Need name of Lady in charge of SB100 Program in Sacramento

[Randy Rosenberg]

Byron, run (don't walk) to another DMV office. There's no need for you to continue a fight like this against such stubborn incompetence. In addition, you don't them screwing up your title. So, do yourself a favor and go to another DMV office. My only experience is with the one in Fremont, and I know that the one in the Pleasanton/Dublin/San Ramon area is very familiar with SB100. Some other guys may have a recommendation for an office in the South Bay, closer to you.

Good luck,
Randy R...

[ByronRACE]

Originally Posted by Randy Rosenberg

Byron, run (don't walk) to another DMV office. There's no need for you to continue a fight like this against such stubborn incompetence. In addition, you don't them screwing up your title. So, do yourself a favor and go to another DMV office. My only experience is with the one in Fremont, and I know that the one in the Pleasanton/Dublin/San Ramon area is very familiar with SB100. Some other guys may have a recommendation for an office in the South Bay, closer to you.

Good luck,
Randy R...

The LG DMV is 5 minutes from my place of work, hence the continued self abuse. It also bothers me to think that there are likely many others like me that have wasted valuable sequence numbers...because of this office, and Sandy Hastings. For that reason alone, I'll pursue it as far as I can.

[jmarsey]

Folks,

I went through this issue back in '04 and was scolded by Sacramento for not having my car ready in the year of my sequence number, for whatever bs-excuse I gave them.

The original intent of the SB-100 process, and I believe still is, was to allocate sequence numbers to cars that were reasonably ready to be registered in that particular year, and not to uncompleted cars that might get, or planned to get, finished in said year. Many of us took advantage of this loop hole by securing a number in January and registering our cars in December. Some of us even got “extensions”, which don’t exist, into the following year. You just paid the next years fees and hoped the sequence number went through when they sent it to Sacramento the day you were trying to get a license plate.

The point is, even if Sac is currently saying they are honoring all unused sequence numbers of any year, it was clearly not the intension at the conception of SB-100 . Also, not fair to the folks who have turn key cars and have to wait because of guys like us lucky enough to secure a number with a garage full of cobra parts and a lot of hope.

If folks start thinking all they have to do is get a sequence number and it’s good for any year in the future, there won't be any numbers left for the ones who actually have cars.

Don't be too hard on old Sandy H, even if she is a b#*%h. She is actually doing us a favor by motivating you to get your car done. We are the ones at fault by not registering our cars in the given year and confusing the process.

Get your cars done and registered ASAP before they change or cut SB-100. I was lucky but didn't exactly play by the rules either.

For what it's worth, John

[ByronRACE]

I'd like to actually read senate bill 100 if anyone knows where to find it.

According to the Sacramento "in charge" contact I spoke with in late 2004, the purpose of the allocation process was to regulate the allocation to 500 a year per SB-100. Nothing more, nothing less. She said at that time that the spirit of SB-100 was simply to regulate allocation, not enforce completion. We talked about this at length.