California Assembly Bill AB1421

California 2017-2018 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/17/17
• Refer: 3/16/17
• Report Pass: 3/22/17
• Refer: 3/23/17
• Report Pass: 4/25/17
• Refer: 4/25/17
• Refer: 5/3/17
• Report Pass: 5/26/17
• Engrossed: 5/30/17
• Refer: 5/30/17
• Refer: 6/8/17

Caption

Railroads: noise and vibration levels.

Impact

If enacted, AB 1421 would require the Department of Public Health to investigate environmental factors that can affect local communities, particularly those adjacent to state-funded intercity rail services. The study is intended to include statistical determination of how many miles of rail lines exceed the sound threshold of 60 decibels. This initiative reflects a growing concern about ambient noise pollution and its effects on quality of life, education, and health, especially for vulnerable populations such as children and the elderly living near train corridors.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 1421, introduced by Assembly Member Dababneh, aims to address the impact of noise and vibration levels from intercity rail services on residential areas and schools. The bill mandates the State Department of Public Health to conduct a comprehensive study to assess these levels across all railroad lines in California. The purpose of the bill is to protect public health and improve the quality of life for communities living near railways by gathering precise data and understanding the extent of the noise and vibration generated by rail operations.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 1421 is largely supportive among public health advocates and community groups who emphasize the need for a scientific understanding of noise and vibration impacts. Legislative discussions indicate a common ground around the need for improved data to make informed decisions regarding transportation safety and quality of life. Nonetheless, some skepticism persists amongst certain stakeholders about the feasibility and thoroughness of the proposed studies, particularly concerning budget implications and practical execution.

Contention

Notable points of contention include concerns over bureaucratic delays in implementing the study and potential financial constraints on the budget of the Department of Public Health. Critics may argue that while the intentions behind the bill are meritorious, the practical challenges of executing a state-wide study might dilute its effectiveness. Furthermore, there are debates over the extent to which state intervention and regulation should penetrate into local community affairs regarding noise control and public health.