Hi all:
Sorry to bomb the list. If you're not from california or just not
interested, now is a good time to hit your 'delete' key.
I was on the Association of California Car Clubs defender website
http://www.acccdefender.org/bulletin.html
and came upon the following stuff that I thought I'd share with my
fellow owners of older cars:
> SB 708 SB708 Florez (D) Shafter. initially was intended to put
> vehicles newer than 45 years old into the smog check program. With
> massive communication to Sen. Florez and all other representatives,
> Sen Florez amended his bill to deal with smoking vehicles and
> particulate emitters only. This bill now doubles the fine on the
> second offense. Additionally it introduces a new social program to
> assist offenders meeting low income standards with monetary
> assistance for the repair of their vehicle.
**(Here comes the 'gotcha')**
>Also it authorizes local municipalities to set up road detainment check
points in the name of
> sobriety checking and at that time inspect a vehicle for excessive
> smoke and particulate matter. It further entitles the detaining
> agency to a portion of the fine that is levied against the offender.
> The A.C.C.C. opposes this bill and feels this is an unnecessary
> intrusion in our lives and could have other negative effects on the
> driver of collector vehicles. Please contact your local
> representative and advise against voting for this bill. Update, this
> bill was voted on 6/5/03 and passed by the Senate. Please call or
> write your Assemblyman and the Governor and advise against supporting
> this bill.
Though SB708 has been amended from its original form, the bit about
the sobriety checkpoint and "oh, by the way, how's your tailpipe
emissions?" plus the fact that the detaining agency gets part of the
revenue generated by the fines seemed devious enough to me that I wanted
to see if I could get some additional support from my fellow Tiger owners.
Here's another site with a rant about SB708 that's too long to re-post:
http://www.geocities.com/smogrfg/index.html
He does make some good points, though--especially for you 'modified'
California Tiger Owners out there.
> SB444 SB444 by Senator Vosconcellos (D) San Jose. If passed this bill
> would further indorse the currently unproven Global warming theory
> in California and compel the state legislature to significantly
> reduce its speculated effects using provisions of the Kyoto treaty.
> The Kyoto treaty is one created by countries organized by the United
> Nations several years ago. It is not in effect internationally and
> was rejected at the federal level as its implementation would put to
> much of a hardship on the American people, including many lost jobs.
> AB444 would be the beginning of implementing the Kyoto Treaty in
> California only. This bill if passed would place restrictions on many
> things that are part of our daily lives, including being able to
> drive our collector vehicles.
>
> Please Call your Senator and Assemblyperson and express your extreme
> disapproval for this planned intrusion into our lives.
I have no idea what the Kyoto treaty is all about, but I tend to believe
(perhaps incorrectly) that these folks wouldn't be upset about it's
implementation if it didn't affect us old car folks.
> On 5/29/03 The Inspection and Maintenance Review Committee voted to
> pass a resolution to innitiate legislation to repeal the 30 year smog
> exemption and freeze it at pre 1975 vehicles.
>
> What is the I.M.R.C.?
>
> ?The I.M.R.C. is a committee that is appointed by the Governor, as
> required by law, to oversee and be advisors of the Smog Check program
> as developed by the Air Resources Board and administerd by the
> Burear of Automotive Repair.
>
> This resolution does not constitute law in itself, however it is the
> beginning of the legislative process as initiated by this committee
> and the Air Resouces
>
> Board, and if completed will result in being law.
>
> The A.C.C.C. has expressed it's opposition to this resolution but
> needs your Help in letting this committee know how collector vehicle
> owners feel.
>
> Please write to the members of the committee and express your extreme
> dissapproval for this latest assault on the right to own and operate
> collector vehicles by their attempt to take away from our rights as
> SB42 established in 1997
>
> The Following are the members of this committee:
>
> Victor Weisser- Committee Chair
>
> Norm Covell, Dennis Decota, Bruce Hotchkiss
>
> Sheldon Kamieniecki, James Lents, Robert Pearman
>
> Richard Skaggs, Jeffrey Williams
>
> The address to send Mail to these committee members is:
>
> I.M.R.C In Care of 10240 Systems Parkway Sacramento, CA 95827
>
>
This one sounds like a partial re-run of the Florez bill. While it
doesn't affect our cars at the moment, if it gets into place, it's
easier to take the next step, as Florez originally did, and require that
all 1958 and newer cars become part of the smog program.
Unfortunately, this is an issue that won't go away, so those of us that
own older cars and want to drive them regularly will have to deal with
it on a yearly (or more often) basis. Guess that's part of the price
that goes with owning an older car for those of us who don't want to
convert them to catalytic converters, OBDII, fuel injection and all the
other "mod cons".
It does remind me of an old saying that I'd like to plagarize here:
When they came for the Gypsies I was silent.
When the came for the Russians I was silent.
When they came for the Poles I was silent.
Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak out.
Yes, it's melodramatic, but the point is: a line has to be drawn
somewhere, and just 'cause something doesn't affect me now doesn't mean
it won't affect me later.
Hey, does anybody know if a propane conversion still
carries a permanent smog exemption?
Thanks for reading through all this stuff.
Best Regards
David (they'll have to pry that smoggy little smallblock from my cold,
dead hands) Sosna
|