Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

CT owners, help Tesla on Feb 6th at public hearing

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
A bill (#198) has been proposed by a local Senator who himself has ordered a Tesla, to allow Tesla to sell directly to its customers. Though the title/intent of the bill doesn't name Tesla specifically, but we all know what they are talking about.

The hearing is to be held by the Transportation Committee on Feb 6th at 10:30am. At this time I don't have a set time. Representatives from Tesla's legal team will be on hand.


Please reach out to Allan Woolmer (Milford Service Center manager) at [email protected] to get more information.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
All -

The hearing is now scheduled for Friday the 6th at 10:30am....

From Will Nicholas at Tesla Motors:

The Transportation Committee will hold a public hearing on Friday, February 6, 2015 at 10:30 A.M. in Room 1E of the
Hartford, CT Legislative Office Building at 300 Capitol Ave Hartford CT 06106

I will be there!

Aaron
 
I'll try to support the event. Cuts into work schedule a bit though. I posted this fall after an event at the capital building sponsored by the Connecticut Auto Retailers Association (excerpt below). I was really alarmed by the pro dealer language in the meeting. Complete lack of mention of Tesla by any politician or panel member.

"More inspiration: I'm coming fresh off a very concerning day at Hartford Capital Building Drive Electric Event. That event was sponsored by the Connecticut Auto Retailers Association (CARA) and the DEEP. I was the only Tesla at the event, and drew the ire of the majority auto-dealer brass with my posters explaining the law preventing Tesla from selling in CT, and the recent decision by MA supreme judicial court to throw out the lawsuit against Tesla. A "Panel of Experts" Discussion was led by the DEEP Commissioner Rob Klee and CT Automotive Retailers Association President James Flemming. I was really alarmed by the unbalanced pro-dealership language in the panel discussion. This discussion took place inside our beloved state legislative building. Tesla of course was not mentioned, even by the public officials. The only hint at the dealer conflict was was a comment by Sierra Club Panel Member Martin Mador that "we need to recognize that just because we did something yesterday, doesn't mean we should do it again today and going forward".

If the law changes, I'm told by Milford Service that Tesla wants to open showrooms in Milford, West Farms Mall, and Greenwich to market their cars. Let's help get the young voters educated on this issue.

Sept 15th Dealer Award Ceremony and Panel Discussion Members
DEEP Commissioner Rob Klee
Connecticut Automotive Retailers Association President James Fleming
NADA - Michael Harrington (Michael Harrington)
GM - Kevin Kelly
Ford - Ann McDonough
M Benz - Michael Schweizer
State Sen. - Toni Boucher
State Rep. - Lonnie Reed
Nissan - Joan Gough
Toyota - Kevin Kinnaw
Lawyer - Mark LaBel
Sierra Club - Martin Mador
 
Below is the CT law currently preventing Tesla from selling and being manufacturer simultaneously. There are obviously no Tesla Dealers being protected by this law! If the law were changed to say no person, firm, or corporation licensed as a manufacturer in accordance with the provisions of section 14-67 may be the holder of a new or used car dealer's license if there are existing non-manufacturer owned dealers selling the same make of new automobiles in the state.

CT General Status, Chapter 246, Section 14-52b

(b) Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d) of this section, no person, firm or corporation licensed as a manufacturer in accordance with the provisions of section 14-67a may be the holder of a new or used car dealer’s license issued in accordance with the provisions of section 14-52, except a manufacturer may operate as a dealer on a temporary basis in accordance with the provisions of subdivision (8) of section 42-133cc. The provisions of this subsection shall apply to any firm or corporation that is owned or controlled by a manufacturer, as determined by the commissioner. Any applicant for a new or used car dealer license that is denied a license under the provisions of this subsection shall be entitled to a hearing in accordance with the provisions of chapter 54.
 
Here's how I would propose modifying that law (changes underlined)
CT General Status, Chapter 246, Section 14-52b

(b) Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d) of this section, no person, firm or corporation licensed as a manufacturer in accordance with the provisions of section 14-67a may be the holder of a new or used car dealer’s license issued in accordance with the provisions of section 14-52 if said manufacturer has a franchise contract with any new car dealer in the state as of February 1, 2015, except a manufacturer may operate as a dealer on a temporary basis in accordance with the provisions of subdivision (8) of section 42-133cc. The provisions of this subsection shall apply to any firm or corporation that is owned or controlled by a manufacturer, as determined by the commissioner. Any applicant for a new or used car dealer license that is denied a license under the provisions of this subsection shall be entitled to a hearing in accordance with the provisions of chapter 54.
We don't need to win the big battle of revoking this entire provision, which will have every car dealer in the state twisting arms against the change. The change I propose above is only useful for new entrants, like Tesla, Tata, BYD, Lit Motors, etc., which is sufficient.
 
Here's how I would propose modifying that law (changes underlined)
We don't need to win the big battle of revoking this entire provision, which will have every car dealer in the state twisting arms against the change. The change I propose above is only useful for new entrants, like Tesla, Tata, BYD, Lit Motors, etc., which is sufficient.

Robert, your point at the end is actually what the dealers afraid of. Not Tesla per se, but the hole in the dike that Tesla creates, which is then widened by new entrants from China and India, and ultimately becomes so big that their franchisors decide they need to go direct in some form. This won't happen overnight, but it is likely to happen and would be a nightmare for those not prepared.

The irony is that as a result of consolidation many dealers are no longer local mom & pop operations, including megadealers and corporates like Autonation. They should have the wherewithal to add value and survive.
 
Robert, your point at the end is actually what the dealers afraid of. Not Tesla per se, but the hole in the dike that Tesla creates, which is then widened by new entrants from China and India, and ultimately becomes so big that their franchisors decide they need to go direct in some form. This won't happen overnight, but it is likely to happen and would be a nightmare for those not prepared.
Peter, I hope you'd agree that they will fight such a limited exemption less vigorously than they would a complete removal of the ban on manufacturers owning dealerships. Telling an Audi dealer that BYD can sell BYD cars direct is far less of a threat than telling the Audi dealer that Audi can direct.
 
All -

The hearing went really well and I think we have the legislator's on Tesla's side to come to a compromise which will allow Tesla to open 4-5 stores in CT and not offend the Auto Dealers Association (too) much... Now they will have to deliberate, possibly have another hearing and come to a decision.

You can see some pictures and captions I posted to the @TeslaRoadTrip twitter feed:

https://twitter.com/TeslaRoadTrip

Aaron