Bill Commons

CA SB 220

dead

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · upper

Quick answers

Did CA SB 220 pass?

No. CA SB 220 did not pass — it was defeated or died in the legislative process (2026-02-02). Latest recorded action (2026-02-02): Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 62(a).

What is CA SB 220 about?

Existing law creates the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority with specified powers and duties relative to transportation planning, programming, and operations in the County of Los Angeles. The authority is governed by a 14-member board of directors consisting of the Mayor of the City of Los Angeles, 2 public members and one Los Angeles city council member appointed by the mayor, 4 members appointed from the other cities in the county, the 5 members of the board of supervisors, and a nonvoting member appointed by the Governor. If the number of members of the board of supervisors is increased, existing law requires the authority, within 60 days of the increase, to submit a plan to the Legislature for revising the composition of the authority. At the November 5, 2024, general election, the voters of the County of Los Angeles approved Measure G, which, among other things, amended the charter of the County of Los Angeles to, in 2032, increase the number of members on the board of supervisors from 5 to 9. The bill would require the authority, on or before July 1, 2027, to submit a plan to the Legislature for revising the composition of the authority to account for the amendments described above. To the extent the bill imposes new duties on the authority, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Who sponsors CA SB 220?

Allen is the primary sponsor of CA SB 220.

Description

Existing law creates the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority with specified powers and duties relative to transportation planning, programming, and operations in the County of Los Angeles. The authority is governed by a 14-member board of directors consisting of the Mayor of the City of Los Angeles, 2 public members and one Los Angeles city council member appointed by the mayor, 4 members appointed from the other cities in the county, the 5 members of the board of supervisors, and a nonvoting member appointed by the Governor. If the number of members of the board of supervisors is increased, existing law requires the authority, within 60 days of the increase, to submit a plan to the Legislature for revising the composition of the authority. At the November 5, 2024, general election, the voters of the County of Los Angeles approved Measure G, which, among other things, amended the charter of the County of Los Angeles to, in 2032, increase the number of members on the board of supervisors from 5 to 9. The bill would require the authority, on or before July 1, 2027, to submit a plan to the Legislature for revising the composition of the authority to account for the amendments described above. To the extent the bill imposes new duties on the authority, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Introduced
2025-01-23
Latest action
2026-02-02 — Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 62(a).
Bill type
bill
Last updated
—

Subjects

Sponsors

  • Allenauthor

Committees

Not provided by source.

Action timeline

  1. 2025-01-23

    Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

    introduction,reading-1,referral-committee

  2. 2025-01-24

    From printer. May be acted upon on or after February 23.

  3. 2025-02-05

    Referred to Com. on RLS.

    referral-committee

  4. 2025-03-26

    From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.

    amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee

  5. 2025-04-02

    Re-referred to Com. on TRANS.

    referral-committee

  6. 2025-04-09

    From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on TRANS.

    amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee

  7. 2025-04-10

    Set for hearing April 28.

  8. 2025-04-28

    April 28 hearing: Heard for testimony only.

  9. 2025-12-18

    Set for hearing January 13.

  10. 2026-01-05

    From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on TRANS.

    amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee

  11. 2026-01-13

    January 13 set for first hearing. Failed passage in committee. (Ayes 7. Noes 2. Page 3215.)

    committee-failure,committee-passage-unfavorable

  12. 2026-02-02

    Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 62(a).

    failure

Versions

  • 01/23/25 - Introduced — 2025-01-23Compare
  • 03/26/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-03-26Compare
  • 04/09/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-04-09Compare
  • 01/05/26 - Amended Senate — 2026-01-05Compare
  • SB220Compare
  • (document, no version)Compare

Documents

Votes

  • Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

    2026-01-13 · fail · 7-2

    Member-level votes (15)
    • Blakespear: yes
    • Umberg: yes
    • Cortese: yes
    • Arreguín: yes
    • Richardson: yes
    • Grayson: yes
    • Pérez: yes
    • Seyarto: no
    • Strickland: no
    • Archuleta: other
    • Valladares: other
    • Menjivar: other
    • Gonzalez: other
    • Dahle: other
    • Cervantes: other

Related bills

No related bills recorded for this bill.

Official source

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB220

Attribution

Data from openstates_bulk_csv, retrieved 2026-07-24T01:34:27.960412Z

Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:

Source and document changesStatus and relationship changes

Use this data

Every field on this page is available from the free public API — no key or licence required. Fetch this bill as JSON: GET /api/v1/bills?jurisdiction=CA&identifier=SB 220. See the API docs or the MCP server for AI assistants.

Known limitations

  • Sponsor party and chamber affiliation are not yet captured by this API.
  • Committee referrals are not yet captured.
  • Some documents have no extracted text yet, so version comparison may be limited.

See the methodology page for data sources and limitations.