redemption manual 4.5 edition

her appearances before the sub-committee, she never actually said what the "use" was. There wassome discussion about making certain "types" of vehicles subject to registration. There was evena suggestion that it might be easier if every vehicle with a motor in it was therefore required tobe titled, but the lobbyist told her listeners that every vehicle which could be titled and registeredwas potentially exempt because it is use that determines.The point I will make here about SB 124-A, and there are others, is that it resulted in the currentORS 803.035, "Optional titling rules". This paragraph provides that "upon request of anowner . .. ", any "otherwise exempt vehicle" may be titled by the DMV. When DMV accepts theowner's money and becomes title holder in fact, the vehicle becomes subject to all the provisionsof the Vehicle Code. Of course the owner sets the benefit of one form of proof of right topossession. Exhibit B actually contends that this is a benefit owners "sometimes want". Thebottom line is, "If this authority were not continued, there would be some loss of revenue". Slightmisstatement, the purpose of the bill was to obtain authority never possessed by the DMV, butthe previous sentence says, "if this authority were not continued".Options are always nice to have. Did anyone at the DMV ever tell you about their optional titlingprogram? Of course, anything that can be opted into has to have an opt out protocol. The verynext paragraph, ORS 803.040, which was part of SB 124-A, says that, an optionally titled vehiclewill so remain "until the owner uses a method recognized or established by the department toestablish the vehicle is no longer subject to the provisions of the vehicle code". That soundspretty inviting. Who knows what the method is? Who's going to say, even if he or she knows?I don't have all the answers, but I am involved in processes which are leading to moreinformation. I have used a method which must be recognized by an agency with repeated results,twice. That resulted was that the agency did not contest the method, and declined to engage inagency review of the implication of their default.After I obtained the minutes of these meetings, I had to have the audio tapes. The archivist whofilled my order told me that I was the first to ever purchase these records. Because I have metmany people who know something about the DMV scam and articulate their aggravation, if nothostility, I found it amazing that I am the first to pull these records. The Senator who chaired theSenate Transportation committee and the joint subcommittee and who became the director ofDMV, found it so amazing that I had photo copies of her eighteen year old meetings that she hadto break off abruptly from the pleasantries of sharing a latte' with me.It is hoped that by including many source citations readers will be encouraged to research forthemselves. There may be readers who would like to exchange information or reimburse me forresearch and materials. I have hard copy of all documents referred to, plus Public Record LawDemands which were made to establish the non-existence of a record. Much of the records areformatted to compact disk. There are audio tapes of four 1985 joint subcommittee onTransportation meetings, two House Transportation Committee meetings, and one SenateTransportation Committee meeting on SB 124-A. These tapes have been edited down to apresentation that can be made in one hour. The edited tape also has reference to bills to changedefinition of driver license and classes of licenses.REDEMPTION MANUAL - FOUR POINT FIVE EDITION 527