Bill would let counties raise car registration fee

Contra Costa Times ^ | 4/22/6 | Kiley Russell

[SmithL]

An East Bay assemblyman is proposing to give all nine Bay Area counties the ability to increase vehicle registration fees to pay for local transportation projects and environmental mitigation.

The money, up to $30.5 million a year, would be spent on local roads and transit systems and for water and air quality projects.

It might not seem like much, sitting as it does in the shadow of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's $68 billion public-works bond proposal, but the money is vital to the health of local streets and bus lines, said Assemblyman Johan Klehs, D-Hayward.

"For one thing, there is no guarantee the bond will be passed," Klehs said. "And regardless of if there's a bond passed, the bond is all for state projects, nothing for local roads. This is purely outside the bond."

The bill, Assembly Bill 2444, would allow a county's transit authority to add $5 to the vehicle license fees collected in that county. The authority's board could impose the fee with a two-thirds vote.

The money would be spent on road improvements and building as well as bicycle and pedestrian programs, among other things.

The proposed legislation would also allow the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, with a two-thirds vote, to impose a $5 fee in all nine counties "for the mitigation of the impacts of motor vehicles on the environments."

Half of the money collected by the district would go to the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board and half the district could spend on its own projects such as storm water runoff and water and air quality improvements.

Seventy-five percent of the money for both the air district and the water board would have to be spent in the counties where the fees are collected, and the rest could be spent on regional projects.

If both $5 fees are imposed, it would amount to 20 cents a week for every vehicle in every county, Klehs said.

"We're making getting to work and getting home after work a lot easier on our roads (and) global warming is such a major concern, we want to do our part," he said.

The bill passed out of the Assembly Transportation Committee April 17 and now awaits a hearing in the Local Government Committee.

Klehs is confident his bill will end up on the governor's desk, and he said administration officials encouraged him to introduce it. Still, Schwarzenegger's signature is not guaranteed. Last year, he vetoed a similar bill by Klehs and since 2001 at least five comparable bills have died, either by veto or in committee.

Schwarzenegger said voters, not the local or regional boards, should decide if they want to impose such fees.

Voicing a similar concern, representatives from the state's auto dealers and anti-tax groups oppose the Klehs bill.

Politicians should stop adding more money to the roughly $31 already tacked onto the vehicle license fee for things such as emergency response on freeways and prosecuting car theft, said Brian Maas of the California Motor Car Dealers Association, which represents 1,400 new car dealerships.

"Our opposition, frankly, is narrowly confined to the fact that the proposed fee increases in Mr. Klehs' bill would not be approved by the voters who would ultimately have to pay for them," Maas said.

Klehs and his supporters, however, say the money generated by the new fees is too small to justify an election campaign, and they note that the board members who would approve increases are all elected officials.

"I can certainly understand people's concern that taxes will get out of control, but we don't see this as a tax, this is a fee. You're going to pay something and you're going to get something," said Dennis Fay, the executive director of the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency, which is sponsoring the bill.

Gayle Uilkema, a Contra Costa County supervisor and chairwoman of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, said there is a long list of local projects her board would like to help fund, but it often does not have the money.

Still, she said, fees such as the ones the bill would allow can be a significant burden.

"Personally, I have not supported those and have voted no, even at the air board, even when we needed money, because I'm concerned about the overall impact of tack-on fees," she said.

[SmithL]

Oh, I get it. A tax isn't really a tax, if you only call it a FEE.

[newzjunkey]

Exactly: a tax is not a tax if they call it a fee. Funny how the people understood when Grey Davis tripled the car license fee they called it the "tripling of the car tax" and didn't fall for this "fee" business.

[sangoo]

I don't understand how the water quality is adversly impacted by motor vehicles. Seems like they're just trying to fund some projects on the backs of vehicle owners.

[Chode]

and Atlas Puked...

[goldstategop]

My California vehicle registration fee is $98 and that's BEFORE the mandatory smog check, which is another $50. Politicians think its c20 cents more per day. They should get out of their offices into the real world and see how ordinary people have to manage expenses.

(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")