• Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!

  • Microsoft MSN, Live, Hotmail, Outlook email users may not be receiving emails. We are working to resolve this issue. Please add support@steelsoldiers.com to your trusted contacts.

WisDOT on the warpath again!

vtwinpilot

New member
81
0
0
Location
wisconsin
Good to hear the fight continues. Curious on how the lady got yanked after all this time. Was it via random pull over or anal retentive property watchers or did they dredge it up on the database? Can't wait for some old biker with a WLA to get told their registration has been yanked after decades of legal use. Then the cat's will hit the powerline. I still consider Holperin to have been instrumental in stripping use from the US common conversion's, if just for his casual non-comprehension. He reminds me of a lawyer working both sides until he get's dis-barred.
 
Last edited:

undysworld

Member
493
9
18
Location
Blue Mounds, WI
FlyingVan,
Thanks.

VTwin,
FYI: She and her husband had purchased it in the 60's, then moved to Wis and titled it as a Collector in '79. In '09 they sold it to their daughter/son in law, who also registered it as a Collector. But in '10 they got it back. Shortly afterward, her husband passed away, and the re-registration got side-tracked. Just recently she applied for Collector plates and was denied.

Re: Holperin. Casual non-comprehension is probably closest. But consider that the whole collector/milveh issue is a pretty small matter, relative to every other concern nowdays. Legislators have bigger fish to fry. DOT succeeded in making it out to be as confusing as possible. So it is tough for legislators to cut through the BS and understand the issue.

Holperin may have mis-comprehended some of it. But it was still he who declared about the other bill that they would "ram the it down DOT's throat", and then did.

Criticism and credit where due.

Cheers,
Paul
 

vtwinpilot

New member
81
0
0
Location
wisconsin
Interesting, I wonder what would happen if someone just claimed it was a "jeep" and pulled the same non-comprehension on it's former mv status. Good point's on the chairman. I believe I plainly made my case multiple times. I was given a some what of an offer of an exemption. Since I did not see it as fair that my personal vehicle of choice be the only exclusion I stubbornly insisted on all "common civilian conversions" be excluded which were the - Chevy's, Jeep's, Dodge's, and Motorcycles-Harley's, Indians, Kawasaki's, Cushman. These list's not set in stone as I insisted on all US made and any vehicles that have been allowed remain allowed for use. I could have just accepted a chance at personal exemption but I still might own a WLA or other vehicle some day and did not want the door slammed shut. I still have a hunch the dmv may not have considered including the bikes if they were not mentioned in the first place. Thank's for the detailed input.......Paul. Don't mind me I'll beat this Deadhorse till it's exit pipe whistles the star spangled banner.:deadhorse:
 

vtwinpilot

New member
81
0
0
Location
wisconsin
In WI auto-rv there is a 1945 GMC duk for sale, 125000.00$, if I cracked the lotto I'd score it put regular plates on it and pull my Blazer around with it. Chairman Holperin was campaining on recall day and a retired veteran said he would not vote for him mainly due to his role with the dot...he claimed he was "not familiar with that legislation" Distract and deflect. I will no longer consider that "casual non-comprehension" it's more like straight up BS.
 
Last edited:

vtwinpilot

New member
81
0
0
Location
wisconsin
Time to drag this back out from under the rug. I do not know how I missed this or if it was changed after the fact. During a recent visit to a DMV I grabbed a copy of the collector regs. As usual it states vehicles must be 20 years old and un-modified and un-altered. What I never caught before was it then listed the 4 chosen mv's allowed Dukw,Humvee,Kiaser and Pinzgaur which were listed under the simple statement-Four former military vehicles (even if altered or modified). That last line in parenthesis floored me...............So I can throw a blown small block chevy with side pipes in a Pinzgauer and get collector plates? Guess CUCV owners will have to buy the body off one of the chosen 3 (DUKW) does'nt fit in this anywhere with any reason. and modify it to their chassis if they want to actually use it..............unfreakinreal.
 
Last edited:

Hightechken

New member
115
0
0
Location
NE Wisconsin
Time to drag this back out from under the rug. I do not know how I missed this or if it was changed after the fact. During a recent visit to a DMV I grabbed a copy of the collector regs. As usual it states vehicles must be 20 years old and un-modified and un-altered. What I never caught before was it then listed the 4 chosen mv's allowed Dukw,Humvee,Kiaser and Pinzgaur which were listed under the simple statement-Four former military vehicles (even if altered or modified). That last line in parenthesis floored me...............So I can throw a blown small block chevy with side pipes in a Pinzgauer and get collector plates? Guess CUCV owners will have to buy the body off one of the chosen 3 (DUKW) does'nt fit in this anywhere with any reason. and modify it to their chassis if they want to actually use it..............unfreakinreal.
YEP! Really. How shady can you get? An exemption for those four vehicles?
It is fine to issue a collector plate to a Pinzgaur but not a common CUCV?

