Flyingvan911
Well-known member
- 4,709
- 158
- 63
- Location
- Kansas City, MO
Awesome! Just curious, what about '70 and newer deuces, 5 tons, etc? '70, '71, and '72 deuces are just like the '69 models. I'm not trying to shoot you down, just asking.
-
Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!
2012 Wis Motor Vehicle Registration Rights Act
- Thread starter undysworld
- Start date
col.halftrack
Member
- 32
- 0
- 6
- Location
- Kansas
Awesome news! Thanks Paul, Tom and others in Wisconsin!
I am preparing to leave later this week for the MVPA Winter BOD meeting in KCMO.
Proof positive if you fight you might lose BUT you just might win, if you cave you cannot win.
Really proud of the MV owners who have stood up to the bullies.
THANK YOU!
I am preparing to leave later this week for the MVPA Winter BOD meeting in KCMO.
Proof positive if you fight you might lose BUT you just might win, if you cave you cannot win.
Really proud of the MV owners who have stood up to the bullies.
THANK YOU!
vtwinpilot
New member
- 81
- 0
- 0
- Location
- wisconsin
Good to hear, this agency need's to be held accountable now, they dragged this out and now we have to negotiate with them. It would be great if the year could be line item changed to 1987 and older to cover the bulk of the ex-mv's and still be at 25 years and older. Did anyone find a link to the original hearing on wiseye.gov? I watched a session where it was passed quickly, but I really want to watch the committee debate as 2010 that way you can truly absorb the mentality spending our tax dollars opposing common sense and rightful use.
Last edited:
undysworld
Member
- 493
- 9
- 18
- Location
- Blue Mounds, WI
Flyingvan911,
Post-68 military vehicles are another change we hope to be addressing with DOT in the coming months, and we expect to be working on legislation next year.
The bill, assuming it gets signed into law, only repeals the statute [341.10(6m)] which denies registration for milvehs that don't meet FMVSS. Essentially, it establishes that ex-military vehicles will be held to the same standards as all other vehicles are, nothing more, nothing less. That is a HUGE first step toward resolving the problems here.
The statute [341.10(6)] which denies registration if the vehicle lacks a certification label still exists, for now. But DOT has already stated that that statute needs to be rewritten. It's written wrong, and it simply can't be applied against every pre-68 vehicle successfully.
To make a long story short, we will work to amend the statute to reflect the federal exemption from FMVSS for vehicles older than 25 years. Then, a lack of sticker on a vehicle built prior to '87 will not be a reason to deny registration.
Kevin,
Thanks. All the owners in Wisconsin deserve a huge pat on the back! Tom and I may have helped write it, but they got it passed.
Vtwin,
We're aware that '87 and earlier seems to account for the vast majority of military vehicles in private hands. It's been a hard battle to restore military vehicles to the same standards as civilian vehicles must meet. Next year, the '87's will be 25 years old, so perhaps it's a moot point. I think it's important that the law applies equally to all vehicles.
I emailed WisEYE, and was told that they had a malfunction which caused them to only record video, but no audio. The proceeding will not be available, to my deepest regrets.
Post-68 military vehicles are another change we hope to be addressing with DOT in the coming months, and we expect to be working on legislation next year.
The bill, assuming it gets signed into law, only repeals the statute [341.10(6m)] which denies registration for milvehs that don't meet FMVSS. Essentially, it establishes that ex-military vehicles will be held to the same standards as all other vehicles are, nothing more, nothing less. That is a HUGE first step toward resolving the problems here.
The statute [341.10(6)] which denies registration if the vehicle lacks a certification label still exists, for now. But DOT has already stated that that statute needs to be rewritten. It's written wrong, and it simply can't be applied against every pre-68 vehicle successfully.
To make a long story short, we will work to amend the statute to reflect the federal exemption from FMVSS for vehicles older than 25 years. Then, a lack of sticker on a vehicle built prior to '87 will not be a reason to deny registration.
Kevin,
Thanks. All the owners in Wisconsin deserve a huge pat on the back! Tom and I may have helped write it, but they got it passed.
Vtwin,
We're aware that '87 and earlier seems to account for the vast majority of military vehicles in private hands. It's been a hard battle to restore military vehicles to the same standards as civilian vehicles must meet. Next year, the '87's will be 25 years old, so perhaps it's a moot point. I think it's important that the law applies equally to all vehicles.
I emailed WisEYE, and was told that they had a malfunction which caused them to only record video, but no audio. The proceeding will not be available, to my deepest regrets.
