Connecticut: Registration, Inspection & Emissions

[SJK2]

Don,
A thought would be, can all who will attend meet up somehow there for combined strategy.??

Also what do you think of this used w/perm letter:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Joint Transportation Committee Member:

By this letter, I am requesting your support for legislation (H.B. No.5790) to exempt composite vehicles from emissions testing including street rods and custom cars, kit cars and replicas.


This legislation represents a number of important benefits to a huge number of Connecticut residents. The Connecticut street rod and custom vehicle community is an important part of our State.

Street rods and custom cars are the same crowd pleasers that participate in exhibitions and as parade vehicles, and whose owners regularly contribute to charities and civic events. H.B. 5790 simply recognize the immeasurable amount of time, money and thought automotive hobbyists invest in their cars. For many vehicle enthusiasts in Connecticut and throughout America, building, maintaining and enjoying their vehicles is a favorite pastime. This legislation represents an opportunity to acknowledge their commitment to the hobby and to protect it for future generations.

Based on model legislation crafted by the Specialty Equipment market Association (SEMA), similar bills have been enacted in Illinois (2002), Missouri (2004), Rhode Island (2004), Montana (2005) and Maine (2005). A version of the bill was also enacted in Hawaii (2004). The New York, Tennessee, New Hampshire, Virginia, Wyoming and Arkansas Legislatures have already introduced the SEMA model for the 2006 legislative session.

Thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions, or require additional information please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,
xxx
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Don]

Steve, good thought, but by Friday morning @ 9:00 the 50 copies of the written testimony will need to be prepared.

Difficult to determine what is valued more, the written or the speaking session, especially with 34 members on the House Transportation Committee. Remeber that all members of the Transportation Committee may or may not be present during the entire Public Hearing due to conflicts with other Committee schedules etc., implies the importance of the written testimony to inform all 34.

There is no right or wrong approach, but when I was on a Corporate Public Affairs Committee, we encouraged everyone to use their own words and thoughts to convey the message which is implied in the title of HB 5790,:

Title: AN ACT CONCERNING COMPOSITE VEHICLES.

Statement of Purpose: To exempt composite vehicles from emissions testing because such vehicles are only driven a few miles per year.

The thought being that if every written document was similar or even exactly the same ( resembles a petition ), there could be a tendency to ignore the document, not knowing the preferences and thought process of 34 individuals .

The point is valid in mentioning what other states are doing.

[Cashburn]

Anyone happen to know the emissions from a single lawnmower? In comparison to the "accepted levels" of 2007 composites?

[SJK2]

Jay,
Is that with or without FartCan mufflers

[Don]

RE: Public Hearing Update:

* Written Testimony: 6 individuals, SEMA, Back Draft Racing and ERA

* Speaking: A total of 7

* No Public Agency testimony

* All testimony supported 5790, no negative testimony

* A few questions asked for clarification on the general topic of kit cars and choice of engines between those period correct or modern

* Claire Janowski was present and briefly met with the group to obtain a bettter understanding of Composites, selection of engine and modeling a kit car after a specific time period, such as 1965 & 1966 Cobras.

* Next step is internal to the Committee for a discussion. It is possible the Committee might contact either a speaker or someone submitting written testimony for additional information or clarification.

* Do not have a date when the Committee will vote.

Good Start !!

[Cashburn]

I think there was a rocky start, but there was definite momentum at the end of the hearing. It also looks as though the concept of altering the Bill to allow replicas to be registered as the year they intend to replicate is the direction we are going ... VERY GOOD.

It's not over, it just started. Your written testimony can still be submitted from what I understand and they will get it.

There were 50 bills on the agenda today. Only 10 or so had any testimony. And 7 speakers provided testimony for HB 5790. It was a strong statement.

I feel the written testimony will have the greatest impact overall, so get it in.

[SJK2]

I concur with both Don & Jay,
Its imperative that we all follow up and support.....

[Cashburn]

Just want to clarify the "rocky start" was not on the part of any supporters' testimony, more so the awkward nature of the hearing process. Order by signup is very challenging for the flow and depth of the discussions.

[Cashburn]

Originally Posted by SJK2

I concur with both Don & Jay,
Its imperative that we all follow up and support.....