It is very clear that Wisconsin has far too many lawyer types and others working at DOT that need to be defunded.
I agree with the first post. Contact your elected representatives NOW and DEMAND action. Also be sure to write to Scott Walker and tell him where to save some more money for the state. Eliminate those upper story jobs at DOT!
 

Fishtail

New member
121
0
0
Location
stevens point wisconsin
That's what is wrong with the current WIS motor vehicle laws for military vehicles, they have exemptions for certain vehicles. Should be for all ex. military vehicles, not certain vehicles.

Why on earth would someone go through all the trouble lobbying Madison and attending hearings, etc. and then say 'well how about just the doohicky and the thingajig' instead of them all.

Crying about it to Madison again could get the laws tightened even more.

Scott
 

undysworld

Member
493
9
18
Location
Blue Mounds, WI
VTwin,

Thanks for resurrecting this thread. You're right, the laws here are nutty.

I've previously posted the chain of events which led up to last year's laws being enacted, so I'm not going to repeat myself. They leave a lot to be desired, and corrected.

Perhaps I should be apologizing for the 4 milvehs eligible for Collector plates, because I do bear primary responsibility for the law existing. (But many others helped too. My thanks go to them.) But that was a hard-won fight for additional rights, beyond those in the HMV law. It's an unfair privilege, but we earned it. Now we need to extend those privileges to other military vehicles too.

The other law, the "HMV law", has created as many problems as it corrected. Mostly these problems are due to DOT's policy of refusing Regular or Collector registrations for military vehicles unless the owner can prove that the vehicles "meets FMVSS", under 341.10(6m). This is the law that is keeping CUCV's from registering. NOTE: The legislative record of the HMV bill shows that the DOT atty. Paul Nilsen was responsible for adding this prohibition into the HMV bill.

Hightechken,

You are right, CUCV's should absolutely be eligible for registration. DOD documents indicate that FMVSS compliance was part of the MILSPEC contract requirements. This goes for nearly all milvehs on tires, including motorcycles. I gave DOT those documents.

Since spring, I have been meeting with DOT on this, trying to get them to either change their internal policy to correct this, or work on additional legislation to rewrite the law. Tom Zat from Alfa Heaven has been involved also. We have additionally assisted two owners in conducting appeals of their denials. We believe legislation is necessary to resolve things.

We have reached preliminary common ground with DOT on a few issues, but not made any positive changes yet. One appeal decision is still pending, and the second one was withdrawn during the appeal when it came out that the Jeep was a civilian chassis.

The final legislative session of 2011 begins on Tues., Oct. 18, and runs through Nov. 3. Any legislative change this year will have to get passed by then, and will need Gov. Walker's signature after that. Instead of contacting your representatives to complain about it now, please wait until we can get some legislation written which you can support.

Tom and I have tried to make contact with all collector groups in the state, including military vehicles and civilian vehicles. We will notify everybody when we have a numbered bill, which people can refer to when they contact their representatives. If you are not a member of a group and wish to be contacted directly, you may send your email address to me. I will also post info here on Steel Soldiers.

Fishtail,

Understand that I/we didn't set out to get a list of four vehicles. Please see earlier posts for the details. All I can tell you is: you don't always get what you ask for.

Assuming we are able to get a bill drafted to fix things, I hope you'll be willing to come to Madison and stand up for your/our rights with us. WisDOT has worked very hard to manipulate the laws and policy, and we'll need to stand united to correct things. The alternative is that we lose individually.


PLEASE STAY TUNED FOR UPDATES ON THIS IN THE NEAR FUTURE!​
 

gerrykan

Member
386
5
18
Location
SGF, MO
YEP! Really. How shady can you get? An exemption for those four vehicles?
It is fine to issue a collector plate to a Pinzgaur but not a common CUCV?
Simple really,
A few owners of the afore mentioned vehicles fought for their right to register and license them.


Some did not know anything was afoot.




