensure the funds are spent properly and report to the Legislature. Counties involved will be reimbursed for election costs if the increase is approved.

If the increase fails, it can be re-submitted in a future election. The results will be reported to the authority, and the toll change cannot occur without further legislative authorization unless it complies with specific exceptions. The oversight committee will review expenditures and submit findings to the state government. Representatives in this committee can't have ties to entities funded by the commission.

(a) For purposes of the special election to be conducted pursuant to this section, the authority shall select an amount of the proposed increase in the toll rate, not to exceed three dollars ($3), for vehicles crossing the bridges described in Section 30910 to be placed on the ballot for approval by the voters.

(b) The toll rate for vehicles crossing the bridges described in Section 30910 shall not be increased by the rate selected by the authority pursuant to subdivision (a) prior to the availability of the results of a special election to be held in the City and County of San Francisco and the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma to determine whether the residents of those counties and of the City and County of San Francisco approve the toll increase.

(c)

(1) Notwithstanding any provision of the Elections Code, the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco and of each of the counties described in subdivision (b) shall call a special election to be conducted in the City and County of San Francisco and in each of the counties that shall be consolidated with a statewide primary or general election, which shall be selected by the authority.

(2) The authority shall determine the ballot question, which shall include the amount of the proposed toll increase selected pursuant to subdivision (a) and a summary of the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan. The ballot question shall be submitted to the voters as Regional Measure 3 and stated separately in the ballot from state and local measures.

(d) The ballot pamphlet for the special election shall include a summary of the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan regarding the eligible projects and programs to be funded pursuant to Section 30914.7. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall prepare a summary of the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan.

(e) The county clerks shall report the results of the special election to the authority. If a majority of all voters voting on the question at the special election vote affirmatively, the authority may phase in the increased toll schedule consistent with subdivision (c) of Section 30916.

(f) If a majority of all the voters voting on the question at the special election do not approve the toll increase, the authority may by resolution resubmit the measure to the voters at a subsequent statewide primary or general election. If a majority of all of the voters vote affirmatively on the measure, the authority may adopt the toll increase and establish its effective date and establish the completion dates for all reports and studies required by Sections 30914.7 and 30950.3.

(g)

(1) Each county and city and county shall share translation services for the ballot pamphlet and shall provide the authority a certified invoice that details the incremental cost of including the measure on the ballot, as well as the total costs associated with the election.

(2) The authority shall reimburse each county and city and county participating in the election for the incremental cost of submitting the measure to the voters. These costs shall be reimbursed from revenues derived from the tolls if the measure is approved by the voters, or, if the measure is not approved, from any bridge toll revenues administered by the authority.

(h)

(1) If the voters approve a toll increase pursuant to this section, the authority shall establish an independent oversight committee within six months of the effective date of the toll increase to ensure that any toll revenues generated pursuant to this section are expended consistent with the applicable requirements set forth in Section 30914.7.

(2) The oversight committee shall include two representatives from each county within the jurisdiction of the commission. Each representative shall be appointed by the applicable county board of supervisors and serve a four-year term and shall be limited to two terms. The oversight committee shall annually review the expenditure of funds by the authority for the projects and programs specified in Section 30914.7 and prepare and submit a report to the transportation committee of each house of the Legislature summarizing its findings. The oversight committee may request any documents from the authority to assist the committee in performing its functions.

(3) A representative appointed to the oversight committee shall not be a member, former member, staff, or former staff of the commission or the authority, shall not be employed by any organization or person that has received or is receiving funding from the commission or the authority, and shall not be a former employee or a person who has contracted with any organization or person that has received or is receiving funding from the commission or the authority within one year of having worked for or contracted with that organization or person.

(i) If voters approve a toll increase pursuant to this section, the authority shall annually prepare a report to the Legislature, in conformance with Section 9795 of the Government Code, on the status of the projects and programs funded pursuant to Section 30914.7.

(j) Except as provided in subdivision (c) of Section 30916 and Section 30918, the toll increase adopted by the authority pursuant to this section shall not be changed without statutory authorization by the Legislature.

toll increase bridge tolls special election Regional Measure 3 independent oversight committee San Francisco counties ballot question voter approval election costs reimbursement toll revenue expenditure plan toll oversight election results legislative report statutory authorization

(Amended by Stats. 2018, Ch. 16, Sec. 1. (AB 1041) Effective January 1, 2019.)

Struggling to fill out your Divorce Forms?

Toll Facilities And Related Matters

Chapter 4San Francisco Bay Area Bridges