At this juncture it is important to contact members of the Transportation Committee and voice your support. Once we get approval by the committee it then becomes important to contact your representative for your district and request their support when the bill is heard in the full house.

The tact to take is that we would like to see these vehicles registered and held to the standards of the vehicle they intend to recreate.

If it is a '34 Ford then the standards are safety and no emissions (over 25 years)

If it is a '65 Cobra then the standards are safety and no emissions (over 25 years)

If it is a replica of a 1990 Lambo then the standard should be safety and emissions based on 1990 standards.

The concept to stress here is that the architecture of the original would not support all advancements made to vehicles since its creation without a significant investment and the loss of the original intent. This hurts the hobbyists and the preservation of automotive history.

[Don]

The 34 members of the Transportation Committee

http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/menu/Membe...=TRA&doc_type=

At any one time, there were approx 12 to 15 members present at the Public Hearing. Every member receives a copy of the written testimony

If you have not submitted the written support for the Bill:

FAX: 869-240-0021: Direct the FAX to Antonio in the House Transportation Committee and mention HB 5790

e-mail to Antonio:

antonio.peronace@cga.ct.gov

[Don]

For HB5790, there were 9 written documents submitted, as of 9:00 AM on 2/9, even though there were three ways of submitting, in person, fax, or e-mail. The 9 came from the Connecticut Council of Car Clubs ( 4Cs ), Vintage Motorsports ( BackDraft Racing ), ERA, SEMA and 4 individuals.

We were able to take copies of all the written testimony. I was very disappointed that after all the Reply ,Posting and View traffic on this Thread regarding the topic there were only 9 written documents submitted. The reference for this Thread had also been posted on the FFR Forum by a Club Cobra member.

It is recognized that individuals might have sent e-mails to Legislators and/or Claire Janowski which would also have supported the initiative . There would be no way of knowing how many selected the alternative. In hindsight, after gaining experience with the process, appears all three methods, contacting a specific Legislator and the Bill sponsor , and providing testimony for use by the entire Committee, are needed to gain maximum exposure.

Another unknown is how many of the approx 300 Composite owners in CT have Cobras.,GT 40s etc and/or follow the Club Cobra and FFR Forums. Another hindsight , finding all the other Forums in CT, other than Cobras , that have Composite members.

The value of written testimony :

* Allows all 34 members of the Transportation Committee to become informed. At any one time during the Public Hearing only 12 to 15 members of the Committee were present due to schedule conflicts and/or other Committee assignments.
* There is a discussion reference for the Senators and Representatives to use when the entire Committee meets and takes a vote on reporting the Bill out of Committee
* Provides a variety of individual personalized viewpoints on the same subject
* Etc., etc.,

I have asked the LOB Transportation Committee office if written testimony can still be submitted, If I hear back, I will post the reply.

For Bills other than HB5790, I did notice during the Public hearing that Legislators, not on the Transportation Committee, testified. If anyone knows Legislators that have similar interests as we have and might also be of assistance, they also should be contacted.

For the future, if this initiative is not successful , there will be nothing to prevent additional reductions in the emission standard for Composites registered after 2007. Included is the possibility of making the future standards retroactive, such as eliminating the 2000 standard and adopting the 2005 standard for Composites that were already registered, as noted below:

2000: HC 484, CO 5.09 ( eliminated )
2005: HC 800, CO 4.00
2006: HC 220, CO 1.20
2007: HC 220, CO 1.20

[Cashburn]

If it is not clear from Don's post here you go:

If you live in CT and have not gotten off your arse and done something to voice support for this bill (phone, email, written, etc.) and this includes current owners already registered (you can see they have already gone retroactive on the levels) ... you have no one to blame but yourself when you cannot own or operate these vehicles in CT.

I'm already looking at shop space in Scottsdale ... would love to stay and support the area but you guys have got to step up.

[Clark Creswell]

When you refer to written testimony, precisely what do we need to get out? I've hand written, e-mailed, and called, my legislator (Elizbeth Ritter) and done the same to Janice. Presently getting to Hartford with my work schedule is nearly impossible.

