Carpokes

Just got my notification that I need to get my ‘85 smog checked so hopefully Leno’s Law will be in effect for next time.

Came upon this note in Courthouse News. Looks like Leno's Law is out of committee and headed to appropriations for a blessing before going to the floor.

See: https://www.courthousenews.com/lenos-la ... a-capitol/

dr bob wrote: Tue Apr 08, 2025 8:44 pm Came upon this note in Courthouse News. Looks like Leno's Law is out of committee and headed to appropriations for a blessing before going to the floor.

See: https://www.courthousenews.com/lenos-la ... a-capitol/

We shall see. This one is getting more traction than the others it seems, which is great, but I'll believe it when I see it.

Fun fact, there are 40 members of the California senate and 20 of them sponsored this bill, so it would seem likely to pass the senate vote. It would then need to be approved by the 80-person assembly, which is anyone's guess. The assembly has 60 democrats, and 20 republicans, so it would need pretty strong bipartisan support.

PLEASE!

Crossing my fingers, this would be a dream.

The Senate Appropriations Committee just considered Leno's Law this morning and summarily moved it into the 'suspense file.' One person from the air quality board appeared in opposition to the bill, and no one appeared in support. Comments were supposed to be limited to financial impacts, but the air quality person seemed more interested in just registering general opposition, claiming without details that there would be extra costs relating to keeping the air clean. The committee had a long list of bills to consider and the chairwoman said all of them were suspense file candidates. The 'suspense file' is a notorious and clandestine process where the legislators size up a bill's prospects for being approved and then either send it to the senate for a vote -- if it has the votes -- or let it die in suspense -- all out of the public eye. Overall, the meeting today was a non-event I'd say, with no real tea leaves to read. For Leno's Law to pass, it will need to emerge from the suspense file at some point for a vote by the Senate, then be approved by the Assembly, and then be signed by the Governor. It's a long way to Tipperary.

https://calmatters.org/politics/2025/04 ... led-bills/

One might question why this bill was ever in Appropriations. The impact on state revenue is minimum at worst. The state loses out of some testing revenue, something that's, theoretically anyway, a zero 'profit' issue for the state. There's a Catch-22 in here somewhere -- "We don't actually make any profit on the Smog Test program, but we'll lose significantly if this very tiny fraction of that testing is eliminated."

-----

Several plus 1 decades ago, an issue came up regarding bridge toll revenue for the Desmond Thomas Bridge over Los Angeles harbor between Terminal Island to the SE and San Pedro to the NW. The toll had been set up originally just after the stone age, to pay off the bonds that financed construction of the bridge. Long after the bonds were fully repaid though, the tolls continued. Some of us asked why. The revenue from the tolls now just covered the cost of toll collection. This is pre-FastPass, so it was all meet-and-greet with the attendant in the booth. And all cash. It took a while, but the final agreement was that as natural attrition and retirement thinned the ranks of toll collectors to the point where staffing wasn't sufficient, they just wouldn't be replaced. In a few years, we paid tolls in only one direction. Then finally, the toll was completely eliminated as the last few retired. Or went off on disability with lung issues related to breathing tons of diesel truck exhaust fumes over their years in the booth.

Continuity is bureaucracy's Prime Directive, with only funding expansion as a second option.

It seems the appropriations committee reviews nearly all bills, since they claim to cover all bills with 'any' financial impact on the state. On that basis, it's hard to conceive of a bill that couldn't have any financial impact at all. If one can think up some colorable financial impact, however much of a stretch, then it seems to be fair game for the committee. Even the 1997 SB389 Bill, designating San Joaquin Soil as the official state soil of California, should have gone to the committee says the google AI bot. I don't think we learned anything about the bill's prospects today.
Today's air research board representative seemed to be saying that eliminating smog checks on old cars would result in other costs to mitigate whatever impact it has on air quality. Using that logic, my wife's new Subaru will cost me $250k, because I will now need to get a PTS turbo S to maintain a pleasing mix of colors in the garage.

In my casual estimation, I'm sure your dealer will be willing to order a new PTS Turbo S for you to exactly match the color and quality of the paint on your wife's Subie. Do be sure to get a short video clip of the agent's eyebrow raise and maybe even an eyeroll. It will be AWD, right?

----
Maybe we need a Taycan or a new eMacan to offset the air-quality impact of all the 'old' cars we drive.