Here some interesting input. Senator Runner seems to be fair
in his assessment of this bill. You may want to follow the bills
progress at the address below.
Begin forwarded message:
> From: "Runner, George" <George.Runner@SEN.CA.GOV>
> Date: August 28, 2008 11:14:41 AM PDT
> To: "wendell bain" <wbain@sonic.net>
> Subject: RE: A.B. 3053
>
> Dear Mr. Bain:
>
> Thank you for your correspondence expressing opposition to Assembly
> Bill
> 3053 (Jones), which requires vehicles 15 years or older, except for
> pre-1976 model cars currently exempted from smog checks, to undergo
> annual, instead of biennial, smog inspections.
>
> Last week, the bill was amended into this version. I oppose it
> because
> it seeks to justify doubling the cost of complying with Smog Check
> on a
> vast segment of the vehicle fleet under the supposition that
> statistically these vehicles are more likely to fail, or once
> repaired,
> more likely fail again at a later date. This argument seems to be
> predicated, at least statistically, on the philosophy that these
> vehicles are guilty until proven innocent.
>
> AB 3053 is scheduled to be heard in Senate Appropriations Committee
> sometime this week. You may monitor the progress of this bill at
> www.sen.ca.gov/runner.
>
> Again, thank you for taking the time to share your concerns with me.
> Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future regarding
> legislative
> issues of concern to you. It is an honor to serve you in the
> California
> State Senate.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> GEORGE C. RUNNER, JR.
> Senator, 17th District
>
>
> P.S. For information about the current status of the budget, please
> visit www.senaterepublicanbudget.com.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wendell bain [mailto:wbain@sonic.net]
> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 10:50 AM
> To: Senator Runner
> Subject: A.B. 3053
>
> Dear Senate Representative,
>
> For the reasons listed below I feel A.B. 3053 is not justified. My
> 1959 Morgan Plus 4
> brings a smile to all who see it and as it's driven 2,500 or less a
> year and is very well
> maintained is not a factor in air quality.
> Please consider this in when voting on this Bill.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Wendell Bain
> 7508 bobbie Way
> Rohnert Park, CA 94928
> 707-795-0260
> wbain@sonic.net
>
> *Immediate Action Needed!*
> *Committee Hearing set for August 28. Call Now!!!*
>
> In an effort to avoid public scrutiny, California Assemblyman Dave
> Jones
> (Assemblymember.jones@assembly.ca.gov
> <mailto:Assemblymember.jones@assembly.ca.gov>) has amended a
> completely
> unrelated bill with language to require annual Smog check inspections
> for vehicles 15-years old and older. This represents an obvious
> attempt
> to sneak through legislation in the closing days of the legislative
> session that had been previously defeated (A.B. 616). *The new bill is
> designated as A.B. 3053.*
>
> While pre-1976 motor vehicles would remain exempt under existing
> California law, this proposal ignores the fact that vehicles 15-years
> old and older still constitute a small portion of the overall vehicle
> population and are a poor source from which to look for emissions
> reduction. Furthermore, the bill would direct that the funds
> generated
> through annual inspection fees be used to scrap older cars. This
> represents another attempt by California legislators and regulators to
> scapegoat older cars.
_______________________________________________
Nobbc mailing list
Nobbc@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/nobbc
|