I copied the original e-mail concerning suspension mods to the (Taurus)
SHO discussion group (I have a '91 SHO+ in addition to my '67 MGB). One
of the guys on the list (Hugo) works for the Colorado Attorney General's
office. His comments are encouraging and at the end of this thread.
I will keep you posted on whatever good stuff shows up on the SHO list.
BTW, us SHO folks are also pretty riled up about this too.
>Mike Edmonds wrote:
>>
>> I just saw this on one of the MG discussion lists . . .
>>
>> >OK GANG,
>> >This came to me via an interested party via the SEMA website today....It
>> >concerns Colorado residents now...who knows who it will affect
>> >later....knowing what California hobbyists did to get the recent SMOG law
in
>> >place, maybe we should keep an eternally vigilant eye on politicians
>> >everywhere....
>> >Tom
>> >
>> >> >- ---------------------------------
>> >> >LEGISLATIVE NOTICE
>> >> >
>> >> >BILL TO PROHIBIT ALTERED SUSPENSIONS
>> >> >APPROVED BY COLORADO REVIEW COMMITTEE
>> >> >
>> >> >The Colorado Legislature's Transportation Legislation Review Committee
>has
>> >> >given preliminary approval to a draft bill that would prohibit any
>person
>> >> >from operating a motor vehicle on a public highway if the
configuration
>of
>> >> >the vehicle has been altered from the original manufacturer's
>> >> >specifications. This measure is specifically designed to ban vehicles
>with
>> >> >altered suspensions, but also pertains to tire or wheel size, body
>height,
>> >> >chassis configuration and steering system. Violators could face fines
of
>> >up
>> >> >to $1,000.
>> >> >SEMA supports reasonable and relevant safety laws regulations at both
>the
>> >> >state and federal level and supports the model raised vehicle
regulation
>> >> >recommended by the American Association of Motor Vehicle
Administrators.
>> >> >Like some other states, however, Colorado appears poised to impose
>> >> >unnecessarily restrictive and burdensome vehicle suspension
requirements
>> >> >without substantiating its claim that the legislation will improve
>highway
>> >> >safety or provide other tangible benefits. In addition, it effectively
>> >> >defers to the vehicle manufacturers to set the standards.
>> >> >While this bill has not been formally introduced and Review Committee
>> >> >approval does not ensure passage, we are extremely concerned that
action
>> >on
>> >> >the legislation may become an immediate priority when the legislature
>> >> >reconvenes in January, 1998. We will be forwarding additional
>information
>> >> on
>> >> >this important bill in the near future. In the meantime, please feel
>free
>> >> to
>> >> >make copies of this notice for distribution to all interested parties.
>> >> >For more information please contact stevem@sema.org.
>> >
>
>
>This concerns me greatly. I work in the Colorado Attorney General's
>Office
>and will look into this right away. Three things to keep in mind: there
>will
>be testimony taken on this (and every other) bill, so you can have your
>say;
>also, the Colorado General Assembly is loath to pass bills that will
>cost
>a lot of money to enforce (hint!); the GA is Republican, so the odds
>decrease
>for passage (IMHO) if the bill is sponsored by a Democrat. To the
>extent I
>can share with the list any information I may come accross, I would be
>happy
>to do so.
>
>Hugo Teufel
>'91 MTX, black on black
>
|