Not sure what you aren't agreeing with. How many full time bus lanes are in existence in the state? Under a generous reading, maybe the G Line, AC Transit Tempo, Muni Van Ness BRT, that weird section of MTS Rapid 225 in Chula Vista, and a couple of miles of the SBX.
J Line too, right? At least the 910 portion from Harbor Gateway Transit Center to El Monte Bus Station?
That is not a dedicated roadway for public transportation since 2+ carpoolers can ride for free as well as anyone who pays the toll.
Hmm that seems to me too strict an interpretation. There are still those sections of the 110 lanes that are fully dedicated for public transportation, that dip in and out of with the Express Lanes. There are maps from bill sponsors of where the bill will apply and J Line stops are on there.
The @cayimby.bsky.social explainer says dedicated lanes like the G line. Certainly local jurisdictions can opt in to more density (as they can right now by rezoning) but I think using it for freeway based BRT like the J, MTS 235, etc. is ripe for litigation. cayimby.org/sb-79-explai...
Yea, J Line has fully-dedicated lanes at the point of stations
That seems like a stretch that you could say that any bus route that enters a transit center would be SB 79 eligible, since those internal roadways will always have more than four buses an hour. It is the same concept.
Do you have any of the maps from bill sponsors? I've only seen unofficial ones, including lots of people sharing one I helped make. Which I'm flattered by but I can't guarantee I got it all right
Here’s a map that was shared in a CA YIMBY toolkit to push back against disinfo spread by MAGA TikTokers.
Sort of surprised at how far this map has gone - I worked with somebody on Reddit a few months ago who was making this map. This uses my interpretation of which stops apply and in which tier. If I've misunderstood SB 79 in any way, then that will be reflected here.
Oh interesting! Yeah it was in a Google Drive folder from CA YIMBY so I thought it was an official version from them. But yes bill language can be in flux and we don’t really know for sure until the bill is passed and, I guess, tested by projects.
(I was pretty confident in my interpretations, but see other points in-thread where we've been discussing unclear parts of the text.)
That's a screenshot of the original, made in Google My Maps. The maker took it down about a day after LAist published a story linking to it - I never followed up to ask why
In LA, weirdly the bus lanes on Sepulveda Boulevard in the Valley seem to meet the qualification criteria. The Measure HLA bus lanes in LA should qualify when built
Amend SB 79 to include all paragraphs in 21060.2(a) then. But station-based BRT like the G Line should absolutely qualify.
Given this paragraph in the Senate Local Government analysis of the bill, I would hope that an amendment like this to better clarify would be a slam dunk. Although I'm not sure anything in the state actually meets all of 21060.2(a)? G Line probably does and definitely will soon (TSP ambiguity)
I think the author just threw up a bunch of letters, but the J Line does not qualify under the existing law definition, unless they want to kick all of the cars off the freeway right of way (which would be fine by me!) It makes no sense why the J would qualify and MTS Rapid 235 doesn't.
I've been working with a former member of the author's staff on another issue and although he is a lawyer, he is not known for his language precision. But I could absolutely see including the J Line in SB 79 litigated.
If it's meant to be included, it should also be noted that Carson and PCH stations don't apply to the current text thanks to ~20 minute frequencies. Ultimately fine with that being excluded but it seems like they may not have known what they were writing there