JOINT FAVORABLE REPORT
AN ACT MAKING REVISIONS TO STATUTES CONCERNING THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES.
Joint Favorable Substitute
SPONSORS OF BILL:
Department of Motor Vehicles
REASONS FOR BILL:
Substitute Language, as contained in LCO 1859, removes some sections and includes other requests from DMV. Primarily a technical bill that includes a number of changes to improve the DMV customer service, achieve efficiencies within the agency and improve administration of many of the programs. It revises statutes concerning motor vehicle licenses, fees, emissions, penalties, and parking for persons with disabilities and person who are blind.
RESPONSE FROM ADMINISTRATION/AGENCY:
The Department of Motor Vehicles – Commissioner Ward
Requested by DMV – the Bill is mostly technical in nature, and will improve customer service, achieve efficiency in the agency and improve administration of many programs.
State Department of Emergency Management and Homeland Security – Commissioner Boynton
Supports the bill, particularly the sections relative to the REAL ID Act. From a homeland security perspective, compliance with this act will enhance public security in Connecticut, as well as nationwide. Additionally, complying with REAL ID licensing requirements will ensure that Connecticut motor vehicle licenses remain valid at security checkpoints, including airports, once the REAL ID Act is fully implemented.
NATURE AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT:
Connecticut Conference of Municipalities
Particularly supports the section which will allow the DMV to share information, such as taxpayer's date of birth, with municipal assessors. Date of birth information allows municipal assessors to properly collect motor vehicle taxes while providing the taxpayers with the customer service they deserve. Without the birth date to distinguish between people with the same name, all the individuals will be reported as delinquent to the DMV. It will put such taxpayers on the defensive in order to prove that they are not delinquent on their taxes, and create antagonisms between inconvenienced citizens and hometown governments.
State of Connecticut Judicial Branch – Stephen N. Ment
Suggested change to what was Section 20 of the proposed bill which deleted “truck, as defined in section 14-260n” and replaced it with “motor vehicle or combination of motor vehicles.” Believed this to be confusing because it appears to conflict with the penalty for motor vehicle operators found earlier in the same section.
NATURE AND SOURCES OF OPPOSITION:
Reported by: Mary Anderson, Assistant Clerk, Transportation Committee
Date: March 17, 2010