An act to amend Sections 50474.21 and 50474.3 of the Government Code, relating to local government.
Summary
AB 1150 revises California law governing airport customer facility charges, including alternative customer facility charges collected from rental car customers. The bill expands the purposes for which these charges may be used to include major maintenance of consolidated airport rental vehicle facilities, and it requires that the total amount collected not exceed the reasonable costs of financing, designing, constructing, operating, and performing major maintenance on the covered facilities and transportation systems. It also preserves the existing framework requiring public hearings, independent audits, annual reporting, and website posting of audit and spending information before and during collection of the fee.
The bill raises the maximum daily alternative customer facility charge from $9 to $12 beginning January 1, 2026. It also updates the bond and revenue-use rules so that proceeds backed by, or derived from, alternative customer facility charges may be used for major maintenance of a consolidated rental vehicle facility, while removing the prior authorization to use those proceeds for terminal modifications. The bill continues to treat these charges as user fees rather than taxes and confirms they are not subject to sales, use, or transaction taxes.
Impact
AB 1150 amends Sections 50474.21 and 50474.3 of the Government Code, affecting local agencies that operate airports and require rental companies to collect customer facility charges. The practical effect is to give airports more flexibility to finance long-term upkeep of consolidated rental car facilities and related transportation systems, while increasing the maximum alternative daily charge they may impose under specified procedural findings and public transparency requirements. Rental companies and airport customers may see higher per-day charges, but only within the statutory cap and only after the airport satisfies the hearing, audit, and reporting conditions.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been generally favorable and noncontroversial in the Legislature, as reflected by strong vote margins in committee and on the floors, including several unanimous or near-unanimous votes and final enactment as chaptered law. The available voting history suggests broad support for the measure’s airport financing changes, with only isolated opposition in a few votes. No committee transcript material is available to show detailed debate, but the vote pattern indicates the bill was viewed as a practical infrastructure financing update rather than a major policy dispute.
Contention
The main policy tension in AB 1150 is between airport financing needs and the cost burden on rental car customers. Supporters likely favored the higher fee cap and the ability to use revenues for major maintenance, arguing that airports need a more durable funding source for aging rental facilities and related transit systems. Potential critics would be rental car companies, consumer advocates, or fee-sensitive travelers who may object to higher daily charges and to the continued expansion of airport-imposed user fees. A secondary point of contention is the shift in allowed uses of bond proceeds: the bill removes terminal modifications from the alternative fee financing list while adding major maintenance, which reallocates airport funding priorities.