OFF THE WIRE
This is the future – WE WILL BE HUNTED AND HARESSED. All the BEACH CITIES in California do this already – so when funds are low – and they’re looking for ways to raise them – and the general public don’t care – we’re a TARGET. I see it as 2 sided – there’s dipshits that crank their pipes at 3am – get up to go to work and let the bike idle for 10 minutes with straight pipes. You know what? I don’t like that shit either – I barely sleep as it is. I coast my Thunderheader to the main street before 8am – I coast in late at night – some people are Fucking Stupid – and we’re all going to pay the PRICE........
ML&R
Screwdriver
After they originally put out somewhat incorrect information, I provided this to the MRF last month, and they are supposed to be running it in the current MRF Reports. Feel free to distribute as you see fit.
~Tony~
ABATE, of California
SB-435 - Clearing Up The Misconceptions
January 7, 2011
Due to the many false reports and misconceptions about SB-435, it looks like it is time to clear the misunderstandings and false impressions people have concerning SB-435 and ABATE of California’s role in shaping this bill. Contrary to all of the rumors, ABATE of California did not roll over on SB-435 and in fact, was the only major SMRO to oppose SB-435 until June 28, 2010 when it was heard in the Assembly Transportation Committee. At the hearing, last minute resistance was offered by other groups who showed up to testify in opposition, and a few other groups and individuals continued to oppose the bill as it made its way back to the Senate and Governor’s desk, where it was eventually signed.
So let’s look at what happened with SB-435, and how things really transpired. SB-435 was first introduced on February 26, 2009, by State Senator Fran Pavley, (D), Agoura Hills as a bill to institute biennial smog checks for motorcycles. After vigorous opposition to SB-435 by Jim Lombardo, ABATE of California’s lobbyist, SB-435 was turned into a two-year bill and allowed to pass out of the Senate with the provision that Senator Pavley amend the bill and remove the smog check language. In Senator Pavley’s own words, “ABATE’s lobbyist killed my smog bill on the Senate floor.” Accordingly, the record reflects several amendments, which were offered by the bill author before she amended it from a smog check bill into an EPA noise label match-up bill.
The bottom line here is that California’s motorcyclists will not be burdened with a unwarranted and restrictive smog check bill, thanks to the determined efforts of ABATE of California. Once again – NO SMOG CHECKS for motorcycles in California thanks to ABATE of California and Jim Lombardo. Moreover, in the final version of the bill, which was signed into law, all motorcycles currently on the road up to model year 2013 are grand-fathered in. That is a huge concession that ABATE of California was able to achieve on behalf of the over 800,000-registered motorcycle owners in the state. Just guessing, I would estimate that this will save the average owner with after market pipes at least $600 to $1,000.
On June 28, 2010, the version of SB-435 that passed out of the Assembly Transportation Committee is the one which basically was signed into law by the Governor. With just a few weeks prior notice, ABATE of California was able to mobilize to meet the threat posed by the amended bill. The amended SB-435 called for imposition of the 1983 EPA noise label match-up language that has been in effect at the Federal level for 27 years. In addition, it called for a $300 fine, a moving violation, a point on a driving record, and it would have allowed any law enforcement officer, including meter maids to cite motorcyclists, even if the motorcycle was parked. One of the amendments ABATE of California was apprehensive would be offered was the imposition of SAE J2825, developed by the AMA & MIC.
Incidentally, both the AMA and MIC were lobbying to get SAE J2825 introduced into SB-435, and that is a bullet that California’s motorcyclists were able to dodge. In a test performed by ABATE personnel certified in the J2825 testing procedure, virtually every after market set of pipes failed the test, which leads those of us in ABATE of California to have little faith in J2825’s objective standards. Moreover, J2825 would have led to roadside testing and every county and city with officers equipped with db meters would be pulling over and citing motorcyclists given the sorry state of the budget in California. ABATE of California urges all SMRO’s to take a hard look at J2825 before signing onto that program. ONE MORE TIME -- SAE J 2825 will lead to increased roadside checks! Is that really what we need or want?
