On Thu, 9 Jan 1997 00:54:01 -0800 Aleksandr Milewski <n6mod@amt.org>
writes:
>History, text, etc., of the bill is available from
>http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/ I can't give a more specific URL than that,
>since their webmaster loves to put dates in the filenames. This should
>be
>consistent, though:
>http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0001-0050/sb_42_bill_961202_introduced
>
>An excerpt:
>
>BILL NUMBER: SB 42 INTRODUCED 12/02/96
> BILL TEXT
>
>INTRODUCED BY Senator Kopp
>
> DECEMBER 2, 1996
>
> An act to amend Section 44011 of the Health and Safety Code, and
>to amend Section 4000.1 of the Vehicle Code, relating to air
>pollution.
>
> LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
>
> SB 42, as introduced, Kopp. Air pollution: vehicles.
> Existing law exempts any motor vehicle manufactured prior to the
>1966 model-year from provisions requiring vehicles powered by
>internal combustion engines in certain areas of the state to obtain a
>smog check certificate of compliance or noncompliance biennially,
>upon transfer of ownership, or upon registration of a vehicle
>previously registered outside the state.
> This bill would, instead, exempt from those requirements any
>vehicle which is 25 or more model-years old.
> Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
>State-mandated local program: no.
>
>Full text of the proposed changes to the Vehicle Code follow in the
>above
>referenced page.
Notice: "Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no."
I read this to mean:
a.) The bill passed
b.) No money to go with it.
c.) Committee deems it financially sound. (no cost)
d,) States can legislate against it.
I think that means it's not enforceable in California. Any opinions?
Barney Gaylord
1958 MGA in Illinois
|