CALIFORNIA BILL: AB-1740 Clears Another HUGE Hurdle!!!!

sorry guys, my head is spinning from reading this thread. As a California resident, and obvious hot rod enthusiast, what do you need me to do? I cant tell if we are in letter writing phase, verification of senator statement phase, or what. Maybe just a quick review of goal here in bullet/outline form would help refocus all (or maybe just me?)

 

Ok, quick review...

AB-1740 (***emblyman Jeffries, sponsor) is a bill that would increase the number of custom vehicle registrations that California allows per year from 500 to 750. There is a Senate hearing on June 15th for the next round of voting. This bill was doomed from the start, because of the overwhelming anti-automobile climate in Sacramento. However, with a huge push from all of the car enthusiast community, it's still moving it's way through the process. Although 250 more cars ain't much, this is becoming more about disproving some of the false information, like what's being presented by the Air Resources Board against all pre '76 vehicles.

By looking back through this thread, or going to Goodguys.com, or SEMA.org, you can find the list of Senators that will be voting on our bill. Contact the ones in the district that you live, or if you'd like, contact them all. Tell them you are asking for their yes vote for AB-1740. Key points are...
1. These vehicles are limited use, not driven daily, and have little to no impact on the States smog problem
2. The revenues generated from events benefit local economies and charities.

Write back if you need further info or have questions.

 

We still need to contact the senators listed in post 11 about the benefit of AB-1740.
Just a quick note that you are in support of the bill, and the positive impacts it would have on the state of California and your personal pursuit of happiness.
AB -1740 expands the amount of emissions waivers for specialty constructed vehicles from 500 to 750. A SCV can be a Cobra or a Brookville Deuce.
And yes all this drama over 250 more waivers is ridiculous but that shoes how tight the noose has already gotten.

 

Even the longest journey is one-step-at-a-time.

 

agreed

 

The folks in S.F and L.A. vote for nut cases like her and all the rest.

 

Dude, ^ not civil. Please delete.

 

Thanks for your helpful insight. That will really help us win this now that we know that.

 

To all,
A couple of weeks ago, I sent out a post containing a portion of a letter I had received from one of our supporters. In the letter, Senator Christine Kehoe was quoted as making some rather detrimental statements against hot rods/collector/cl***ic automobiles.

Several of you attempted to contact the Senator's office for an explanation. Some of you were told that the Senator never met with Mr. Anthony Publico (our supporter that provided the information) and therefore, the statements were false.

I have since learned that there was in fact an error, and Senator Kehoe is owed an apology. Mr. Publico did not meet with the Senator at her San Diego office as was first understood. Therefore, the Senator herself, could not have made the statements. However, Mr. Publico DID meet with one of the Senator's staff members at her Sacramento office. This is where/when the alleged comments, quoted in the letter, were to have been made. Mr. Publico stands behind his story.

This is in no way an attempt to retaliate against Senator Kehoe or her staff. I'm simply trying to set the record straight. What may or may not have been said is not important right now. Please, keep all of our focus on calls, faxes, e-mails, and letters to the Senators that will be voting on our bill next Tuesday. For a complete listing of addresses for the Senators, look back through this thread, or go to "goodguys.com".

It's crunch time folks, please, everyone do your part and contact your representatives.

 

bump

 

thanks, Ed. Bump.

 

