SB 569: Bikeways: reversions and modifications.

Official summary

Legislative Counsel’s Digest (official, as of the latest version). Written by nonpartisan legislative staff; reproduced verbatim.

Existing law grants the legislative body of a city certain powers with respect to city streets and highways, including the power to construct and maintain those streets and highways. Existing law grants the board of supervisors of a county general supervision, management, and control of county highways and authorizes the board of supervisors to lay out, construct, improve, and maintain county highways.

Existing law authorizes the governing body of a city, county, or local agency to, among other things, establish bikeways, as defined and classified. Existing law requires the Department of Transportation, in cooperation with county and city governments, to establish minimum safety design criteria for the planning and construction of each type of bikeway and of roadways where bicycle travel is permitted, and requires all city, county, regional, and other local agencies responsible for the development or operation of bikeways or roadways where bicycle travel is permitted to utilize the minimum safety design criteria.

This bill would prohibit a bikeway constructed, in whole or part, using moneys from the State General Fund allocated to any city, county, regional, or other local agency from being reverted to a nonactive transportation use or modified in a manner that reduces the safety, accessibility, or mobility of nonmotorized users, for a minimum of 20 years from the date of the allocation or its actual useful life, as documented in its project design or local building or permit application materials, whichever is less, except as specified. The bill would require the modification of one of those bikeways to be consistent with an active transportation use, as defined, and be subject to specified public meeting and hearing requirements, as provided.

The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.

Sponsors

Sponsors by party (alphabetical): Democratic 1

“Support” is shown only as formal sponsorship recorded by the legislature. Roll-call votes are available on the official bill page.

Recent official actions

1. August 31, 2026Ordered to inactive file on request of Assembly Member Aguiar-Curry.
2. August 10, 2026Ordered to third reading.
3. August 10, 2026Read third time and amended.
4. July 1, 2026Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
5. June 30, 2026From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 13. Noes 2.) (June 29).
6. June 24, 2026From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on TRANS.
7. June 22, 2026From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on TRANS.
8. June 11, 2026From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on TRANS.
9. July 14, 2025July 14 hearing postponed by committee.
10. June 24, 2025July 7 hearing postponed by committee.
11. June 16, 2025Referred to Com. on TRANS.
12. June 5, 2025In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.