UPDATE: Feb. 4, 2022
SB 146 was amended to add the problematic language that will penalize an electric vehicle driver if their car becomes unplugged. The amended bill was approved on 2nd reading on Thursday and will likely pass in the Senate. The House bill HB 157 passed out of the Motor Vehicle and Transportation Subcommittee on Thursday. That bill was amended to remove the requirement to post official signs at all charging stations funded with public money. Tesla objected to the mandatory enforcable signs:
“There are commercial properties who would like to install charging infrastructure but would not want to install a sign as required under HB157. For example, an establishment with limited spaces for customer parking may not be willing to limit its parking to EV customers only. The approach in the crossfiled bill, SB146, to outline what should be on a sign if a property owner chooses to install one, without requiring their installation, is a better approach to ensuring that potential site hosts are not dissuaded from installing EV chargers on their property.”
Tesla testimony regarding Maryland HB 157
Maryland House Bill 157 and Senate Bill 146 were originally described as: “Prohibiting stopping, standing, or parking a vehicle that is not a plug-in electric vehicle in a parking space that is designated for the use of plug-in electric vehicles.”
California Got it Wrong
Unfortunately, Maryland’s “anti-ICEing” bills contain problematic language that GM bullied into California AB 475 in 2011. EV advocates including Plug In America tried to stop AB 475 before it became law. One compelling reason was that other states look to California when adopting electric vehicle policies. Unfortunately, the efforts of the EV community to overturn the wishes of General Motors were not successful. Therefore, we must continue to educate lawmakers on a state-by-state basis on the consequences of borrowing from the bad California “anti-ICEing” law.
Read More …