Well, I got this back:
Dear Dennis, Thank you for your email and for your support of SB 462. After the bill was passed unanimously in the Senate, it was sent over to the Assembly and ordered immediately messaged (passed) last Thursday, March 15. Many important pieces of legislation were passed this past session and I'm glad to say this bill was a part of that. I've supported similar legislation in the past, and I am willing to assist motor vehicle enthusiasts across the state in the practice of this hobby without the interference of outdated or unnecessary regulations by the state. Thank you again for writing in about this issue. If you have any questions or concerns regarding legislation or any state related issue, please do not hesitate to contact me or my office. Sincerely, Jeff Fitzgerald Speaker of the Wisconsin Assembly
I appreciate this, now the Governor needs to sign and we are golden.
what is the implication of this bill specifically to classic cars, nil vehicles after '68?
Now how do I get my CUCV licensed like norml vehicles and I want my M35A3 licensed like a normal vehicle as well.
Guess I shoulda read the thread before I posted oops!
Dear Dennis, Thank you for your email and for your support of SB 462. After the bill was passed unanimously in the Senate, it was sent over to the Assembly and ordered immediately messaged (passed) last Thursday, March 15. Many important pieces of legislation were passed this past session and I'm glad to say this bill was a part of that. I've supported similar legislation in the past, and I am willing to assist motor vehicle enthusiasts across the state in the practice of this hobby without the interference of outdated or unnecessary regulations by the state. Thank you again for writing in about this issue. If you have any questions or concerns regarding legislation or any state related issue, please do not hesitate to contact me or my office. Sincerely, Jeff Fitzgerald Speaker of the Wisconsin Assembly
I appreciate this, now the Governor needs to sign and we are golden.
what is the implication of this bill specifically to classic cars, nil vehicles after '68?
Now how do I get my CUCV licensed like norml vehicles and I want my M35A3 licensed like a normal vehicle as well.
Guess I shoulda read the thread before I posted oops!
Last edited:
Dezarms
New member
- 26
- 0
- 1
- Location
- adams wisc.
Paul, so let me get this right, that 87 to 2000 m35a3s still cant be licensed?? please advise me how I should register my 1999 m35a3 truck, Iam confused.
Last edited:
undysworld
Member
- 493
- 9
- 18
- Location
- Blue Mounds, WI
Trukhead and Dezarms,
Not every aspect of this is guaranteed, especially as it applies to those vehicles less than 25 y.o. The bill did not go through exactly as we initially wrote it. There will likely be some details that evolve.
We've only managed to repeal one of two problematic statutes (assuming the Gov. signs it).
This bill, in it's final form, only effects ex-military vehicles. We wrote it to benefit civi vehicles too, but in the face of opposition from DOT, a few owners, and the Gov., the other provisions did not have the support to pass. We will continue working towards those other provisions this year, and legislation for them next year.
The military vehicles less than 25 years old are still a grey area. (understand, there aren't very many of them) With evidence the truck was built prior to '87, we anticipate no problems eventually. But vehicles newer than this may depend on our ability to rewrite 341.10(6) in the coming year. DOT has indicated they want to rewrite it.
We can't make this bill out to solve every problem, but in its' current form, it will resolve the vast majority of military vehicle registration problems. We're hopeful that as it plays out, it will encompass all vehicles up to, and including, the 5-ton M-class vehicles.
I'm sorry that I can't be more certain of things at this stage, but it's not over yet. Hopefully it plays itself out fairly soon.
Not every aspect of this is guaranteed, especially as it applies to those vehicles less than 25 y.o. The bill did not go through exactly as we initially wrote it. There will likely be some details that evolve.
We've only managed to repeal one of two problematic statutes (assuming the Gov. signs it).
This bill, in it's final form, only effects ex-military vehicles. We wrote it to benefit civi vehicles too, but in the face of opposition from DOT, a few owners, and the Gov., the other provisions did not have the support to pass. We will continue working towards those other provisions this year, and legislation for them next year.
The military vehicles less than 25 years old are still a grey area. (understand, there aren't very many of them) With evidence the truck was built prior to '87, we anticipate no problems eventually. But vehicles newer than this may depend on our ability to rewrite 341.10(6) in the coming year. DOT has indicated they want to rewrite it.
We can't make this bill out to solve every problem, but in its' current form, it will resolve the vast majority of military vehicle registration problems. We're hopeful that as it plays out, it will encompass all vehicles up to, and including, the 5-ton M-class vehicles.
