Leno's Law

Is California finally gonna come to their senses?

"Leno's Law" would fully exempt a collector motor vehicle from the smog check requirement, both biennially and at transfer, if the vehicle is at least 35 model years old!

https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB712/2025

We can only hope and pray!

 

Honestly, I'm hoping he isn't raising a hornet's nest that makes it worse. I hope it works out but he might be alerting Sacramento that hundreds of thousands of "gross polluters" are still running around CA. And if they can't meet smog, get rid of them.

I really really hope that's not the case but in CA you never know.

 

They should make it 25, not 35.

 

My impression is that Sacramento doesn't give a hoot about what's what. They have their own agenda and I don't think facts are going to sway them either way.

 

My fear is that classic cars were invisible to Sac lawmakers with everything else they have to deal with. Now, its being raised up as "an issue". There are more people who want less air pollution than there are classic car owners who want less restrictions -- so they can potentially pollute more (at least in the heads of the politicians and greenies). What does a guy driving an electric car thinking he's saving the planet think about someone else driving a "gross polluter" classic car?

It ain't pleasant. So it could backfire as they push for more regulations and restrictions, not less.

It is completely possible in CA that one day call car with a certain pollution level could be banned from driving. I don't think that's now, but I see it in the future.

Again I really really hope I'm wrong. If this bill works I'll be very happy. But there is some risk.

 

No offense, but as a former - and potentially future - resident, I'd suggest emails, letters, phone calls, and financial contributions to the industry groups/lobbyists trying to shepherd this through the CA Legislature might be more effective.
- Dave

 

wow good luck to you guys in California out here in NYC we don't have those problems after 25 years no testing on any car just safety

 

I hear of other states that have safety checks which are much more onerous than what we have in California. "All" we have is an emissions check every two years. The car could have burned out lights and brakes that barely work yet will still be licensed if it passes its emissions test. Elsewhere, my brother had to take a car of the road because it couldn't pass his local safety checks due to body rust the inspectors deemed to be excessive. Sheesh.

I am in no way defending California, as an owner of three vintage cars I really want the smog test requirement to go away (and, yes, I have written my letter to my Senator). It is patently unfair that I need to smog check a car every two years which only travels 2,000 miles through that time.

Apparently, there are a lot of car guys, believe it or not, working for the CARB (California Air Resources Board) who are providing statistics on how insignificantly hobby cars contribute to pollution compared to the F150s and the like the soccer moms now seem to prefer. They probably see the current law as ridiculous.

In the end, it will be a political decision where perceptions and optics matter more than the reality.

 

Yup my brother lived in Utah and a cracked windshield would fail you plus insurance didn't cover windshields.

 

I wouldn't hold my breath. Recently we have seen certain politicians in California pivot 180* from positions not just held but championed only a few months ago. Posturing for the next election. Even if implemented it could easily be reversed again, maybe even strengthened from current law, post election season.

 

The bill was authored by 20 senators and assembly members. 17 of the 20 are Republicans. When this comes before the General Assembly for a vote, it may get laughed out of the chamber. I assume Newsom would have to sign it into law. In this age of climate hysteria I just can't see CA amending a law that gives a pass only to a segment of the population that can afford expensive toys.

 

Sorry but I really don't want this to turn in to a political topic but after seeing your governor and politicians you have no shoot at that bill passing or being signed.

You do have the 3 W,s Weather Woman and Wine after that not just don't have much to say about the place

Good luck hope i am wrong and it does pass for guys

 

Safety inspections have shown time and time again to have no positive impact on highway safety. It is the reason fewer and fewer states have them. Politics is all that keeps them going. In Californias case having been on the enforcement side of the emission laws you have less than zero chance of this new idea coming to fruition. I wrote specific reasons why but it was deleted for being political which is part and parcel of Californias vehicle emission laws.

 

Thats problem #1 and why it was stupid to give it Lenos name. The authors are brain dead.

 

So you're a politician. What possible advantage from this law can you tell the public why you should make it easier for people to pollute the air?

"I voted for this bill to exempt some cars from pollution standards because.....". Finish the statement. Really, really hard to explain what the problem is if you don't own classic car and make someone who doesn't care.

That is the problem. If you own one, you have to deal with it. If you don't, you don't care.

The way to really do this is elect a governor who would sign an EO or put pressure on the AQMD to lighten up. With one champion in power it might work. But from the legislature? I don't see it.

 

It will take a leader who is willing to take CARB to task and tell them to revamp laws to make sense and target problem pollution sources that will improve air quality and stop with the broad brush approach. California has not had that leader in a long time and will not for the foreseeable future.

 

Like I said, I don't think this will pass. I only hope it doesn't raise a red flag to the bureaucrats to crack down harder in the future.

If you push back and you fail, you are suddenly on the defensive.

 

Agreed. About the only strategy I see at this point would be to approach it from a revenue generating point of view and tie it to the revenue the state is losing to Montana registrations. That would have to be done hand-in-hand with statistics showing just how little classic cars pollute. Obviously not a perfect solution, but I don't see how else you're going to gain any legislative interest.
Unfortunately, this probably had a better chance of passing by taking a low-key approach and working with legislators one-on-one. If sponsors think Leno's star power would help, let him glad-hand key legislators individually and then try to have the bill attached as a rider on a larger omnibus-type bill. Even worse than non-car enthusiasts not caring, is the prospect of key consumer groups whipping-up sentiment against the bill not only on environmental grounds, but by painting it as a favor to entitled political cronies/contributors.
- Dave

 

Dead on arrival. I don't care how you try and sell it. 58 years of California politicians are why I live in Texas.

 

Texas is interesting. Up until 2025 we had annual vehicle safety inspections, but no smog tests. Vehicle inspections were dropped, but emissions compliance testing was added to all cars between 2-25yo, BUT only in high-population cities (e.g. "New LA" formerly Austin, Houston,...).

 

If you followed the fight for safety inspections in Texas as I did their existence in the face of overwhelming evidence of their pointlessness was due to the auto repair lobby that kept them alive for as long as they were.
Our smog testing is largely driven by the feds.

 

Smog check requirements are just revenue sources.

The number of cars that fail smog checks and are driven enough on the road in CA to make any sort of difference in AQ is marginal, at best.

 

probably because of all the California people who moved there in Covid, they went so they can be free from the BS but are bring that same BS with them

 

i really should not comment on California i only been there 3 times in my life and that was 2 years ago 1 dropping off 2 visit and 3 pick up my daughter at school and have to say was not very impressed with the state at all, sorry but after seeing all the homeless and open-air drug usage etc. being told by the hotel staff not to go out and walk around because you will be robbed having my rental car windows broken in the parking lot of the hotel (with security guard) was a big turn off.

i lived in nyc my whole life and it has problems too but nothing like i seen out there, and i feel it's because of your politicians they are way too much out of any type of reasonable thinking at least in ny if we have one like them get in office they do not stay long or comply with the people, as far as Newson while he only lies when he opens his mouth then again most of them do if not all who live off the tax payer dollar

 

Nevada is a bit like Leno's law already. Cars more than 25 years old are exempt from emissions testing. But there are technical restrictions on how much you can drive it and you must have classic car insurance. Also, to re-register, you have to go to the DMV every year instead of online.

There used to be no restrictions at all in Nevada but too many people were avoiding emissions testing with cars and trucks that were 25 years old but used everyday. Now they require classic insurance which have limited mileage.

Also no front plate (technically its a requirement BUT if your vehicle doesn't have a front plate holder you don't need one). I don't know one person in Nevada who was ever ticketed for no front plate but I was several times when I lived in LA. Annoying.