Fog light height

[abusive]

So, I got an early Christmas present. Finally (today) got the letter from SDOT stating their non-objection to the repeal of the minimum height for fog-lights. Hopefully that'll be done away with very soon... just FYI.

[idiosyncratic]

nice early christmas present!

[Rob]

Cool... this is Drew?

[abusive]

Cool... this is Drew?

yessir...

[Audiboy808]

finally damn I've been waiting forever for this. Then I can put my fogs back in. 12in was ridiculous.

[abusive]

Bill still needs to have two committee hearings and a public hearing, but hopefully can get it out by March...

[lois]

ooooh Drew must be tickled pink!

are you needing people to show up at these meetings or is it a slam dunk?

[abusive]

ooooh Drew must be tickled pink!

are you needing people to show up at these meetings or is it a slam dunk?

I don't think it'll be necessary - at this point. It's just a archaic law that, as best as I can discern, serves no real purpose. Of course there was one local association that had some opposition - not stated publicly - as they saw it as a "chipping away" at recon... which it's not.

now if people want to testify in support of free bus service... hahaha...

[idiosyncratic]

where can i get info on this free bus service? :confused:
:gapteeth: j/k

[abusive]

Done. Everyone's welcome. :)

[xurusaibobx]

so the law is gone ?

[ikeyballz]

sweet dude, nice one.. :] mucho gracias for doing away with stuff that was useless..

[idiosyncratic]

great job! nice to know that someone is actually doing something!

[abusive]

where can i get info on this free bus service? :confused:
:gapteeth: j/k

well, that law goes into effect same day as the fog light one... (gee, I've been busy).

It's actually enabling legislation so the funds for fare-free service need to appropriated first. It'll cost about an additional $40M - in addition to the $95M subsidy that's currently going to the system. I'll keep you posted. If the money is found and appropriated the fare-free service would start July 1, 2008.

[Udrivecrap]

very nice :hand:

[8overgixxer]

good job abusive

[idiosyncratic]

if that free fare bus service would actually happen, how many of us would actually use it? how many would still drive?

would that work better than the proposed rail system? (free fare bus service)?

sorry. i went a little off track there...
(but that's typical of idio... woohoo! offroading (offtracking?) is fun! vroom vroom!)

[beefy242]

if that free fare bus service would actually happen, how many of us would actually use it? how many would still drive?

would that work better than the proposed rail system? (free fare bus service)?

sorry. i went a little off track there...
(but that's typical of idio... woohoo! offroading (offtracking?) is fun! vroom vroom!)

since nobody is going to use the rail system, i think a free bus would require an increase in taxes and so forth because of the increased demand. I hear most buses on popular routes get packed to the limit as it is, so the fleet would surely increase BUT fuel consumption for the island would drop dramatically. in a nutshell, of course. a very large, ugly nutshell.

[ikeyballz]

hmm free bus service.. i think if buses werent so overcrowded, the seats were a little further apart, and crazy people got banned for life from them, a lot of people would take them. if they also moved a bit faster, id take em too. :]

[lois]

great job! nice to know that someone is actually doing something!

yup...Drew has been the ONLY person i have ever seen rant on a message board but actually do something about it. good for him and his efforts.

it's one thing to talk...but to be actually effectual...now that deserves respect.

[8overgixxer]

yup...Drew has been the ONLY person i have ever seen rant on a message board but actually do something about it. good for him and his efforts.

it's one thing to talk...but to be actually effectual...now that deserves respect.

quoted for the day you show me some respect after my bill hits the leg. :)

[Rob]

Drew's been at this for YEARS!

[lois]

don't forget Drew spent a lot more time than "a few minutes a day", asked for help from the always apathetic FH crowd (all lip), never got much help (if ANY), and was still unsuccessful in his efforts (not THIS particular issue, though).

i'm not gonna hold my breath. :D

[8overgixxer]

Drew's been at this for YEARS!

yeah, probably a small amount of time each week for years. Just like the path I'm starting out on. Like I said, gov is slow, no way around it.

[Rob]

Actually he spent a LOT of time at the leg over years... not just minutes a day... but EVERY session.

[freeride]

what other recon items are on the drew list?

[8overgixxer]

Actually he spent a LOT of time at the leg over years... not just minutes a day... but EVERY session.

well when it gets to the point where we need to be there all the time, i will be. For now my friends and I are just working on what needs to change, what stays, what is obsolete etc... still very much brainstorming and outlining. On the plus side, even if I find myself out of town in a few years and the attorney's lose interest, at least some groundwork will be in place that someone else could pick up and work with.

[abusive]

Actually he spent a LOT of time at the leg over years... not just minutes a day... but EVERY session.

And (when I was working there) the time spent was done outside of my regular work, I might add. Don't want anyone thinking I was misusing taxpayer monies!

At this point I've kind of given up on trying to repeal recon - of even care about it, for that matter. I've got much bigger issues to deal with. If I can ever get my own consulting firm going I'll probably make a pet project.

Of course, all the whinners out there could pull their money together and hire me.. heheh...

kidding aside - think about this way: An outright repeal is very difficult to legitimately argue for, given all the individual criteria that vehicles are (in theory) checked for and the potential gaps in equipment checks that could emerge. Now if the criteria is slowly whittled down to a few items then one can easily argue that the program isn't doing much.

Lastly, a repeal could have happened - TWICE. Both times it failed because of the lack of real committment (i.e. showing of support) by those whose interests were being represented.