I'm sorry that I can't be more certain of things at this stage, but it's not over yet. Hopefully it plays itself out fairly soon.
vtwinpilot
New member
- 81
- 0
- 0
- Location
- wisconsin
To Paul and Tom, thanks again for all done for the cause, and to anyone else out there that helped kick some sand on this. Since Tom has a posting up showing that owners of a CUCV won re-appeal after 17 months I would think that it's not likely to be a problem for a current registered owner (again that may be case by case and risky expensive for some) The WI-eye issue stinks, and smells deliberate. Any way we can get a transcript? I am itching to hear what lunacy came out from the elitist faction this time.
Dezarms
New member
- 26
- 0
- 1
- Location
- adams wisc.
paul, so the law doesnt cover( all ex military )2.5 ton vehiciles,including newer ones then .under what type registration do these fall under? military,collectors,truck?? or scrap/boat anchor!!The newer ones have been updated with the extended service program,seatbelts etc.
Last edited:
undysworld
Member
- 493
- 9
- 18
- Location
- Blue Mounds, WI
Vtwin,
I'm confident CUCV's will come out of this fully legal. The Blazer in the appeal received a clear Collector plate already. The Blazers should be fine NOW.
WisEYE is what it is. Google them, and email for info on a transcript. I don't know if such exists.
Dezarms,
Tough questions. You happen to own one of the very few post-87 trucks, and as such, you face the toughest challenge.
As you know, since '09 all deuces are eligible for HMV only. So unless you choose to license it as HMV, then yes, it's been a boat anchor since then. I sympathize, but I'm not willing to take the blame for it. Please go easy on the messenger.
Tom and I are doing EVERYTHING we can, to restore them to normal registration. HOWEVER, we can only work within the laws as they exist. We can't make 'em up. We've been able to accomplish what we did, by demanding WisDOT honor existing laws, and taking them into court when they didn't.
Unfortunately for folks who own vehicles '87 and newer, those vehicles are not exempted from the FMVSS requirements yet, because the vehicle is not yet older than 25 years. Vehicles older than 25 yrs. are exempted by Federal law, from FMVSS requirements. Tom and I cannot change that.
To my knowledge, your truck was probably originally built prior to '87 as an A2, but rebuilt between '93-'99 under the Ext. Svc. Prog., see Wikipedia
Our bill originally sought to repeal TWO statutes which were causing problems. That bill was faced with enough opposition to KILL IT. IT WAS DEAD. Blame the DOT. Blame the few owners who opposed it. Blame Gov. Walker.
After that, Tom managed to convince DOT to back the repeal of one of those statutes: 341.10(6m), and that's what the current bill will do. But the remaining statute requires the certification label, and for trucks that are less than 25 y.o., that is an issue.
While I understand that it is very frustrating to have a vehicle that is restricted (remember, my Pinz was totally illegal for a year too), please understand that we're doing everything we can to restore as many vehicles to the road as we can. Selling surplus vehicles is Tom's business. It's how he puts food on his table.
So what do you do?
I don't think an appeal is your best bet, because of current laws v. your truck's age.
It might be worthwhile to try and research the original build date of your truck, in an attempt to prove it is older than 25 yrs.
Keep the truck, register it as HMV until it's 25, then register as you wish.
Support our efforts next year to repeal 341.10(6).
Sell it and get an older one. (sorry to toss this one in, but that's the one sure fix)
Lastly, I can suggest you hold tight and we see what can be accomplished via meetings, etc. I cannot guarantee we can fix it, but we're trying.
I'm confident CUCV's will come out of this fully legal. The Blazer in the appeal received a clear Collector plate already. The Blazers should be fine NOW.
WisEYE is what it is. Google them, and email for info on a transcript. I don't know if such exists.
Dezarms,
Tough questions. You happen to own one of the very few post-87 trucks, and as such, you face the toughest challenge.
As you know, since '09 all deuces are eligible for HMV only. So unless you choose to license it as HMV, then yes, it's been a boat anchor since then. I sympathize, but I'm not willing to take the blame for it. Please go easy on the messenger.
Tom and I are doing EVERYTHING we can, to restore them to normal registration. HOWEVER, we can only work within the laws as they exist. We can't make 'em up. We've been able to accomplish what we did, by demanding WisDOT honor existing laws, and taking them into court when they didn't.
