The Future of SB100 and DMV -->?
 

Chuck, Doug, Morgester, Et Al.

So when I was reading the other DMV/Reg threads --I had an idea on the future of SB100, Vintage/classic car insurance and DMV fees that I would like to bounce off of you guys. (and maybe someone higher up in DMV)


Being a classic car nut, and I had a brainstorm and it hits the insurance industry, related sections of government and DMV.

– I am trying to spec it out so it is describable to folks but here is the generic idea;

Value of Vehicles and how they are determined, emissions results for classic cars ( they are driven less and most pollute less than many think)

A> FEES/VALUES

So when someone buys a classic car there is always;

1. a DMV reported value of the car, which sales taxes and registration fees are collected on a percentage
2. An actual monies paid for the car (x dollars)
3. The amount they tell their insurance carrier it is to be it insured for.

--These are always three different dollar amounts.

–I think the disparity /delta is costing the state of CA about 20M in lost revenue yearly due to under-reported values.

---I also think that the insurance industry is losing 100M in under and over stated classic car values (cheap policies on one side, cashing in on the other)

I also believe that there is value in a properly documented "California Car"

Here is what I am thinking ;

Solution; a “California Certified Classic Vehicle Value“ that is obtained by having the car independently appraised and having that appraisal figure be the cornerstone for DMV based taxes and fees AND insurance coverage.

Now to encourage responsible owners to Insure their cars, give them a break on vehicle registration if they have “Comprehensive” coverage and hit them with a delta (surcharge) if they get the bare minimum.

B> It pays to be green; The other portion of this is emissions, there should be a sliding scale of DMV fees, based on emissions measurement and declaration. if you keep your classic car clean and well tuned you can “test better” and get a lower DMV registration bill. ---If your car is running poorly/badly you test results are worse and you pay more fees to offset your emissions. (think of it as buying your own carbon credits)

This would be based on the "engine" you have so if you have a FE 428, your clean vs dirty rating would be measured against a "Clean 1965 428 spec on file"

C> Specially Constructed Vehicles (SPCN) replicas, reproduced hot rods etc.
This is an important part of the California culture and landscape.

Since I researched how this is being done currently, I was not impressed.

Under SB100 and such there is a limit of 500 “SB100” certificate numbers that allow the vehicle to be registered as a specially constructed car, and be exempt from emissions testing.

-- since there are only 500 certificates available they are all gone on Jan 2nd. I think there is an opportunity for DMV to obtain a SPCN “Fee” say $500 (after all if you are building one of these , $500 wont kill you.) ---and increase the number of certificates available to 5000.

Bonus: if the car passes a basic sniff test (based on “B “ above) you could get a significant % off your fees.

Benefits:

I. You get your SB100 reg without waiting in line in January.
II. Everyone has the same financial information on your car and bases fees in truth (novel concept)
III.You pay less if you keep your emissions down (greenies will love it).
IV.You reduce the loopholes and the pent up needs , hence possible fraudulent activity.
V. Certified values that the insurance co cant change in case of acc.
VI. you establish a certified historical system for SPCN/Classic cars to document its history and increase its value.


Let me know your thoughts.

My Motorvation (haha)-- lets start the dialog, before someone precludes it/ IE "they" preclude it.

Steve

Steve:

Reference the CT Registration Thread, ( Composite is CT name for kit cars/replicas ) starting with page 25 and the new CT emissions requirements as of August 1 :

Quote: It is this EPA hardware mandate which requires with no options or alternatives CT to issue the new Composite emission regulations. The EPA requirement has been in effect at least since 1994. If you care to review their information it is available at

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/imports/kitcar.htm


http://www.clubcobra.com/forums/show...=68699&page=25

CT does not have the SEMA legislation. However, since 2007 the Composites are exempt from emissions testing, but as noted as of August 1,2008, must have the period correct, based upon the year of the engine block, emissions hardware and systems installed, even though there will not be any testing.

The 1994 EPA regulation also mentions the heads must be of the same year as the engine block.

Steve,

I got as far as paragraph "c" and then my head exploded.

Chuck

Steve,

My guess is that majority of people who register their SPCN vehicles in CA are fairly honest about documenting the costs associated with their build and paying their fare share of sales tax. Even if people are cheating left and right, it's hard to put a solid number on the lost revenue and I know that the State won't launch a new program or build the infrastructure unless they're 100% sure they can pay for it.

SB 100 is far from perfect, but it's all we've got right now. The State of CA isn't motiviated to increase the number of SB 100 certs. You could increase the total number of SB 100 certs to 5,000 and charge people $2,000 (which people would pay), but I think it would be tough to find a legislator who is interested in taking up the cause.

