California 2019-2020 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB2006

Introduced
1/28/20  
Introduced
1/28/20  
Refer
2/14/20  
Refer
2/14/20  
Report Pass
5/5/20  
Report Pass
5/5/20  
Refer
5/5/20  
Report Pass
6/2/20  
Report Pass
6/2/20  
Engrossed
6/8/20  
Engrossed
6/8/20  
Refer
6/9/20  
Refer
6/9/20  
Refer
6/23/20  
Refer
6/23/20  
Report Pass
8/4/20  
Report Pass
8/4/20  
Refer
8/4/20  
Refer
8/13/20  
Refer
8/13/20  
Report Pass
8/20/20  
Report Pass
8/20/20  
Enrolled
8/28/20  
Enrolled
8/28/20  
Chaptered
9/11/20  
Chaptered
9/11/20  
Passed
9/11/20  

Caption

State Highways: relinquishment: State Highway Route 184.

Impact

If enacted, AB 2006 would formally alter the classification of the designated segment of Route 184, which runs from Route 223 near Weedpatch to Route 178. The relinquishment would mean that this highway segment would cease to be maintained as a state highway and would empower local authorities to manage maintenance and transportation decisions specific to that area. This change could potentially enhance mobility and transit solutions tailored to the local needs of Kern County and the City of Bakersfield.

Summary

Assembly Bill 2006 aims to authorize the California Transportation Commission to relinquish a specified portion of State Highway Route 184 to the County of Kern and the City of Bakersfield. This legislative change reflects a broader trend towards allowing local governance and control over state highways that are no longer deemed essential to the state’s highway network. The bill provides a procedural framework for this relinquishment by necessitating an agreement between the Department of Transportation and the local entities, ensuring that the transfer aligns with the interests of both the state and local communities.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 2006 appears largely supportive, particularly among local officials who view the relinquishment as an opportunity for greater control over local infrastructure. Supporters argue that local governance can lead to more efficient and responsive management of transportation resources. However, there may be concerns about whether local entities possess the requisite resources and expertise to effectively manage the new responsibilities that come with the relinquishment of a state highway.

Contention

One notable point of contention that arose during discussions regarding AB 2006 involved the allocation of funds for maintaining the relinquished highway. Critics expressed skepticism about whether local governments would be able to sustain the infrastructure adequately post-relinquishment. There were also discussions about the implications for future state funding and the oversight of highway conditions once managed locally, highlighting a need for careful consideration of the terms of relinquishment to ensure that they meet the community's long-term transportation needs.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Previously Filed As

CA AB2817

State highways: Route 1: relinquishment.

CA AB2082

State highways: State Route 138: reduction.

CA AB250

State highways: State Route 83: reduction.

CA SB606

State highways: State Route 203: reduction.

CA SB710

Sale of excess state highway property: State Highway Route 710 Terminus.

CA AB2333

State highways: airspace leases: report.

CA SB1247

Route 41: Tachi Highway.

CA AB2525

State highways: property leases.

CA AB824

Highway greening: statewide strategic plan.

CA AB752

State highways: worker safety.

Similar Bills

CA AB1764

State highways: relinquishment: Route 184.

CA SB512

Public postsecondary education: support services for foster youth: Cooperating Agencies Foster Youth Educational Support Program.

CA SB606

State highways: State Route 203: reduction.

CA AB1456

State highways: Route 193: relinquishment.

CA AB2272

State highways: relinquishment.

CA SB52

State Route 39.

CA AB732

Crimes: relinquishment of firearms.

CA AB2473

State Highway Route 185: relinquishment: City of San Leandro.