Unfortunately for folks who own vehicles '87 and newer, those vehicles are not exempted from the FMVSS requirements yet, because the vehicle is not yet older than 25 years. Vehicles older than 25 yrs. are exempted by Federal law, from FMVSS requirements. Tom and I cannot change that.
To my knowledge, your truck was probably originally built prior to '87 as an A2, but rebuilt between '93-'99 under the Ext. Svc. Prog., see Wikipedia
Our bill originally sought to repeal TWO statutes which were causing problems. That bill was faced with enough opposition to KILL IT. IT WAS DEAD. Blame the DOT. Blame the few owners who opposed it. Blame Gov. Walker.
After that, Tom managed to convince DOT to back the repeal of one of those statutes: 341.10(6m), and that's what the current bill will do. But the remaining statute requires the certification label, and for trucks that are less than 25 y.o., that is an issue.
While I understand that it is very frustrating to have a vehicle that is restricted (remember, my Pinz was totally illegal for a year too), please understand that we're doing everything we can to restore as many vehicles to the road as we can. Selling surplus vehicles is Tom's business. It's how he puts food on his table.
So what do you do?
I don't think an appeal is your best bet, because of current laws v. your truck's age.
It might be worthwhile to try and research the original build date of your truck, in an attempt to prove it is older than 25 yrs.
Keep the truck, register it as HMV until it's 25, then register as you wish.
Support our efforts next year to repeal 341.10(6).
Sell it and get an older one. (sorry to toss this one in, but that's the one sure fix)
Lastly, I can suggest you hold tight and we see what can be accomplished via meetings, etc. I cannot guarantee we can fix it, but we're trying.
vtwinpilot
New member
- 81
- 0
- 0
- Location
- wisconsin
You can bet the oppostion will be pulling against, so now is no time to back off. Time for everyone to tell the Gov. to sign it. Undy you really go along way explaining the details. If you know the exact date/ time the majority of debate took place I would appreciate it. I
t may help shake the details from wieye, if not don't sweat it I'll try to ferret it out.
t may help shake the details from wieye, if not don't sweat it I'll try to ferret it out.
undysworld
Member
- 493
- 9
- 18
- Location
- Blue Mounds, WI
VTwin,
As far as details go, I've pretty much been living this thing for the past nearly 5 years. Taken in total, it's incredibly complicated and convoluted. Because of this, it's easy to misunderstand what is happening.
In order to effect the change we need, we all need to be acting in union, without a bunch of folks on the sidelines screaming "STOP!". So it's imperative that the tough questions be asked, and then the most thorough explanations be available. I'm too far invested in this effort to slow down now, and I didn't come this far to see us all fail. If my explanations have helped, then I'm satisfied.
The only debate on the bill, to my knowledge, was in the Senate Trans. Comm. Public Hearing on Thursday, Mar. 8 around 3-4:30pm.
As far as details go, I've pretty much been living this thing for the past nearly 5 years. Taken in total, it's incredibly complicated and convoluted. Because of this, it's easy to misunderstand what is happening.
In order to effect the change we need, we all need to be acting in union, without a bunch of folks on the sidelines screaming "STOP!". So it's imperative that the tough questions be asked, and then the most thorough explanations be available. I'm too far invested in this effort to slow down now, and I didn't come this far to see us all fail. If my explanations have helped, then I'm satisfied.
The only debate on the bill, to my knowledge, was in the Senate Trans. Comm. Public Hearing on Thursday, Mar. 8 around 3-4:30pm.
Dezarms
New member
- 26
- 0
- 1
- Location
- adams wisc.
thanks Paul for all your help keeping us up to date on this issue, also in helping us understand these complicated laws. if theres anything I can do, contact me asap. thanks ,Dwayne ![[thumbzup]](https://www.steelsoldiers.com/images/smilies/icon_smile_thumzup.gif "Thumbs Up [thumbzup]")
Well the cool thing is there is an HMV plat for the M35A3, CUCVs can be titled and licensed and the rest of what got done!!!
thanks Undysworld and the other gentleman for working on all this. At least we all didn't roll over cry like whipped puppies. Now we just have to keep going and work on this till the last cat is skinned and critter is hung!
undysworld
Member
- 493
- 9
- 18
- Location
- Blue Mounds, WI
To set the record straight:
Those THANKS go to Tom, of Alfa Heaven, for all his planning and hard work. Extra THANKS go to his wife Dale, because without her internet knowledge and common sense input, we'd all have been lost!
Dezarms
New member
- 26
- 0
- 1
- Location
- adams wisc.