[Don]

Clark, good point, some suggestions: As mentioned, there was no way to determine those that have contacted individual Legislators, However, reporting the Bill out of Committee is the first essential step, otherwise all others would not have an opportunity to vote.

Regarding the written testimony, a previous Reply, Number 220, mentioined the e-mail address and fax number of the Transportation Committee Clerk who would have provided a copy to all 34 members of the Transportation Committee prior to the Public Hearing, if the document could not have been delivered in person.

*** Dave, Newsletter Editor of The Voice, Connecticut Council of Car Clubs has provided the following summary. Dave has been an active participant representing the 4Cs. He testified at the Public Hearing.

Regarding HB5790:

In the simplest terms, the intent of the proposed markup would be to
eliminate emissions testing for composite vehicles. Antique and modified
antique vehicles 25 years old and older are already exempt from emissions
testing.

The proposal adds the definition of a composite motor vehicle that
is consistent with what DMV is currently using (which states a vehicle that
is altered such that it does not resemble any production vehicle). The
existing modified antique vehicle definition is proposed to include motor
vehicles manufactured to resemble a historic vehicle to be consistent with
the SEMA's model bill implemented in other states.

These replica vehicles would use the year and make the vehicle resembles as the model year for
registration and emission purposes (and hence would be exempt from
emissions testing if they resemble a vehicle 25 years old or older).

Only if the reconstructed vehicle did not resemble any production vehicle would the classification of Composite ever be applied going forward if our
proposed definitions are accepted. If our proposed definitions are not
accepted by the state, then our proposal contains the fall back position
that composite vehicles are exempt.

The above can be used with an e-mail, personal contact , phone call and letter, along with your own choice of words which is important. There are mixed opinions on the effectiveness of the petition approach.

Use HB 5790 in the subject line of a letter or e-mail

*** The 34 members of the Transportation Committee, click on the symbol for the e-mail addresses:

http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/menu/Membe...=TRA&doc_type=

I have asked but did not receive a response if there is a single e-mail address that will include all members of the Transporation Committee

Contacting, letter and/or e-mail, the Committee Co-Chairs would be an alternative, with a CC to Claire Janowski.

*** RENEW1, he initiated the filing of the original Bill, has contacted Claire Janowski who is on the Transportation Committee and the sponsor of HB5790 asking what our next steps should be.

*** The web site , by town , to find the Legislator in your District

http://www.cga.ct.gov/maps/townlist.asp

Clicking on the District number will provide the home address and phone number

*** Does anyone know, CT Senators or Representatives who are auto hobbyist that would support the initiative and contact the co-chairs of the Transportation Committee and lobby others in support of HB 5790 ?

Hope this helps..............

[SJK2]

Hat's Of To Virginia and let's Go CT.

http://www.ffcobra.com/ubb/ultimateb.../1.html#000006

[Commodore]

Looks like RI is getting their act together with help from SEMA. They are just a few signatures away from passing a fair 'replica car' registration bill. Once the RI bill is signed into law maybe CT will see the bright light shining near their eastern border and join the party. Someone over on the FFR website just posted a full explanation of what transpired in RI. Worth a look.
RB

[RENEW1]

Well folks wev'e made it to the next hoop. The Transportation Committee voted unamimously to procede with draft of HB5790 to be presented to the full house. We still have a long way to go. I would expect contact soon with rep Janowski. Did some searching around today, and if we get the bill approved, I think Ct DEP must get an exception from federal EPA. EPA has done that for Arizona recently. We are in a "non-obtainable" area for clean air. I believe this may make getting approval harder. That's looking ahead, but we have a ways to go to get there. Some of you should know that "Don" has lost his PC connection to the internet. Hope it gets fixed soon

[RENEW1]

Well folks wev'e passed the first hurdle for HB5790. The Transportation Committee has voted to draft the bill to present to the full house. There is a long way to go.Once drafted I think we will get to see it before it hits the street.

[Cashburn]

Fantastic news. Step 1 of many is done. Keep us posted on everything. We need to keep the momentum.

[Smoking Cobra]

After reading the post about North Carolina i better enjoy my car for the next 3 years before i move there or just leave it registered here. Did not think there could be a place worst than Ct.
joeg