This is a copy of the report CARB is using as an argument against our bill.
​

​

<o></o>
Gram per Mile Emission Rates From Gasoline Fueled Light-Duty P***enger Cars<o></o>
<o></o> <table cl***="MsoTableGrid" style="border: medium none ; margin-left: -0.3in; border-collapse: collapse;" border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr style=""> <td style="border: 1pt solid windowtext; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 0.75in;" valign="top" width="72">
<o>
</o></td> <td style="border-style: solid solid solid none; border-color: windowtext windowtext windowtext -moz-use-text-color; border-width: 1pt 1pt 1pt medium; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.25in;" valign="top" width="120">
<o></o>THC-exhaust<o>></o>></td> <td style="border-style: solid solid solid none; border-color: windowtext windowtext windowtext -moz-use-text-color; border-width: 1pt 1pt 1pt medium; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 81pt;" valign="top" width="108">
<o></o>
NOX-exhaust<o></o>></td> <td style="border-style: solid solid solid none; border-color: windowtext windowtext windowtext -moz-use-text-color; border-width: 1pt 1pt 1pt medium; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 135pt;" valign="top" width="180">
Total<o></o>
Polluting Exhaust<o></o></td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="border-style: none solid solid; border-color: -moz-use-text-color windowtext windowtext; border-width: medium 1pt 1pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 0.75in;" valign="top" width="72">
Kit Car¹<o>></o></td> <td style="border-style: none solid solid none; border-color: -moz-use-text-color windowtext windowtext -moz-use-text-color; border-width: medium 1pt 1pt medium; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.25in;" valign="top" width="120">
8.07<o></o></td> <td style="border-style: none solid solid none; border-color: -moz-use-text-color windowtext windowtext -moz-use-text-color; border-width: medium 1pt 1pt medium; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 81pt;" valign="top" width="108">
5.08<o></o></td> <td style="border-style: none solid solid none; border-color: -moz-use-text-color windowtext windowtext -moz-use-text-color; border-width: medium 1pt 1pt medium; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 135pt;" valign="top" width="180">
13.15<o></o></td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="border-style: none solid solid; border-color: -moz-use-text-color windowtext windowtext; border-width: medium 1pt 1pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 0.75in;" valign="top" width="72">
2005²<o></o>></td> <td style="border-style: none solid solid none; border-color: -moz-use-text-color windowtext windowtext -moz-use-text-color; border-width: medium 1pt 1pt medium; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.25in;" valign="top" width="120">
0.02<o></o></td> <td style="border-style: none solid solid none; border-color: -moz-use-text-color windowtext windowtext -moz-use-text-color; border-width: medium 1pt 1pt medium; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 81pt;" valign="top" width="108">
0.05<o></o></td> <td style="border-style: none solid solid none; border-color: -moz-use-text-color windowtext windowtext -moz-use-text-color; border-width: medium 1pt 1pt medium; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 135pt;" valign="top" width="180">
0.07<o></o></td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="border-style: none solid solid; border-color: -moz-use-text-color windowtext windowtext; border-width: medium 1pt 1pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 0.75in;" valign="top" width="72">
2010⁶<o></o></td> <td style="border-style: none solid solid none; border-color: -moz-use-text-color windowtext windowtext -moz-use-text-color; border-width: medium 1pt 1pt medium; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.25in;" valign="top" width="120">
0.01<o></o></td> <td style="border-style: none solid solid none; border-color: -moz-use-text-color windowtext windowtext -moz-use-text-color; border-width: medium 1pt 1pt medium; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 81pt;" valign="top" width="108">
0.02<o></o></td> <td style="border-style: none solid solid none; border-color: -moz-use-text-color windowtext windowtext -moz-use-text-color; border-width: medium 1pt 1pt medium; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 135pt;" valign="top" width="180">
0.03<o></o></td> </tr> </tbody></table>
<o></o>
A typical kit car in good condition emits 13.15³ grams per mile of hydrocarbons (HC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) as compared with a 2005 p***enger vehicle that emits 0.07⁴ grams per mile of HC and NOx. This is nearly 200⁵ times more pollution per mile. A kit car compared to a 2010 model yields over 400⁶ times more pollution per mile.<o></o>
<o></o>
¹***umptions for calculating Kit Car emissions include typical 8 cylinder carbureted engine with no emission controls, similar to that of a 1965 model year vehicle. (i.e., uncontrolled vehicle). This was the last model year before elementary emission controls were used on a production basis. The model ***umes that the typical kit car is well maintained and thus falls into the “normal” emissions regime. These measurements were obtained from the 2002 EMission FACtors (EMFAC) Model using an average annual accrual of 6,000 miles. The EMFAC model takes into consideration a variety of driving scenarios, and testing is performed with complete vehicles on a ch***is dynamometer. Vehicles tested are vehicles loaned by private citizens to the Air Resources Board (ARB) for in-use surveillance testing and several vehicles are tested over the same cycle.<o></o>
<o></o>
² ***umptions for calculating 2005 model year is a composite average across the spectrum of vehicles certified for sale in California which includes computer controlled emission systems, and all size engines. These measurements were obtained from the 2002 Emission FACtors (EMFAC) Model using an average annual accrual of 17,218 miles. <o></o>
^<o></o>
³This figure is the sum of THC-exhaust and NOX-exhaust.<o></o>
<o></o>⁴This figure is exhaust emissions only and does not include significant evaporative emissions.<o></o><o></o>
<!--[if !supportLists]-->⁵<!--[endif]-->This value is derived by dividing 13.15 grams/mile for kit cars by the same data for 2005 model year vehicles, .07 grams/mile.<o></o>
<o></o>
⁶ These values were calculated using EMFAC 2007 v2.3, comparing a composite of 2010 new vehicles to 1966 vehicles, which included emission controls that were not used in 1965 and prior years (uncontrolled). Consequently this calculation used 12.39 as a basis of the 1966 vehicle.<o></o>

 

...and this was the response back from our emissions expert.


