California SB-286 HOV Extension Update

I just want to know if it'll be a hassle getting the green stickers off once they're not useful anymore. I don't see too many yellow stickers that have been removed.

 

No The yellow stickers are easier to take off than the green stickers. (There are many videos on line telling you how to remove the stickers) I think many people are just to lazy to take them off. It is like the CA warning sticker that is on the drivers window door. I see many people who never have removed this sticker, and wonder how this does not bother them or their vision when driving.

I have a friend who put on a green HOV sticker crooked. I watched him try to take it off and reposition it very slowly. I noticed some of the green was sticking to his bumper and he basically damaged the sticker. He used some goo gone to remove the adhesive. He put it back on straight, but you can see the sticker was removed. The instructions you receive with the sticker tells you not to remove them once you put them on.

 

Well... maybe that's because they've been removed.

 

On cars where they've been removed, there's visible evidence. There are still lots of yellow stickers driving around.

 

I used tar remover to remove the glue after peeling off the yellow stickers. There wasn't any trace of them when I was done.

 

Bill Text: CA AB266 | 2013-2014 | Regular Session | Amended | LegiScan

 

Am I reading the amended text correctly, that the green plug-in decals will die on Jan 1, 2015, as under the current law, and only the white decals will be extended to Jan 1 2019? The former text mentioning 2018 for the green decals seems to have been struck out.

 

Say it ain't so! :-(

 

What ... is it just "all about me? ... show some love for us white sticker peeps ... you can still be happy for us - right?

.

 

No, you're reading it incorrectly. The amended version says that the stickers can be distributed until 2015, and they are valid until January 1, 2019.

 

This is the way my wife and I read it.

 

Thank goodness...sigh of relief.

 

It's pretty confusing. I think the only way we find out what's going on is for someone to phone one of the bill's sponsors.

Here's how I read this amendment.

There are two almost identical versions of the bill glommed together. One is Sec. 1, Sec. 2 and Sec. 3. The other is Sec. 1.5, Sec. 2 and Sec. 3.5.

Sec. 1 and Sec. 3 say that green stickers end on 1/1/15. Sec. 1.5 and Sec. 3.5 keep green and white stickers the same, until 1/1/19.

Which one takes precedence? According to Sec. 4, if both bills are enacted and become effective and AB266 is the second one, then 1.5 and 3.5. Otherwise, Sec. 1 and 3.

What's really going on? I don't know but maybe someone in Sacramento does.

But it can't be good for us.

 

According to a staffer for one of the Assembly sponsors of AB266, this is the deal:

The bills are what is called "double jointed." According to that explanation, "Double-jointing occurs when two bills amend the same code section, but in different ways, and the Legislature wants both of them to happen."

The deal among the authors is that one bill will extend the white sticker program. The other will extend the green sticker program.

The confusing language in AB266 stems from the way this is implemented. Look for the same thing to happen in SB286. But the important thing is that there is agreement and the extensions of both programs are supposed to be enacted.

I just hope this isn't a setup for the governor to veto the green stickers while signing the white ones. But we'll find out.

 

Thank you bilofsky for getting an authoritative explanation.

 

Yeah, I think I actually understand it now.

AB266 extends the white stickers, except that if it is enacted after SB286 then it extends both green and white.

SB286 will be amended so that it extends the green stickers, except if enacted after AB266 then it will extend both green and white.

So suppose AB266 is enacted first. Then its author will be able to claim that he extended the white stickers.

Then SB286 gets enacted. Normally it would take precedence, being later, so would override AB266 and only extend the green stickers. But because of the double jointed language, Sec. 1.5 and 3.5 will kick in and it will extend both. So its author can say he extended the green stickers, while leaving intact the white sticker claim of the author of AB266.

And symmetrically if SB286 gets enacted first.

As my wife just said, "Your tax dollars at work."

It makes the PiP's engineering look simple.

 

The devil is in the details, as always.

 

I just bought a 2007 with the 4 yellow stickers still on it. I used a hairdryer to heat up the adhesive, a plastic Office Max rewards card as a scraper, and some bug and tar remover. No evidence they ever existed, and only took about half an hour. I'm sure the green stickers would be about the same process.

 

3 years? for who? the only people who got 3 years were those who pre-ordered the PiP at MSRP prices and even they got only 33 months or so (first deliveries in early March).
someone buying it today is barely getting 18 months.
so, yeah, 6 years will make a significant difference, i would suspect.

 

The only possible explanation for this stupidity masquerading as complexity: As a State Senator/Assemblyman, it was **I** who sponsored the bill that was enacted into law...