FLORIDA CAR WARS!! SENATE SAFETY BILL PROTECTS EVERYONE BUT TAXPAYERS!

IT SHOULD READ WEBFKD!

(ED. NOTE: IF YOU ARE ON X CHECK OUT PENNYPINCHINGPATRIOT AS THEY ARE FLYING THE FLAG FOR THIS NEWEST FLORIDA FOLLY)

Most bills that end up destroying personal freedoms will start out with some positive title, like Patriot Act,and then once passed through the legislature take on a mind of it's own. Like the current Act that is being pushed through the statehouse in Florida by wunderkind Senator Joe Gruters... CS/CS/SB 92: Motor Vehicle Safety .

The bill, also named the Lilly Glaubach Act, seizes upon human tragedy and takes the opportuntity to twist it into yet another authoritarian rule. When I first heard about it, I thought this was another shitsandwich coming out of the DeSantis camp, but no, it is being pushed on us by Senator Joe Gruters.

For those not in the know, Gruters is not only a Senator in the Florida Capitol but a Trump "ally" and quiet man candidate for Florida's Chief Financial Officer (CFO) to replace Jimmy Patronis. So this Act should show you what to expect from the guy.

He doesn't disappoint.

So here's a breakdown of the Act. (from the Florida Senate site)

"Motor Vehicle Safety; Citing this act as the "Lilly Glaubach Act"; requiring that every vehicle required to be licensed in this state display a license plate on the rear and the front of the vehicle; requiring a motor vehicle repair shop to request a written crash report from a customer under certain circumstances; requiring a motor vehicle repair shop or the vendor that processes repair estimates for the motor vehicle repair shop to transmit a copy of the finalized repair estimate within a specified timeframe to a database to be established and maintained by the Department of Law Enforcement, if a customer does not provide a written crash report, etc."

It's the "etc." that always bothers the staff here at TSFC, so we did some wargaming and here's what we see as some issues.

Florida Senate Bill CS/CS/SB 92, known as the "Lilly Glaubach Act," introduces measures to enhance motor vehicle safety and regulation. The major provisions of the bill include:​Florida Senate+5Florida Senate+5FastDemocracy+5

1. Dual License Plate Requirement: All vehicles required to be licensed in Florida must display license plates on both the front and rear. ​LegiScan+6FlHouse+6palmcoastlocal.com+6

2. Crash Report Submission for Major Repairs: Motor vehicle repair shops must request a written crash report from customers when performing accident or collision repair work estimated to cost $5,000 or more. ​Florida Senate+7Florida Senate+7palmcoastlocal.com+7

3. Transaction Form in Absence of Crash Report: If the customer does not provide a crash report, the repair shop must complete a detailed transaction form approved by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (DACS), documenting information such as the shop's name and address, vehicle identification number (VIN), and a description of the vehicle's damage. ​Florida Senate+1Florida Senate+1

4. Record-Keeping and Reporting: Repair shops are required to maintain copies of transaction forms for at least one year and deliver the originals to the appropriate law enforcement agency by the end of each business day, unless other arrangements are made. Electronic submission is permitted if the necessary technology is available. ​Florida Senate+1Florida Senate+1

5. Penalties for Non-Compliance: Violations of these requirements constitute a second-degree misdemeanor. Additionally, DACS may revoke the registration of repair shops found in violation. ​Florida Senate

6. Enhanced Repair Estimate Details: The bill mandates that written repair estimates include the vehicle's VIN, adding to existing requirements. ​Florida Senate+5Florida Senate+5Florida Senate+5

The act is scheduled to take effect on July 1, 2025. (Unless we get it stopped, Ed.)

There are elements of this Act that should remind those who follow the law as reminescent of ATF inspired nonsense regarding gun stores and reporting. Coming from a business background somethings stick out. This act appears to add an unnecessary level of accounting and legal liability onto the owners of motor vehicle collision shops as well as foster aspects of a surveillance state. It may also have the eventuality of putting small collision shops out of business bringing on a monopoly of larger companies thereby rising prices.

So let's talk about those troubles.

1. Increased Administrative Burden & Legal Liability

The bill requires repair shops to collect and submit detailed documentation—including crash reports or a transaction form—to law enforcement. This adds an extra layer of bureaucracy to an industry already dealing with extensive regulations, insurance negotiations, and customer service demands.

• Small Shops at a Disadvantage: Large auto repair chains may have the administrative resources to handle this paperwork efficiently, while smaller businesses—often family-owned—might struggle to keep up, leading to penalties or forced closures.

• Risk of Legal Repercussions: If a shop inadvertently fails to submit the proper paperwork or makes an error, they could face misdemeanor charges and potential revocation of their business registration. This creates a legal minefield for small business owners.

