BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1010|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 1010
Author: Florez (D)
Amended: 1/23/06
Vote: 21
SENATE ENERGY, U.&C. COMMITTEE : 6-2, 1/12/06
AYES: Escutia, Alarcon, Dunn, Kehoe, Murray, Simitian
NOES: Morrow, Cox
NO VOTE RECORDED: Battin, Bowen, Vacancy
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 12-0, 1/19/06
AYES: Murray, Aanestad, Alquist, Ashburn, Battin, Dutton,
Escutia, Florez, Ortiz, Poochigian, Romero, Torlakson
NO VOTE RECORDED: Alarcon
SUBJECT : Rail service: City of Shafter
SOURCE : City of Shafter
DIGEST : This bill authorizes the City of Shafter to
establish a special district to develop and operate an
intermodal rail facility. This bill also requires freight
railroads operating in the state to report annually on
track use and capacity.
ANALYSIS : Existing law authorizes municipal corporations
to acquire, construct, own, operate, or lease any public
utility.
This bill declares:
CONTINUED
SB 1010
Page
2
1.Railroads may have sufficient California capacity to
permit additional trains to operate over their lines
without unreasonably interfering with existing rail
traffic.
2.It is state policy for railroads to use their lines to
move traffic via rail rather than via highway so that
congestion and pollution are reduced.
3.It is in the public interest for railroads to allow
others rail carriers to use surplus capacity so that port
and highway congestion is reduced.
This bill authorizes the City of Shafter to establish a
separate governing body (special district) for purposes of
operating an intermodal rail facility with the City of
Shafter, but delegates to the city all governance issues.
The City shall obtain financing, or enter into leases or
contracts, relating to the construction of such an
intermodal rail facility.
This bill requires all revenues received from the operation
of such facility to be used solely for public or municipal
purposes.
The bill provides that the special district shall not levy
any tax, assessment, fee or other charge, and shall prepare
and submit a budget to the City of Shafter, as specified.
This bill requires all freight railroads to report annually
track utilization and capacity to the Public Utilities
Commission (PUC), the Department of Transportation (DOT)
and the California Air Resources Board in a manner
determined by those agencies.
Background
According to the author's office, the author has observed
that the major Southern California ports are congested with
greater congestion forecast. Conversely Oakland, the major
Northern California port, has capacity to expand. The
author believes that expansion is constrained by the rail
capacity for moving containers to and from the port.
SB 1010
Page
3
The Port of Oakland, the City of Shafter (in the author's
district, 15 miles northwest of Bakersfield, between I-5
and Highway 65), and a privately-owned company, Northwest
Container Services, Inc., have formed a partnership to
increase that rail capacity through the creation of the
California Integrated Logistics Center (CILC). The CILC is
an inter-modal facility intended to encourage greater use
of the Port of Oakland by creating an alternative way of
getting containers into the greater Los Angeles area.
Rather than using the heavily congested Ports of Long Beach
and Los Angeles, container ships could go instead to the
Port of Oakland, where a railroad shuttle would ferry
containers to Shafter. Once in Shafter, those containers
would be trucked to their destinations in Southern
California. Exports could also be trucked into Shafter
whereupon the process would be reversed for shipping out of
the Port of Oakland.
Note: According to the California Railroad Industry, the
Northwest Container Service, Inc. advised the City of
Shafter that they were "no longer interested in pursuing
the project." They state they were unable to develop a
mutually acceptable Memorandum of Understanding and do not
agree with the City's "legislative approach to working with
the railroads."
AB 1768 (Oropeza), Chapter 1127, Statutes of 2002, provided
$5 million from the State Transportation Fund to DOT for
local assistance to the City of Shafter for the Southern
San Joaquin Valley Inter-modal Facility, a part of the
CILC. Last month ground was broken on the switching and
rail spur for that project.
Comments
This bill requires railroads to report to the PUC on their
track utilization and capacity. The PUC and DOT are to
develop appropriate definitions and reporting procedures.
The declarations in the bill regarding state policy to
encourage rail line owners to permit other users on those
lines are uncodified.
SB 1010
Page
4
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
Although the PUC does not have a specific estimate of the
costs of this bill, it expects costs to be "significant" -
in excess of $150,000 - to develop standards for the
report.
SUPPORT : (Verified 1/23/06)
City of Shafter (source)
Tejon Ranch Company
OPPOSITION : (Verified 1/23/06)
The California Railroad Industry
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Proponents argue that the CILC
will (1) improve air quality and reduce road congestion as
rail transport is substituted for trucks, (2) improve air
quality and reduce road congestion as rail transport is
substituted for trucks, and (3) relieve congestion in the
Southern California ports, improving efficiency.
Proponents argue that the reports will be beneficial.
Understanding if and where slack rail capacity exists will
help in the formulation of policy for utilizing that
capacity. Relieving choke points in the transportation
infrastructure will facilitate growth of California ports
and support the more efficient conduct of commerce.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The California Railroad
Industry opposes the statewide rail capacity reports, which
they argue have no specific relevance to the City of
Shafter proposal. They argue it is difficult to understand
how studying every rail route in the state will advance the
purpose of reducing port-related truck congestion. They
argue they would prefer a limited DOT study that would be
relevant to the Shafter project. While they do not have a
position on the City of Shafter pursuing an intermodal rail
facility, they argue that "ultimately, the issue of whether
a short-haul rail service is viable between Shafter and
Oakland is a market decision that cannot be solved through
SB 1010
Page
5
legislation." They note the bill focuses exclusively on
"line capacity" without considering other factors such as
the comparative costs of short haul rail, and the cargo
owners' economic and logistical considerations. They state
"the bill implies incorrectly that the State can determine
if a railroad has 'available capacity' on some vague
standard in a corridor or between any two points, and then
appropriate that capacity for State or private purposes."
NC:cm 1/25/06 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****