"Mahler9th-
“I see words like "oppressive, arbitrary and capricious," and "tyranny," and yet it does not appear, at least to me, that folks using such words have any idea what happened to this Bill.”
I appreciate you having prefaced this with the advisory that amounts to your concession that most of us posting here are not lawyers. Nevertheless, the minutia of the law is not what concerns us but rather the effect of the law, not the law itself."
I don't know who "us" is. Don't care.
To what "law" do you refer? To what "law" did someone refer in this thread using terms like "tyranny?"
There are existing laws.
Do folks know what they are?
I was not sure so I posted that, for example, my 1975 911 is smog exempt. It has been smog exempt for many years... but for the first few years after I bought it it was not exempt.
I had nothing to do with that change.
SB 712 was an attempt to change at least some of the existing laws.
SB 712 was not "shot down."
Not sure what you mean by "minutia."
Seems black and white to me.
CA house and senate members voted to approve/move SB 712 forward,
not "shoot it down."
As part of their processes, folks in favor and folks opposed got to "weigh in."
Folks can watch some of the related public comments via you tube videos. I posted a link to one video that included Leno.
SB 712 appears to have gotten stopped at the "appropriations" step.
That appears to be a step where a number of known/presumed/assumed financial impacts are discussed. Likely not for just a single Bill.
I have NOT vetted this information but consider this possibility (from an AI search):
"For example, during the 2023-24 Legislative Session, the Assembly Appropriations Committee reviewed 5,525 bills, demonstrating the considerable workload of the committee that crosses all policy jurisdictions."
The "suspense file": A large number of bills are quietly killed by placing them on the committee's "suspense file". For example, in April 2025, several hundred bills were moved to the suspense file in the Assembly and Senate appropriations committees.
I don't think one needs to be a lawyer to understand that this part of the sausage-making process, and sausage business management process exists.
And I don't think there is any "minutia" to consider.
I have been using the same smog shop for about 10 years. Right at the beginning, the owners helped my next door neighbor. Her husband had died and left a 1986 911 to his granddaughter, who was at UCLA at the time. Neither the widow, nor the daughter or granddaughter could drive a manual transmission vehicle, and it was a bit hard to get that car to pass.
We endured.
The widow and I were so thankful that we bought a bottle of champagne for the owners because they were just getting married.
Now they have three daughters and an expanded business.
When they moved into a larger space, it was a real pain for them to move their rolling smog rig, and apparently maintenance costs have risen sharply.
I don't think the gubment requires them to offer rolling smog services.
So let's see.
Leno's testimony suggests that in his area (likely SoCal), it is getting harder and harder to find rolling smog shops.
I suspect the writing is on the wall...
Here is a quote from an AI search:
"Q: Are smog shops with ability to test older cars getting harder to find in CA"
A: Yes, it is getting harder to find smog shops in California with the specialized equipment needed to test older cars built before 2000
. The state's smog program is shifting towards modern diagnostic methods for newer vehicles, leading to a decline in the availability and maintenance of older testing machines."
Here is a link to some related info:
https://www.bar.ca.gov/arsc/newsletters/newsletter/spring-2025/exploring-future-solutions-for-pre-obd-vehicle-inspections
Not vetted, but perhaps logical.
I do not know if CA senate appropriations considered this... or if they had jurisdiction to do so.
I am not an attorney, nor a sausage factor c-suite exec, nor a sausage maker.