2. Government Surveillance Concerns

• The requirement to submit repair records to law enforcement daily raises concerns about increased state monitoring of private vehicle ownership and movements.

• This could evolve into a system where the government keeps a running database of vehicle accidents, owners, and repair histories, effectively tracking citizens' driving habits and incidents without their explicit consent.

• Over time, this could lead to further expansions, such as requiring shops to install surveillance cameras or report “suspicious” activity, making private businesses an arm of the state’s monitoring apparatus.

3. Potential for Market Consolidation & Price Hikes

If smaller repair shops cannot keep up with compliance costs, they may be forced to shut down or sell to larger competitors, leading to a monopolization of the industry.

• Fewer Choices for Consumers: With fewer independent collision shops, large corporate chains could dominate the market, reducing price competition.

• Higher Prices: With a monopoly or oligopoly in place, prices for collision repair could rise, as customers would have fewer alternatives.

• Stronger Insurance Company Leverage: Large repair chains often work closely with insurance companies, meaning independent shops disappearing could result in insurers dictating repair costs, which may not be in the consumer’s best interest.

4. Unintended Consequences

• Black Market Repair Work: Some vehicle owners may bypass official repair shops altogether to avoid the reporting requirements, leading to more under-the-table, potentially unsafe repairs.

• Insurance Fraud Complications: While the bill is likely intended to prevent insurance fraud, it could paradoxically push some fraud into unregulated, harder-to-detect channels.

So, could it, in fact, as a scaled up version actually increase the amount of cars that do not go to legitimate collision shops thereby stimulating the rise in unlicensed shops in certain areas?

Yes, a scaled-up version of this law could absolutely lead to an increase in vehicles avoiding legitimate collision shops, thereby fostering the growth of unlicensed or underground repair operations. Here’s why:

1. Increased Consumer Evasion Due to Paperwork & Scrutiny

If customers know that taking their vehicle to a licensed repair shop means their accident history gets reported to law enforcement, some may choose to avoid official shops altogether.

• Fear of Higher Insurance Premiums: Even minor accidents, once documented, can raise insurance rates. If customers believe that taking their vehicle to a licensed shop automatically creates a record that insurers might use, they may seek alternatives.

• Avoiding Legal or Financial Consequences: Those driving with expired registrations, suspended licenses, or without insurance might be reluctant to have their vehicle officially repaired if they know law enforcement could access the information.

2. Expansion of Unlicensed & Underground Repair Shops

If legitimate businesses are burdened with regulations, some mechanics and body repair specialists may move to unregulated operations that don’t report repairs.

• "Backyard" or mobile repair shops: These types of operations, already prevalent in some areas, could expand as demand increases for repair services without paper trails.

• Increased use of cash payments & informal networks: Word-of-mouth and local community networks could direct customers to under-the-radar mechanics who offer services without government oversight.

3. Decrease in Repair Quality & Safety Risks

Unlicensed shops might not adhere to proper repair standards, which could lead to:

• Compromised vehicle safety: Some repairs require specialized knowledge and equipment that unlicensed shops may lack.

• Use of stolen or substandard parts: Without regulation, some shops might resort to using counterfeit or stolen parts to keep costs low.

4. Economic Consequences for Legitimate Businesses

• Revenue Loss: Licensed shops may see fewer customers, reducing revenue and forcing some to shut down.

• Higher Prices at Licensed Shops: As smaller shops close, larger chain operations could raise prices due to reduced competition.

5. Law Enforcement & Regulatory Challenges

• Difficult Enforcement: Cracking down on unlicensed repairs would require significant police resources and could result in targeting lower-income communities where underground shops may flourish.

• A Vicious Cycle: As enforcement efforts increase, so do compliance costs for legitimate shops, further driving consumers toward unregulated alternatives.

Looking at the above points, rather than increasing transparency and safety, this type of regulation may backfire by encouraging a shadow economy of unlicensed auto repairs. This shift could reduce safety, increase fraud, and hurt legitimate businesses while paradoxically making accident-related repairs less trackable than before.

So, as the Act grows a bureaucracy (at the taxpayers expense) it now needs to be able to police itself. However, Florida has a distinct problem that many other states does not have and that is the amoount of transient and temporary residents that do not have vehicles registered in the state and are therefor outside of the law. What to do?

Estimating the cost for Florida to track down and correct improperly registered or fictitiously documented vehicles is challenging, but we can make a broad estimate based on key factors such as the number of improperly registered vehicles, law enforcement costs, and administrative processing.