Thanks ,tom and Dale for all your hard work, if you need any help let us know . Dezarms.
YES, HUge thanks Tom and another double Huge thanks to Dale!!!
Yay! We have some kind of MV friendly awareness now in the legislature and hopefully the Governor signs it.........
I thinks we cannot drop the ball and must keep on the legislature until the
!!
To your effirts 
Yay! We have some kind of MV friendly awareness now in the legislature and hopefully the Governor signs it.........
I thinks we cannot drop the ball and must keep on the legislature until the
!!To your effirts
undysworld
Member
- 493
- 9
- 18
- Location
- Blue Mounds, WI
We sent this Email out yesterday to our contact group:
ANNOUNCING BIG GAINS FOR OWNERS OF FORMER MILITARY VEHICLES
In discussions with DOT, Tom has secured the following agreements.
Effective Immediately: ANY former U.S. military vehicle under 10,000 GVW may register for regular registration regardless if there is a certification label.
Effective Date (approx 7/1): All Pre-1970 former military vehicles (US and foreign) may register for regular registration; (Auto, Truck, Farm, Collector, Hobbyist, etc.)
Confirmation of problem: 1970 & newer former military vehicles which lack a certification label may still be denied registration under 341.10(6), a problem which can only be corrected through legislation. (see the next item)
BIG GAINS FOR ALL VEHICLE OWNERS
Going Forward: DOT has acknowledged the need to draft legislation to amend 341.10(6). The way it's written now, any vehicle without a certification label can be denied registration, including every pre-'70 vehicle. It will be changed, to acknowledge the federal exemption for vehicles older than 25 years. We expect to draft legislation this year, and will push for passage next year. STAY TUNED.
ANNOUNCING BIG GAINS FOR OWNERS OF COLLECTOR VEHICLES (NOT HOBBYIST)
Note: These changes will not effect HOBBYIST registration *.
As you are aware, Collector registration has recently been denied over trivial items such as radios or hubcaps. When we previously asked your opinion about such changes, the response was overwhelmingly in favor of allowing minor modifications to Collector vehicles while still staying true to the spirit of an original or historic vehicle.
In discussions with DOT, Tom has secured the following agreements.
Effective Immediately: DMV will apply as much leniency as possible in deciding which vehicles qualify for Collector registration.
Going Forward: DOT wants a specific list of changes which cannot be considered when deciding originality, and will help draft and introduce legislation for next year.
You Can Help, by submitting your ideas for this list to us. (These are things that you think DMV should overlook on a Collector vehicle application.)
Here are some of our ideas: Wheels/Tires, Color, Radio/Sound System, Safety Upgrades (ie. safety glass windows, dual circuit brakes, radial tires), original options...
We plan to set up a webpage where you can register for or against the items. We'll share the results with you and the DOT.
* Please Note - HOBBYIST: Some owners of Hobbyist vehicles opposed the original bill, stating that Hobbyist owners did not wish those laws to change. In response, we are not proposing any changes to Hobbyist registration laws. Until and unless Hobbyist owners raise concerns and problems which they wish this group to address, we will not go there.
THE FUTURE OF THIS E-MAIL GROUP
This Email goes out to owners, clubs, businesses, farmers, organizations, etc. who share a common interest in preserving old vehicles of all sorts. By forming this email group, and by everybody acting united, we have succeeding in getting this bill passed. In doing this, we have created enough political power to support each others' causes.
It was critical to get at least a part of the bill passed because that validates the power of this group. In order to do that, the bill was stripped down to just the repeal of the military vehicle ban and it ended up directly benefiting only a small segment of our group: owners of former military vehicles. Those owners understand that others have contributed to their gain, and you can be sure they are anxious to repay that effort. But the bill did much more than that, because it proved to DOT and to Legislators that we are a powerful group. Now we have their attention and we are working on getting the rest of our concerns dealt with.
Our political strength comes from all of us working together.
TO DO
Remember Who Helped Us! Sen. Glenn Grothman and Assy. Rep. Evan Wynn were responsible for this Bill getting introduced and they voted for it! They deserve your THANKS, and please remember them when it comes time to place your vote. Rep. Wynn is up for re-election soon, and he's a veteran and a terrific guy. Pass the word.
If you haven't already done so, contact your Legislators and THANK THEM for their support.
The votes were unanimous in both houses. Everybody came through for us. Locate and E-Mail your Legislators HERE.
Pass the word. Forward this E-Mail to others.
