California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SB1125

Introduced
2/13/18  
Refer
2/22/18  
Report Pass
4/26/18  
Refer
4/26/18  
Refer
5/15/18  
Refer
5/15/18  
Report Pass
5/25/18  
Report Pass
5/25/18  
Engrossed
5/30/18  
Engrossed
5/30/18  
Refer
6/7/18  
Refer
6/7/18  
Report Pass
6/27/18  
Refer
6/27/18  
Refer
6/27/18  
Report Pass
8/16/18  
Enrolled
8/31/18  
Enrolled
8/31/18  
Vetoed
9/27/18  

Caption

Federally qualified health center and rural health clinic services.

Impact

If passed, SB 1125 would significantly affect state laws relating to transportation funding and infrastructure development. It sets forth guidelines for local governments on utilizing state funds for highway projects and encourages partnerships between state and local entities. The bill is expected to drive economic growth by enhancing accessibility and mobility for residents and businesses, thus improving overall quality of life. With transportation being a critical component of the state’s economic ecosystem, the bill aims to mitigate road-related accidents and alleviate infrastructure deficiencies.

Summary

Senate Bill 1125 proposes various enhancements and amendments to transportation infrastructure across the state. The bill aims to allocate state funding specifically for improving road safety, upgrading existing bridges, and increasing public transportation options. Advocates argue that the bill addresses urgent needs for safer roads and reduces traffic congestion, ultimately leading to a more efficient transportation network. Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of maintaining environmental standards during infrastructure development, ensuring that safety improvements do not come at the expense of ecological integrity.

Sentiment

The sentiment around SB 1125 appears to be generally favorable among proponents, who are primarily from urban planning and environmental advocacy groups. They view the bill as necessary for modernizing infrastructure in a sustainable manner. However, some critics express concerns over potential budget constraints and the effectiveness of the proposed solutions. The discussions indicate a conscious effort to balance fiscal responsibility with the need for comprehensive safety improvements in transportation.

Contention

Notable points of contention regarding SB 1125 include debates on funding priorities and the potential overreach of state mandates in local transportation planning. Opponents argue that the bill may divert necessary funds away from other critical areas, such as education and healthcare. Additionally, there are concerns that the bill's provisions could lead to undue state control over local transportation decisions, thereby undermining local governance and flexibility in addressing unique community needs.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB1591

Medi-Cal: federally qualified health centers and rural health centers: licensed professional clinical counselor.

CA SB323

Medi-Cal: federally qualified health centers and rural health centers: Drug Medi-Cal and specialty mental health services.

CA SB66

Medi-Cal: federally qualified health center and rural health clinic services.

CA SB966

Federally qualified health centers and rural health clinics: visits.

CA AB3344

Medi-Cal: federally qualified health centers and rural health clinics.

CA AB2029

Federally Qualified Health Clinics: rural health clinics.

CA AB2703

Federally qualified health centers and rural health clinics: psychological associates.

CA SB282

Medi-Cal: federally qualified health centers and rural health clinics.