As others have suggested, SEMA might be the best bet to lobby and move some sort of reasonable legislation along. My opinion is that we won't see many changes. The State of CA (wrong headed politicians and mis-informed enviromentalists) just flat out doesn't want these cars on the road and will continue to limit the number of cars that can be legally registered.

I agree 100%.

They allow us to register these cars through SB100 as a "Courtesy". In no way will they allow or do they want any increase in the yearly "pool" that has a "Bye" on the emissions.
It is currently under control and is at a manageable level, if it were increased 10 fold it would become unmanageable quite quickly, reminicent of some of the title generating companies.

Sorry Chuck, I owe you a Tylenol. -- Still wish the SB100 thing was easier and could be done without the hassle.

Steve,

It's a bit of a hassle, but not as bad as it could be. Read some of the posts describing what they go through in Australia to register their cars, if you want to feel better about SB100.

And besides, once it's done, you can drive your Cobra virtually year-round. I'm OK with that hassle/pleasure ratio. :)

How is your car coming along, BTW?

Chuck

PS - My head is much better, thanks. :D

Totally agree Rick. The only way they could handle a higher number of registrations would be to integrate the SPCN process into their standard registration system, charge a high "pay to play" fee, and open up the flood gates.

In the end, the State would see an increase in revenue (Fee for registering an SPCN, sales tax, annual registration fees, etc.) with little if any measurable impact to air quality.

Unfortunately, they don't get it and they probably never will.

Car is doing well; My 327F is a longblock right now, EFI gear has been test fit on manifold. I am awaiting a Stewart waterpump from Summit, and a couple of small items. Engine should go in for testfit this week/weekend. Trans is being mocked up in place. Still waiting on my driveshaft from steve in reno. --more news when i see yah!

Steve

All we have to do is locate, nominate and elect a "car guy" as Governor!

Jay Leno is stepping down from the Tonight Show next Spring. Hmmm. :D

Just hear-say at this time, but...... I heard that Ca may have an option in the works that wouldmake more legal registrations easier to obtain in Ca. I heard this 2nd hand from someone who is supsed to be up a ways in the dmv. I guess we needto just wait and see.......and hope Ca pulls its head out of the sand. I don't think a additional fee would detour many of us for this hobby.

Let's not forgot - it's all about the money...

The State gets Federal dollars, based on the condition that the State has a maximum of "X Number" of "Spare the Air" days. Those in Sacramento really want this money, so they look at many ways to promote clean air in order to help secure this Federal money. The State believes that Automobiles are the largest contributor to our "bad" air and are the easiest targets to legislate against. Given this, there's no way that the State is going to increase the number of annual Smog Exempt "Get Out of Jail Free" cards - they've given us 500 and they feel that we should be grateful that we have these 500. Any State Representative who presents a proposal to increase this number will probably risk re-election and committee appointments - so no one is gonna do this.

I'm interested to learn what Steve is reporting, when the facts are available...

Happy Motoring,
Randy...

Spoke with a friend in higher up in CA govt this PM, --we are going to start looking for a legislator to speak with and see if this makes sense to pursue.

More news when it happens.

-Steve

Steve,

Here's a link to SEMA's directory of State legislators that are part of the State Automotive Enthusiast Leadership Caucus.

http://www.semasan.com/main/main.aspx?id=61681

California
Senator Dick Ackerman
Senator Ron Calderon
Senator Dave Cogdill
Senator Dennis Hollingsworth
Senator Bob Margett
Senator Tom McClintock
Senator Gloria Negrete-McLeod
Senator George Runner
Assemblymember Joel Anderson
Assemblymember Jim Beall
Assemblymember Mike Duvall
Assemblymember Felipe Fuentes
Assemblymember Bonnie Garcia
Assemblymember Martin Garrick
Assemblymember Bob Huff
Assemblymember Kevin Jeffries
Assemblymember Rick Keene
Assemblymember Doug La Malfa
Assemblymember Roger Niello
Assemblymember Nicole Parra
Assemblymember Alberto Torrico
Assemblymember Michael Villines

Start writing man! :D

Randy,

I read in the San Jose Mercury today that the Bay Area had exceeded the new (tougher) federal air quality guidelines 11 days this year. According to the article, under the old standard last year, the Bay Area would have only been in violation on one day. Fires also added two days to this year's totals.

Like you said, cars are the easy target, but there's no scientific evidence to back it up (i.e. Registering x number of hot rods per year driving an average of x miles per year will result in an increase of .000x% in smog levels).

steve...........do you have your SB100?

Nope. January 2009 is my SB 100.

---We are putting my motor in tomorrow however! ---will be a week or so before we can fire it up (waiting on fuel injection parts) but it should be drivable by 10.1.2008 or so.

Steve