Yes, but think how well your tax dollars pay for there free time and if they
really get bored that can vote in some hefty salary increases. LOL
Richard Seaton
----- Original Message -----
From: Stephen Hanselman
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2003 3:08 PM
To: StangGuy67@aol.com; 6pack@autox.team.net
Subject: RE: for CA owners of TR6s: NEW SMOG LAW
Another good reason to escape from California. Also a good example of why
a full time legislature is not a good thing, to much free time on their
hands
Steve, a native Californian who escaped
tr6@kc4sw.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-6pack@autox.team.net [mailto:owner-6pack@autox.team.net]On
Behalf Of StangGuy67@aol.com
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2003 9:41 AM
To: 6pack@autox.team.net
Subject: for CA owners of TR6s: NEW SMOG LAW
I got this info from another group I belong to.
http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0701-0750/sb_708_bill_20030221_intr
od
uced.html
BILL NUMBER: SB 708 INTRODUCED
BILL TEXT
INTRODUCED BY Senator Florez
FEBRUARY 21, 2003
An act to amend Section 44011 of the Health and Safety Code,
relating to air pollution.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
SB 708, as introduced, Florez. Air pollution: smog check.
(1) Existing law establishes a motor vehicle inspection and
maintenance program (smog check), administered by the Department of
Consumer Affairs and the State Air Resources Board, that provides for
the inspection of all motor vehicles, except those specifically
exempted from the program, upon registration, biennially upon renewal
of registration, upon transfer of ownership, and in certain other
circumstances. Existing law exempts from those requirements, until
January 1, 2003, any motor vehicle manufactured prior to the 1974
model-year, and after that date, any motor vehicle that is 30 or more
model-years old.
This bill would delete the exemption for those motor vehicles, and
would instead, commencing January 1, 2005, exempt any motor vehicle
that is 45 or more model-years old.
(2) Existing law makes any violation of the smog check program, or
any order, rule, or regulation of the department adopted pursuant to
the program, a misdemeanor.
By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a
state-mandated local program.
(3) 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 no reimbursement is required by this
act for a specified reason.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.
[demime 0.99d.1 removed an attachment of type application/x-pkcs7-signature
which had a name of smime.p7s]
|