This is a ridiculous attack on the EV enthusiast! As an EV (electric Vehicle) driver myself I have had occasions where I needed to park in a none EV parking spot near another parked EV utilizing a charge portal that has been charging but has now topped off and I would remove the plug on it and then use the plug (charge infrastructure) for my vehicle. Under AB475 I would cause the other EV car to get a ticket and get towed.This is why we should oppose this poorly written piece of legislation or reword it to be more accommodating towards a growing EV market and makes these limited resources more friendly instead of punitive and discouraging.
Danny Ames
Copied from other folks:
http://www.fastcompany.com/1775575/gm-sponsors-bill-that-could-create-problems-for-electric-car-owners" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
One of Plug-In America's other accusations is far more damning. The group notes that under AB475, every vehicle parked in a designated EV spot must be plugged in to a charger at all times. This means that two parking spots can't share a charger, and that an unplugged EV parked in a charger-equipped space could be towed. In many places, the law could diminish the EV charging infrastructure.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following Tom's lead, all California citizens should send Govenor
Brown a message to veto AB 475
I used
http://gov.ca.gov/m_contact.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I checked at the top, comments, and after you click past that page,
another page opens up so you can put your subject/topic and comments.
It does not prompt you, but I put my full personal mailing address
and web page at the bottom to show I am a California citizen. There
is no warm and fuzzy 'are you sure' to the send button, so multi-check
your work before hitting send. Once it is sent, its gone. I did not
receive an automated response from the Gov's server like I do from
other Gov. reps (Senators, etc.)
I ask that you do not delay. Jump on this, get it done, and our views
will be heard.
brucedp <
[email protected]>
Plug-In America is running a campaign to get the Governor of California to veto this poorly-worded bill. The main sticking points seems to be this text:
"...prohibits a person from parking or leaving standing a vehicle in a stall or space so designated for a zero emission vehicle ...unless the vehicle is connected for electric charging purposes."
The bill would also prohibit a person "from parking or leaving standing a specified vehicle unless the vehicle is connected for electric charging purposes."
In other words, if a vehicle (say a Leaf or a Volt) were done charging, and another EV wanted to charge, that person would cause the already-charged EV to be towed if they removed the plug. The Volt has an alarm that goes off when the plug is removed, but can be disabled if the Volt owner locks the car doors with the key instead of the remote in order to allow charging equipment sharing. (see the owner's manual for details).
'Electric charging purposes' - Could be that an ICE has a bad starting battery, and needs a charge in order to start. Would that be considered 'electric charging purposes'?
Contrary to GM's belief, some charging stations have 120v outlets that are not specific to charging a vehicle. How about if I want to charge my cell phone while the car is parked? I could just run an extension cord from the 120v outlet that some EVSE has to the cell phone AC adapter, and it would be used 'for electric charging purposes'.
Here is the text of the bill so you can see for yourself. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_0451-0500/ab_475_bill_20110824_enrolled.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
If you are a California resident, I encourage you to visit the Plug-In America page and send Governor Brown a note asking him to veto this bill. The bill had good intent, but needs a re-write.
Tom Keenan