San Francisco could make significant investments to its transportation infrastructure under a proposal the state Legislature sent to the Governor today. AB 1184 by Assemblymember Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) affirms San Francisco’s authority to dedicate a tax on Transportation Network Company (TNC) rides to fund critical transportation projects. There is an estimated $22 billion funding gap to meet city and regional transportation needs through 2045.

“As San Francisco’s economy grows, the city must be able to move its people around safely - but current funding streams can’t keep up with the need,” said Ting. “AB 1184 will allow the city to raise the revenue it needs to help fund improvements to roads, bike lanes, public transit, and more, and demonstrates that the best solutions often arise when local leaders from both the public and private sector come up with a solution together.”

“TNCs are a critical part of our transportation system,” said Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), principal co-author of the legislation. “They expand people’s ability to get around without owning a car. AB 1184 helps ensure that TNCs participate in funding our overall transit system.”

“This bill gives San Franciscans the opportunity to provide additional resources to our underfunded transit system,” said Assemblymember David Chiu (D-San Francisco), a joint author of AB 1184. “TNCs have become a part of everyday mobility and it makes sense for them to help take on our transportation challenges.”

It could soon be easier for the public to obtain body camera footage from law enforcement under a proposal from Assemblymember Phil Ting (D-San Francisco). The state Legislature voted today to send AB 748 to Governor Brown for consideration. The bill requires the release of video or audio within 45 days of a critical incident, which is defined as the discharge of a firearm or use-of-force that causes death or great bodily harm.

“As more and more law enforcement agencies begin to use body cameras, California needs a statewide standard for how the public can access those recordings,” said Ting. “Transparency is necessary after critical incidents occur, and AB 748 will help rebuild trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve.”

Groundbreaking legislation by Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara), along with Assemblymembers Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) and Adam Gray (D-Merced), to create the first statewide drug and needle take-back program funded by the pharmaceutical industry has passed the Senate on a bipartisan, 38-0 vote and now heads to the Governor.

Senate Bill 212 requires manufacturers of pharmaceutical drugs and medical sharps to establish, implement and fund take-back programs for safe and secure collection and disposal of their products. This is the first statewide proposal in the nation to include both prescription medications and medical sharps. While there are some safe drug disposal sites in California, there are only 489 locations serving 39 million residents, and clearly they're not enough to meet public demand. In addition, these sites are financed by local governments, and ultimately California taxpayers.. 

“Our current patchwork of take-back programs isn’t working. All Californians need access to safe and convenient ways to dispose of unused medication and sharps. I hope the Governor sees the public health and environmental benefits of the statewide solution offered in SB 212 and signs the bill,” said Assemblymember Ting, who is principal co-author of the legislation.

With the State Senate’s approval today of AB 748 by Assemblymember Phil Ting (D-San Francisco), California takes a big step forward in allowing greater public access to law enforcement body camera recordings. The proposal, which cleared a full house of the legislature for the first time, requires the release of video or audio within 45 days of a critical incident, unless doing so interferes with an investigation. A critical incident is defined as the discharge of a firearm or use-of-force that causes death or great bodily harm.

“Trust between law enforcement and the communities they protect is key to maintaining peace and safety in our neighborhoods,” said Ting. “We need the statewide standard for the disclosure of body camera footage outlined in AB 748 because greater transparency is the only way to rebuild public trust after critical incidents occur.”

The California Police Chiefs Association estimates 20% of the state’s police departments have deployed body-worn cameras on their officers, and that number is growing. Under current California law, the Public Records Act does not have clear or consistent standards regarding release of these recordings. In April, the Los Angeles Police Commission adopted a policy similar to AB 748. But other departments commonly cite “pending investigation” as a reason to withhold body camera footage, further increasing mistrust. Recordings can show whether or not an officer was in compliance with the law when critical incidents occur and help clear an officer of any perceived wrongdoing. If extra time is needed for an investigation, AB 748 also allows for 30-day delays in the release of footage.

California is in position to expand its Gun Violence Restraining Order (GVRO) law after the State Senate approved AB 2888 by Assemblymember Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) today, sending the measure to the Governor. It adds school personnel, employers and co-workers to the list of parties that can request the courts temporarily take away someone’s guns because of the imminent danger they pose to themselves or others. Currently, only law enforcement and immediate family members can file for a GVRO.

“Prior to February’s mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High, teachers and administrators expressed increasing concern about the gunman’s behavior at school” said Ting, author of AB 2888 and father of two school-aged children. “We need to give California schools more tools to prevent another campus tragedy.”

AB 2888 and other red flag laws gained momentum after the Parkland massacre in February that left 17 students and staffers dead, as well as 17 others injured. 13 states now have so-called red flag laws; eight were in response to the Parkland shooting.

The state Legislature is taking steps to make sure driverless cars will operate safely on California roads. The state Assembly approved AB 87 by Assemblymember Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) today, giving law enforcement the authority to impound unpermitted autonomous vehicles (AVs). The legislation comes as Sacramento is poised to become the first California city where AVs with no occupants will be tested on public streets. 

“While we support technology that could potentially create new transportation opportunities, companies can’t just put an AV on the road whenever they feel like it. Lives are at stake,” said Ting, author of AB 87. “By giving police the power to seize unpermitted AVs, we’re incentivizing operators to go through the proper channels first. We need assurances their AVs can interact safely with drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians.”

The California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) issues three types of AV permits, depending on where the testing takes place and whether or not there’s a back-up human driver in the car. Minimum financial and safety requirements must be met before a permit is approved. 50 companies testing nearly 400 self-driving vehicles are currently licensed by the state for trials. The DMV requires AVs tested on public streets without a human occupant to have a remote driver or monitor watching over it. Only two companies so far have sought such approval.

The state is poised to help combat rental car theft with the Assembly’s   passage today of AB 2620 by Assemblymember Phil Ting (D-San Francisco). The proposal would increase the chances of recovering stolen vehicles by shortening the waiting period a rental car company can turn on the vehicle’s GPS location feature.

 "California has the highest number of rental car thefts in the nation, and the problem has become especially rampant in San Francisco,” said Ting. “The current  one week waiting period is far too long, allowing cars to sometimes end up in another country before a rental car company can turn on GPS tracking.  By shortening the waiting period to three days after the missed return date, AB 2620 would be instrumental in the timely recovery of stolen vehicles.”

Over the past few years, thieves have been increasingly targeting rental car companies, largely because they can’t report a vehicle missing or take any action until at least five days after it’s overdue. This bill was spurred by Sharky Laguana, owner and CEO of Bandago, a San Francisco rental van company.  He used Twitter to vent his frustration over law enforcement’s inability to help him recover one of his company’s past-due vans, even after he had miraculously spotted it while driving. Officers cited the five-day legal requirement before they can act on overdue rental vehicles. Laguana and his business partner took matters into their own hands and recovered their van on their own despite the risks.