DeTomaso Mailing List: April 1997, Message #113
![[previous topic]](../images/prev_topic.gif)
![[index]](../images/index.gif)
![[next]](../images/next.gif)
![[next topic]](../images/next_topic.gif)
Reading this tripe makes me violently ill! It is so very obvious, just from this information alone, that the only thing the government is worried about is the "MONEY". Everything else is secondary...... just an excuse. I see the same kinds of BS in corporate P & L summaries, etc, all of the time. Very, very frustrating to say the least! Phwew, now I feel better letting off some steam. ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Fwd: Message on bill sb_42 : billroot:[current.sb.from0000.s Author: MrTella@aol.com at ccmail Date: 4/12/97 10:58 AM --------------------- Forwarded message: From: Senate-News-Reply@SEN.CA.GOV To: Recipients@emin11.mail.aol.com Date: 97-04-12 05:05:44 EDT BILL ANALYSIS Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary SB 42 (Kopp) Hearing Date: 3/17/97 Amended: 2/13/97 Consultant: Bob Franzoia Policy Vote: Trans 6-0 ____________________________________________________ BILL SUMMARY: SB 42 would exempt from the biennial vehicle inspection requirement all motor vehicles 25 or more model-years old. Fiscal Impact (in thousands) Major Provisions 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 Fund Vehicle inspection $1,851 $3,792 $3,837Special* exemption (Revenue loss offset by unknown level of (Revenue loss)savings from program reduction) Program changes One time cost of $30 to DMV; potential Special* indeterminate costs related to Electronic Transmission contract. * Vehicle Inspection and Repair Fund STAFF COMMENTS: This bill probably meets the criteria to be placed on the Suspense file. While actual costs resulting from the elimination of these vehicle in the smog check program will likely decrease significantly, those marginal cost savings would be less than the revenue loss. STAFF NOTES the Department of Consumer Affairs estimates minor, if any, offsetting program savings as a result of this bill. Department of Consumer Affairs Estimated Revenue Loss --------------------------------------------------- |Model Year | FY | FY | FY | | |1997-98 |1998-99 |1999-00 | |------------+------------+------------+------------| |1966 - 73 | | | | | |$1,850,710* | | | |------------+------------+------------+------------| |1974 | | | | | | |$3,792,261 | | |------------+------------+------------+------------| |1975 | | | | | | | |$3,836,638 | | | | | | --------------------------------------------------- * Exemption effective 1/1/98 Assumes 10 percent vehicle attrition rate and $8.00 smog certificate fee. The contract for Electronic Transmission specifies the contractor may impose a cost-per-call charge per transaction by smog check stations. The cost-per-call charge is based on a predetermined volume of transactions. If the number of vehicles declines as a result of this bill, the Department of Consumer Affairs must increase the cost-per-call charge to ensure the contracted revenue stream or compensate the contractor with a direct payment.