Eddie, I forwarded it to Bob. My comments are that I want to know what the 5 gas readings of the cars they were "loaned" were. If they are saying the CO content was as high as the readings indicate the engine should rich foul the plugs every time they start the engine. The NOx reading they are supplying indicates to me that they have the ignition timing way to advanced so I would think the engine would be right on the edge of detonation that would lead to engine damage.

I would like them to supply real exhaust gas ****yzer readings like they make a smog station take on a emissions test. I would also like to see what kind of engine the cars had along with the compression ratio, the cam duration, the ignition timing, the advance curve, the vacuum advance curve (too much ignition advance for the needs of the engine along with a low octane gasoline equals a high NOx reading)and the a/f mixture curve (CO reading).

Too me it looks like they are trying to baffle you with BS since you are questioning their "calculations".

Anyone out there with knowledge in this area, that would like to add comment?

 

They are right of course, but completely ignoring the big picture. How many 2005-2010 cars are on the road and miles driven as compared to "kit cars". I am personally not sure of the exact numbers, but my guess is kit cars could pollute 1000 times more than a 2010 car and the (total cars x miles) comparison would still be an incredibly small fraction and always will be. Even if all new cars made no pollution at all, then technically "kit cars" would pollute infinitely more than new cars, and still have a negligible overall impact on the environment. There just isn't enough 'kit' cars" and old hot rods, etc. being driven enough miles per year to do much anymore - thankfully.

Yes, old cars pollute a lot more than new cars, even if you consider the arguable reuse considerations. But the fact is, there just aren't enough old cars driven enough miles per year to really create much of a measurable effect. We should thank new cars for being so good. But they should also except the reality that there just aren't anywhere near enough old cars on the roads to produce any real negative effect and there is very little chance there ever will be again even if we got 10 times what we would like.

It would be nice to see some actual numbers of 2005-2010 car miles/year compared to kit cars and recalc. their numbers producing a gross pollution/year comparison. Anybody know the number of 2005-2010 cars registered in CA and an average number of miles driven each and also the number of pre 1966 cars and trucks registered and average miles driven? I would seriously bet those numbers are a joke of a comparison.

 

Bump.

 

Can anyone here ***ist with this?

 

Dearborn invented hot rodding. i do hope you can keep your version of it alive California.

 

I too am a native Californian and I fully endorse this statement.
Moreover, I will be calling my representavie (Audra Strickland: 916-319-2037 district 37) in the morning.

Update: As of 11:30 Monday morning, I have left a voice mail at Audra Strickland's Sacramento office telling her my desires for her to vote in the affirmative on AB-1740. And that if she does not, that I won't be voting for her in her upcoming election.

 

There are different sets of numbers being circulated, depending on who's you believe, there are somewhere between 25 and 30 million cars and light trucks registered in California. Of that, I've heard that pre '76 vehicles make up about 1 to 1 1/2 percent.

Several different sources (DMV, AAA, etc,) all different numbers. Hard to know which ones are accurate, but these seem to be the middle of the road.

And yes, we're a drop in the ocean.

 

I have emailed all my reps over the past month in the greter OC area and have yet to recieve any responces. I included my thoughts of how if they were so concerned with the dangers to the environment that our cars produced, that their efforts would be much better focused on the tremendous amount of vehicles, mainly 18 wheeler type trucks, coming up from Mexico. I work in the city of Anaheim and every shift I see a ton of vehicles with Baja CA-MX plates rolling around. Dude those things are heaps and always belching out all kinds of ****. These laws, as most of you easily realize, have nothing to do with environmental preservation, but everything to do with government control and taxation. Henceforth why they don't bother with the cars from MX and keep screwing with us.

 

If she is worried about how much smog comes out of an old car she should go to a factory where a new one is built!I used to work at a nissan factory just making interior door panels this place belched out tons of smog.All for a disposable car that cant be rebuilt!

 

You guys are right on with the comments, common sense just ain't so common anymore. Still, we have made a lot of ground. ***emblyman Jeffries and his staff are awesome, and he knows he has our support. Many of our legislators now know they will be hearing from the car community regarding issues that affect us. Heck, I've been there enough times, I even know how to find the State Capitol now!

A few guys from So Cal and myself are talking about putting together a web page, just to post up to date information concerning anti car legislation in California, possibly other states in the future. It's going to take time and money to set up, but we need a way to be able to quickly inform m*** numbers of folks to call and write when these thing pop up. We also need to inform people which legislators vote for and against us on the issues, and in turn support those with us, and vote out those who don't. I know, I've got better things to do too, but it seems to be the way of the future for hot rodding.