While we dodged a bullet with J2825, SB-435 as amended contained plenty of anti-motorcycling language and as written, the bill would have affected all motorcycles from model year 2000 forward. Through the efforts of ABATE of California through our lobbyist, Jim Lombardo, several concessions were achieved that removed the most unfriendly and anti-motorcycle language from the bill. Through the joint efforts of ABATE’s Jim Lombardo and John Paliwoda of the California Motorcycle Dealer’s Association, the effective date of imposition of SB-435 was rolled back to 2013, and all motorcycles currently on the road are grand-fathered in. Additionally, due to ABATE’s efforts, violations were changed from a moving violation to a fix-it-ticket, it was dropped to a $50 fine from $300, and it is a secondary violation, meaning that it can’t be the primary reason for an enforcement stop.
As can be plainly seen, the final version of SB-435 was substantially altered by ABATE of California and while we would like to have seen the bill die in committee, we did not enjoy the same support against an anti-noise bill that we did against a smog check bill. Furthermore, the co-author of SB-435 was the Chairwoman of Assembly Transportation Committee, and we knew going into the bill hearing that we simply did not have the votes to kill this bill. While there were some in the ranks of the organization that wished to pursue a hard line stance, the vote from our Political Action Committee determined that we would pursue the course of seeking to modify the bill and in this we were successful given the concessions that were achieved. Had we followed a hard line approach and simply hoped we would defeat SB-435 in committee, we would today be facing a far different reality today than we are.
While there is much Monday morning quarterbacking going on regarding SB-435, ABATE of California is confident that we achieved the best possible outcome for the California motorcycling community that was possible given the difficult circumstances we faced. Two last items on the topic of SB-435 are that this bill is likely to have the unintended consequence of driving up the fair market price for pre-2013 used motorcycles due to the fact that they are grand-fathered in. Another consequence that other states facing similar legislation should be aware of is the 2013 date, which was extended to allow the manufacturers to comply. While we still have two years before SB-435 goes into effect, other states facing similar legislation will not have the same grace period if this legislation should come up in their respective states after January 2013.
Anthony Jaime
Executive Director
ABATE of California
This is the future – WE WILL BE HUNTED AND HARESSED. All the BEACH CITIES in California do this already – so when funds are low – and they’re looking for ways to raise them – and the general public don’t care – we’re a TARGET. I see it as 2 sided – there’s dipshits that crank their pipes at 3am – get up to go to work and let the bike idle for 10 minutes with straight pipes. You know what? I don’t like that shit either – I barely sleep as it is. I coast my Thunderheader to the main street before 8am – I coast in late at night – some people are Fucking Stupid – and we’re all going to pay the PRICE........
ML&R
Screwdriver
After they originally put out somewhat incorrect information, I provided this to the MRF last month, and they are supposed to be running it in the current MRF Reports. Feel free to distribute as you see fit.
~Tony~
ABATE, of California
SB-435 - Clearing Up The Misconceptions
January 7, 2011
Due to the many false reports and misconceptions about SB-435, it looks like it is time to clear the misunderstandings and false impressions people have concerning SB-435 and ABATE of California’s role in shaping this bill. Contrary to all of the rumors, ABATE of California did not roll over on SB-435 and in fact, was the only major SMRO to oppose SB-435 until June 28, 2010 when it was heard in the Assembly Transportation Committee. At the hearing, last minute resistance was offered by other groups who showed up to testify in opposition, and a few other groups and individuals continued to oppose the bill as it made its way back to the Senate and Governor’s desk, where it was eventually signed.
So let’s look at what happened with SB-435, and how things really transpired. SB-435 was first introduced on February 26, 2009, by State Senator Fran Pavley, (D), Agoura Hills as a bill to institute biennial smog checks for motorcycles. After vigorous opposition to SB-435 by Jim Lombardo, ABATE of California’s lobbyist, SB-435 was turned into a two-year bill and allowed to pass out of the Senate with the provision that Senator Pavley amend the bill and remove the smog check language. In Senator Pavley’s own words, “ABATE’s lobbyist killed my smog bill on the Senate floor.” Accordingly, the record reflects several amendments, which were offered by the bill author before she amended it from a smog check bill into an EPA noise label match-up bill.