Others stood by and watched, as their rights were given away by someone that allegedly represented them.*

*This statement is why I am no longer a member of the MVPA after 20+ years.
Unfortunately, I have made confidentiality promises, and cannot tell everything I know.
 

kaziboku

New member
26
0
1
Location
crivitz/WI
Letters don't seem to work and threats definitely accomplish very little. Catharsis is OK but what about a class action suit against the state and specific unethical individuals abusing the power of their office? Do we have the wherewithal to instigate a class action suit?
 

simp5782

Feo, Fuerte y Formal
Supporting Vendor
12,125
9,384
113
Location
Mason, TN
Yea Wisconsin is one of those states that doesn't make sense. They don't support letting people have vintage military trucks? That is a bunch of crap. Luckily they don't issue concealed carry permits cause they have a lot of angry MV drivers that are armed and angry.
 

jimk

In Memorial
In Memorial
1,046
45
48
Location
Syracuse, New York
Luckily they don't issue concealed carry permits cause they have a lot of angry MV drivers that are armed and angry.
I don't think there will be a call to arms over this issue. It is probably best if that aspect is not even be mentioned.

update- Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker recently signed into law the Personal Protection Act. Details are in the Nov 2011 American Rifleman (below, second page is in the upper right, to read- right click>save image>save> then zoom in on the image file). The NRA does not take credit in the article surely played a big part. With NRA membership over 4 million there are good financial and political resources available.

The problem with the Wisconsin MV Law fight is a lack of those resources. What is the MVPA doing? Though only 10,000 strong there is strength in numbers. Maybe send a few letters that way too.

Maybe see if the local/regional news media if they will do a favorable piece on the issue? A well thought out and polite inquiry, like Mark's (kaziboku) letter, might sell the idea. They would make a powerful ally. They might be more interested with the Veterans Day parades around the corner. Or next year's Memorial Day parade... Parade coverage would convey the community service aspect well. It would also be a good importunity to meet and lobby politicians as they are always at them.
 

Attachments

Fishtail

New member
121
0
0
Location
stevens point wisconsin
Fishtail,

Understand that I/we didn't set out to get a list of four vehicles. Please see earlier posts for the details. All I can tell you is: you don't always get what you ask for.

Assuming we are able to get a bill drafted to fix things, I hope you'll be willing to come to Madison and stand up for your/our rights with us. WisDOT has worked very hard to manipulate the laws and policy, and we'll need to stand united to correct things. The alternative is that we lose individually.



PLEASE STAY TUNED FOR UPDATES ON THIS IN THE NEAR FUTURE!​
I understand that the DOT can do whatever they want, and I do appreciate the effort that was made. I just think that there should have been no mention of any particular model at those hearings. The DOT didn't need any more information than that they are former military vehicles.

Scott
 

undysworld

Member
493
9
18
Location
Blue Mounds, WI
I understand that the DOT can do whatever they want, and I do appreciate the effort that was made. I just think that there should have been no mention of any particular model at those hearings. The DOT didn't need any more information than that they are former military vehicles.

Scott
Scott,

Judging by your "join date", you apparently missed most of the fray. Again, I ask that you reread previous posts. Again, I agree that a list was undesirable. However, it turned out to be the only avenue available to assure any normal usage of my vehicle. The list was NOT my idea, but rather what came from the Sen. Trans. Comm. Chair. It was necessary because the HMV bill did not allow ANY normal usage.

You are wrong that DOT only needed to know that they are former military vehicles. The ONLY pertinent issue is whether that vehicle met applicable federal and state standards for on-road operation, regardless of who the initial purchaser was (U.S. govt.). This standard must be applied for both milvehs and civilian vehicles. If it got an SF-97, then it should be able to get registered for on-road use beyond parade/display uses, such as regular registration.

And again, for the record, the prohibition which WisDOT is currently applying to deny registration for milvehs like Blazers and pickups [s.341.10(6m), Wis. Stats.] was included as part of the HMV legislation, not the "list". It was added by the DOT attorney, not at the request of the collectors.
 

Tanner

Active member
1,013
11
38
Location
Raleigh, NC
The point here is that the state of Wisconsin already had numerous 'ex-mil vehicles' titled and registered for use on the highway, and had been more than happy to collect taxes and fees on said vehicles. Also, said ex-mil vehicles were obviously functioning on the highways without issues for a period of years, until one of the 99%-ers in WisDOT got their skivvies in a twist. Yet, it appears that no one in the WisDOT has the brass marbles to stand up and say 'It was I' that pushed for these bans...

Keep up the fight, Undy! The state of Wisconsin needs more civilian usable trucks, and fewer parade trailer queens...

'T'
 
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website like our supporting vendors. Their ads help keep Steel Soldiers going. Please consider disabling your ad blockers for the site. Thanks!

I've Disabled AdBlock
No Thanks