Butcher Boy will be heading up to Sac tomorrow for the Senate hearing. Lets wish him well.

 

Good luck tomorrow! Keeping my fingers crossed for a positive and sensible result.

 

I will be there in the morning to meet with Keith and whoever ends up coming to Sac.
Wish us well ............


Bump>>

 

bump

 

Any news how it went today? Hopefully well.

 

Sorry gang, we lost it. Here's the official response...​

FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION:

Today, AB 1740 (Jeffries), relating to increasing the number of annual kit car registrations from 500 to 750, failed on a party line vote, 3-5. Three Republicans, Vice-Chair Bob Huff (Diamond Bar), Tom Harman (Huntington Beach), and Roy Ashburn (Bakersfield) voted in favor of the measure. Five Democrats, Chair Alan Lowenthal (Long Beach), Christine Kehoe (San Diego), Fran Pavley (Santa Monica), Mark DeSaulnier (Walnut Creek) and Joe Simitian (San Jose) voted against the bill.

***emblyman Jeffries, using arguments compiled from many in the kit car community, cited the fact that these 250 additional kit cars were a minuscule amount of cars compared to the nearly 23 million registered cars in California. Other witnesses from the community worked to debunk the Democratic ***umption that there is a &#8216;typical&#8217; kit car; these witnesses clearly explained that cars range in price from $10,000 to well in excess of that. The witnesses expressed the views of many- that, as a hobby, kit cars are more works of art, and can not be defined as &#8216;typical&#8217; by any means.

In committee, Chairman Lowenthal suggested that instead of increasing the limit to 750, kit cars could simply be retrofitted with modern emissions controls or use a modern &#8216;green&#8217; engine developed by General Motors. The California Air Pollution Control Officers ***ociation cited California Air Resources Board (CARB) studies that claimed that the &#8216;typical&#8217; kit car polluted 200 times more than a regular 2005 model year car. The representative from CARB cited their &#8216;statistics&#8217; claiming that most of the recent cars registered under the SB 100 exemptions were high polluting, large model engines. Senator Kehoe, also citing the fact that retro fits and emissions controls were available for kit cars, announced that she would be unable to support AB 1740.

Unfortunately, this negative vote in the Senate Transportation Committee marks the end of the road for this bill. With the bill 2 votes short of p***age and no Democratic Senators willing to vote for the bill (or suggest any amendments that would allow them to vote for the bill) AB 1740 will not advance any further this year. ***emblyman Jeffries is committed to working on this issue again next year- whether the bill takes a form similar to this or something a bit different.

I personally want to thank each of you who have invested so much time and energy in this bill. AB 1740 would not have advanced this far without your dedicated hard work and outstanding perseverance. Many of you gathered signed letters, made phone calls and contacted elected officials. Thank you for your efforts and p***ion for your hobby.

As always, please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns. Please feel free to contact me with any bill ideas for the next legislative cycle, or if you have any questions about the legislative process. Thank you again for your outstanding efforts.

Andrew Shedlock
Office of ***emblymember Kevin Jeffries

Butcher boy did an excellent job of presenting our case, as did ***emblyman Jeffries, Dave Cahill from the NSRA, and Bob Stearns of the ACCC. My sincere thanks to all of them for sticking it out through a several hour delay.

What this shows, is how far off the path things have gotten. When you can't get a measly 250 more cars per year registered, in a State with 30 million, something just ain't right. We had thousands of supporters, but there are tens of thousands of car enthusiasts. There needs to be a way to connect and support these issues when they arise. Something to think about.

Later in the hearing, the amnesty bill AB-2461 (revised version of AB-619) sailed through the committee unopposed. This is a SEMA sponsored bill, look it up and read it for yourselves, and draw your own conclusions. I am concerned, that it could be amended into a monster before they're finished.

My sincere thanks to all of you that took the time to get involved.

 

Sad, but somewhat predictable. Could you please provide us with a list of those Senators who voted for the bill, so whe can at least thank them.

 

I'd like to thank everyone on our end who worked hard to get this through. I'd also like to thank everyone who worked to keep this civil, respectful and constructive.

At the very least, I, and possibly many others, learned a ton on how all of this works, and feel like I am better informed for it.

Perhaps we can build on what we have learned for the next opportunity that we have to get something like this into the law.

 

The votes from today are above, I'll work on getting a list of the others from earlier hearings.