Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Window Tinting Inspection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Conference committee shelves senate window‑tinting change amid enforcement and cost concerns
Summary
Senate-proposed window‑tint standard (70% visible light transmission) was removed from the house draft; committee members raised enforcement, equipment-cost, and inspection-capacity concerns and left the item open for further work.
Conference negotiators discussed whether to adopt the Senate’s change setting a 70% visible-light-transmission (VLT) standard for front windshield and front‑seat windows and instead agreed to leave the house deletion of that standard in place while they pursue more information.
The committee heard several practical concerns: current statute and the inspection manual treat windshield coverings and applied coatings differently; enforcement resources are limited; and the machines that measure VLT were estimated in testimony to cost roughly $100–$400 per unit. Committee members said requiring measurement equipment at inspection stations and for some law‑enforcement uses could impose heavy costs across hundreds of inspection sites and police units.
Members also noted conflicting enforcement practices: the manual currently treats applied coatings over windshields as a fail, but coatings on driver and passenger side windows are advisory at inspection and remain ticketable by law enforcement. That inconsistency, committee members said, could leave motorists confused and inspection mechanics placed in an enforcement role. One member summarized that "by you've taken that out, and then... you just stick with what's there currently," meaning the bill would keep current law and inspection practice if the Senate VLT language is not agreed to.
The chair and members emphasized the broader question of what the state is trying to accomplish with vehicle inspections — safety, affordability, or enforcement — and whether a large capital outlay for testing equipment is practical while enforcement levels are low. The committee did not vote; tinting language was listed as open for further negotiation and will be revisited after additional information on equipment costs, enforcement feasibility, and inspection‑process goals is provided.