Sign-Up for E-Mails. Reply to me at undy@mhtc.net and I'll add you. Likewise, if you want to be off the list, just let me know.
ANNOUNCING BIG GAINS FOR OWNERS OF FORMER MILITARY VEHICLES
In discussions with DOT, Tom has secured the following agreements.
Effective Immediately: ANY former U.S. military vehicle under 10,000 GVW may register for regular registration regardless if there is a certification label.
Effective Date (approx 7/1): All Pre-1970 former military vehicles (US and foreign) may register for regular registration; (Auto, Truck, Farm, Collector, Hobbyist, etc.)
Confirmation of problem: 1970 & newer former military vehicles which lack a certification label may still be denied registration under 341.10(6), a problem which can only be corrected through legislation. (see the next item)
BIG GAINS FOR ALL VEHICLE OWNERS
Going Forward: DOT has acknowledged the need to draft legislation to amend 341.10(6). The way it's written now, any vehicle without a certification label can be denied registration, including every pre-'70 vehicle. It will be changed, to acknowledge the federal exemption for vehicles older than 25 years. We expect to draft legislation this year, and will push for passage next year. STAY TUNED.
ANNOUNCING BIG GAINS FOR OWNERS OF COLLECTOR VEHICLES (NOT HOBBYIST)
Note: These changes will not effect HOBBYIST registration *.
As you are aware, Collector registration has recently been denied over trivial items such as radios or hubcaps. When we previously asked your opinion about such changes, the response was overwhelmingly in favor of allowing minor modifications to Collector vehicles while still staying true to the spirit of an original or historic vehicle.
In discussions with DOT, Tom has secured the following agreements.
Effective Immediately: DMV will apply as much leniency as possible in deciding which vehicles qualify for Collector registration.
Going Forward: DOT wants a specific list of changes which cannot be considered when deciding originality, and will help draft and introduce legislation for next year.
You Can Help, by submitting your ideas for this list to us. (These are things that you think DMV should overlook on a Collector vehicle application.)
Here are some of our ideas: Wheels/Tires, Color, Radio/Sound System, Safety Upgrades (ie. safety glass windows, dual circuit brakes, radial tires), original options...
We plan to set up a webpage where you can register for or against the items. We'll share the results with you and the DOT.
* Please Note - HOBBYIST: Some owners of Hobbyist vehicles opposed the original bill, stating that Hobbyist owners did not wish those laws to change. In response, we are not proposing any changes to Hobbyist registration laws. Until and unless Hobbyist owners raise concerns and problems which they wish this group to address, we will not go there.
THE FUTURE OF THIS E-MAIL GROUP
This Email goes out to owners, clubs, businesses, farmers, organizations, etc. who share a common interest in preserving old vehicles of all sorts. By forming this email group, and by everybody acting united, we have succeeding in getting this bill passed. In doing this, we have created enough political power to support each others' causes.
It was critical to get at least a part of the bill passed because that validates the power of this group. In order to do that, the bill was stripped down to just the repeal of the military vehicle ban and it ended up directly benefiting only a small segment of our group: owners of former military vehicles. Those owners understand that others have contributed to their gain, and you can be sure they are anxious to repay that effort. But the bill did much more than that, because it proved to DOT and to Legislators that we are a powerful group. Now we have their attention and we are working on getting the rest of our concerns dealt with.
Our political strength comes from all of us working together.
TO DO
Remember Who Helped Us! Sen. Glenn Grothman and Assy. Rep. Evan Wynn were responsible for this Bill getting introduced and they voted for it! They deserve your THANKS, and please remember them when it comes time to place your vote. Rep. Wynn is up for re-election soon, and he's a veteran and a terrific guy. Pass the word.
If you haven't already done so, contact your Legislators and THANK THEM for their support.
The votes were unanimous in both houses. Everybody came through for us. Locate and E-Mail your Legislators HERE.
Pass the word. Forward this E-Mail to others.
Sign-Up for E-Mails. Reply to me at undy@mhtc.net and I'll add you. Likewise, if you want to be off the list, just let me know.
Last edited:
vtwinpilot
New member
- 81
- 0
- 0
- Location
- wisconsin
That is great new's, thank's much too all, Tom, Dale, Paul....not enough can be said. Funny I just saw a picture of 2 new Jeep's one look's like the old Kiaser pickup, and the other the flat nosed Willie's which look's alot like a Pinzgaur, wonder if they will offer it in olive drab?