The bottom line here is that California’s motorcyclists will not be burdened with a unwarranted and restrictive smog check bill, thanks to the determined efforts of ABATE of California. Once again – NO SMOG CHECKS for motorcycles in California thanks to ABATE of California and Jim Lombardo. Moreover, in the final version of the bill, which was signed into law, all motorcycles currently on the road up to model year 2013 are grand-fathered in. That is a huge concession that ABATE of California was able to achieve on behalf of the over 800,000-registered motorcycle owners in the state. Just guessing, I would estimate that this will save the average owner with after market pipes at least $600 to $1,000.
On June 28, 2010, the version of SB-435 that passed out of the Assembly Transportation Committee is the one which basically was signed into law by the Governor. With just a few weeks prior notice, ABATE of California was able to mobilize to meet the threat posed by the amended bill. The amended SB-435 called for imposition of the 1983 EPA noise label match-up language that has been in effect at the Federal level for 27 years. In addition, it called for a $300 fine, a moving violation, a point on a driving record, and it would have allowed any law enforcement officer, including meter maids to cite motorcyclists, even if the motorcycle was parked. One of the amendments ABATE of California was apprehensive would be offered was the imposition of SAE J2825, developed by the AMA & MIC.
Incidentally, both the AMA and MIC were lobbying to get SAE J2825 introduced into SB-435, and that is a bullet that California’s motorcyclists were able to dodge. In a test performed by ABATE personnel certified in the J2825 testing procedure, virtually every after market set of pipes failed the test, which leads those of us in ABATE of California to have little faith in J2825’s objective standards. Moreover, J2825 would have led to roadside testing and every county and city with officers equipped with db meters would be pulling over and citing motorcyclists given the sorry state of the budget in California. ABATE of California urges all SMRO’s to take a hard look at J2825 before signing onto that program. ONE MORE TIME -- SAE J 2825 will lead to increased roadside checks! Is that really what we need or want?
While we dodged a bullet with J2825, SB-435 as amended contained plenty of anti-motorcycling language and as written, the bill would have affected all motorcycles from model year 2000 forward. Through the efforts of ABATE of California through our lobbyist, Jim Lombardo, several concessions were achieved that removed the most unfriendly and anti-motorcycle language from the bill. Through the joint efforts of ABATE’s Jim Lombardo and John Paliwoda of the California Motorcycle Dealer’s Association, the effective date of imposition of SB-435 was rolled back to 2013, and all motorcycles currently on the road are grand-fathered in. Additionally, due to ABATE’s efforts, violations were changed from a moving violation to a fix-it-ticket, it was dropped to a $50 fine from $300, and it is a secondary violation, meaning that it can’t be the primary reason for an enforcement stop.
As can be plainly seen, the final version of SB-435 was substantially altered by ABATE of California and while we would like to have seen the bill die in committee, we did not enjoy the same support against an anti-noise bill that we did against a smog check bill. Furthermore, the co-author of SB-435 was the Chairwoman of Assembly Transportation Committee, and we knew going into the bill hearing that we simply did not have the votes to kill this bill. While there were some in the ranks of the organization that wished to pursue a hard line stance, the vote from our Political Action Committee determined that we would pursue the course of seeking to modify the bill and in this we were successful given the concessions that were achieved. Had we followed a hard line approach and simply hoped we would defeat SB-435 in committee, we would today be facing a far different reality today than we are.
While there is much Monday morning quarterbacking going on regarding SB-435, ABATE of California is confident that we achieved the best possible outcome for the California motorcycling community that was possible given the difficult circumstances we faced. Two last items on the topic of SB-435 are that this bill is likely to have the unintended consequence of driving up the fair market price for pre-2013 used motorcycles due to the fact that they are grand-fathered in. Another consequence that other states facing similar legislation should be aware of is the 2013 date, which was extended to allow the manufacturers to comply. While we still have two years before SB-435 goes into effect, other states facing similar legislation will not have the same grace period if this legislation should come up in their respective states after January 2013.
Anthony Jaime
Executive Director
ABATE of California