UPDATE
Nevada Bill to Restrict Eligibility for Classic Vehicle Registration to be Considered on Thursday, March 26, 2015 (ACT NOW!)
Legislation (A.B. 326) to drastically alter the requirements for vehicles eligible for registration as a “classic vehicle” will be considered by the Nevada Transportation Committee on Thursday, March 26, 2015. Despite our efforts to find a compromise, the bill sponsor Assemblymember Richard Carrillo ([email protected]) is insisting on moving his bill as it is currently written. Under the bill, the special plates would only be allowed for passenger cars and require that owners provide proof satisfactory to the state that the vehicle is driven solely for personal use and not more than 5,000 miles during an annual registration period. The owner would also be required to have another passenger car or motorcycle registered during the entire registration period. The bill also would now exclude light commercial vehicles from eligibility.
We Urge You to Call Members of the Nevada Assembly Transportation Committee (List Attached Below) Immediately to Request Their Opposition to A.B. 326
- Existing law already requires that classic vehicles have a manufacturer’s rated carrying capacity of 1 ton or less; were manufactured at least 25 years ago; and contain only the original parts which were used to manufacture the vehicle or replacement parts that duplicate those original parts.
- A.B. 326 makes it more difficult for legitimate classic vehicles to travel long distances for car shows, tours and other events. These cars are already used primarily club activities, exhibitions, tours, parades and occasional pleasure driving.
- A.B. 326 makes no provision for “grandfathering” existing classic vehicles and allowing them to retain their classic status.
- A.B. 326 would deny currently eligible cars from existing benefits, including the special license plate and exemptions from emissions requirements.
- A.B. 326 ignores the fact that classic vehicles in Nevada constitute a small portion of the vehicle fleet and are already well-maintained and infrequently operated.
DON’T DELAY! Please contact members of the Nevada Assembly Transportation Committee immediately by phone or e-mail to request their opposition to A.B. 326. Phone calls are best! Please e-mail a copy of your letter to Steve McDonald at [email protected]. Also, please forward this Alert to your fellow car enthusiasts. Urge them to join the SAN and help defend the hobby! Thank you for your assistance.
Nevada Assembly Transportation Committee
To e-mail all Committee members, copy and paste the email address block below:
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Assemblymember Jim Wheeler (Chair)
Phone: 775-684-8843
Email: [email protected]
Assemblymember Jill Dickman (Vice-Chair)
Phone: 775-684-8563
Email: [email protected]
Assemblymember Victoria A. Dooling
Phone: 775-684-8821
Email: [email protected]
Assemblymember Michele Fiore
Phone: 775-684-8829
Email: [email protected]
Assemblymember Brent A. Jones
Phone: 775-684-8573
Email: [email protected]
Assemblymember P.K. O’Neill
Phone: 775-684-8825
Email: [email protected]
Assemblymember Stephen H. Silberkraus
Phone: 775-684-8855
Email: [email protected]
Assemblymember Melissa Woodbury
Phone: 775-684-8503
Email: [email protected]
Assemblymember Nelson Araujo
Phone: 775-684-8599
Email: [email protected]
Assemblymember Richard Carrillo
Phone: 775-684-8801
Email: [email protected]
Assemblymember Edgar Flores
Phone: 775-684-8583
Email: [email protected]
Assemblymember Marilyn K. Kirkpatrick
Phone: 775-684-8509
Email: [email protected]
Assemblymember Ellen B. Spiegel
Phone: 775-684-8577
Email: [email protected]
Assemblymember Michael C. Sprinkle
Phone: 775-684-8841
Email: [email protected]
|
I don’t quite get what problem this nimrod is trying to solve.
Ummmm, thats pretty common for vehicles registerd as “classic cars” in many states already. The simple solution is this…dont register your vehicle with historic plates. In Arizona the rules are about the same, I would pay more to register it as a classic and I could not drive it as much. I run regular plates, drive as much as I want and pay the same ammount of insurance as I would for classic plates…where is the advantage other than having nifty plates? Oh, well there is the emission exemtion but that applies to 66 and older here anyway no matter how they are registered (not sure haw Nevada does it) Or…you could just simply disconnect the speedo when on a long trip and clock your speed via GPS….but no one would do that because it is dishonest….
I lived in NV until about a month ago. The emissions is the largest benefit by far, and main reason. My bronco could not pass emissions due to mods. I used it only for off roading in the desert. I wanted the plate so I did not have to trailer it around. Many of my friends have DD that are classic for about the same reason and do not have another vehicle to reg to fallow the new law. Really that seems to be the major change. The past year they required you to prove the 5k only miles; so that is not new. I do not understand how the current plates will be denied, if they meet the requirements they should be good.
None of my cars are registered as classics.
I live around the Carson City, the bills sponsor assemblyman Richard Carrillo was busted for dui a few weeks ago(source Nevada Appeal). Sounds like he needs a sponsor of his own. This guy is creating laws!