1. Estimating the Number of Wrongly Registered Vehicles in Florida

• Snowbirds & Out-of-State Registrations: Florida has a massive population of seasonal residents who maintain out-of-state plates but live there for extended periods. Some estimates suggest 800,000+ seasonal residents. A portion of them likely keeps out-of-state plates to avoid Florida's registration fees.

• Fictitious or Fraudulent Registrations: Florida has seen issues with fraudulent vehicle registrations, including stolen cars with fake titles and individuals using shell addresses to register vehicles. Estimates suggest that tens of thousands of cars could be improperly documented.

• Overall Non-Compliance Rate: If we assume even 2-5% of Florida’s 18 million registered vehicles are improperly documented, that’s 360,000 to 900,000 vehicles that may require investigation.

2. Cost of Law Enforcement & Administrative Work

• Law Enforcement Investigation Costs:

  • Dedicated officers for registration enforcement may earn an average of $70,000 per year (salary + benefits).

  • If 500 officers were assigned statewide for a crackdown, annual personnel costs alone would be $35 million.

  • Vehicle stops, data analysis, and follow-ups would increase expenses, likely adding another $10-15 million in operational costs.

  • Estimated law enforcement cost: $45-50 million per year

• Administrative Processing & Corrections:

  • DMV clerks handling registrations earn around $40,000 per year.

  • If each investigation results in administrative processing (title corrections, fines, or re-registration), the state would need hundreds of additional clerks.

  • Assuming 300 new employees, that’s $12 million+ per year in payroll alone.

  • Technology upgrades, system updates, and public outreach campaigns could add another $5-10 million.

  • Estimated administrative cost: $15-20 million per year

3. Total Estimated Cost

Category	Estimated Cost (Annual)
Law Enforcement	$45M - $50M
Administrative Processing	$15M - $20M
Total Cost	$60M - $70M

4. Additional Considerations

• This does not account for court costs if vehicle owners dispute citations, legal fees, or IT infrastructure to support mass verification.

• If the state expands automatic plate recognition (ALPR) systems to scan for fraudulent tags, this could require millions more in new equipment and databases.

• Revenue Recovery: Theoretically, the state could offset costs through fines, impound fees, and back registration payments, but full cost recovery is unlikely.

At $60M-$70M per year, Florida would need to weigh whether the benefit of tracking down these vehicles justifies the cost. If widespread fraud exists, some recovery of unpaid fees could help, but the program could still end up costing taxpayers more than it recovers, while also burdening law enforcement with a highly complex and bureaucratic task.

This not taking into consideration the fact that Florida would be issuing two plates per vehicle and that would have to include motor vehicles such as golfcarts that are licensed by the state.

Estimating the Cost to Florida Taxpayers for Mandating Front and Rear License Plates on All Vehicles (Including Golf Carts)

If Florida mandates that all vehicles—including street-legal golf carts—display both front and rear license plates, the cost implications would be significant. The costs can be broken down into several categories:

1. Cost of Manufacturing Additional License Plates

• Florida has approximately 18 million registered motor vehicles.

• Street-legal golf carts: Estimates suggest over 100,000 street-legal golf carts in Florida, with numbers growing due to retiree communities and urban expansion.

• Total vehicles affected: ~18.1 million

Cost Per Plate Production

• States typically pay between $2 and $5 per plate for manufacturing.

• Florida would need 18.1 million additional plates for front placement.

• Using an average cost of $3 per plate, this alone would cost:$54.3 million (one-time cost for initial rollout).

• Ongoing plate replacements and new registrations would add millions annually.

2. Administrative and IT System Costs

• Florida’s DMV would need to update its system to issue two plates per vehicle instead of one.

• Software updates, printing costs, and employee training could cost $5M to $10M.

• Estimated first-year administrative costs: $10M

• Ongoing costs: $2M-$5M per year

3. Distribution and Logistics Costs

• Shipping and handling to distribute extra plates would be a massive undertaking.

• Florida has 67 counties, each with DMV offices requiring additional storage, staffing, and materials.

• Estimated logistics cost: $10M for the first year, $3M annually thereafter

4. Compliance & Law Enforcement Costs

• Officers would need to enforce compliance, potentially leading to increased traffic stops.

• Some vehicle owners might refuse to install front plates, leading to citation processing costs.

• Estimated enforcement cost: $5M per year

5. Impact on Consumers & Taxpayers

• Direct taxpayer cost: Many states charge residents for extra plates. If Florida follows suit, residents could see an extra $10-$25 fee per year per vehicle.

• Business impact: Fleet operators, delivery vehicles, and rental car companies would bear millions in extra costs, which could be passed on to consumers.

Total Estimated Cost (First Year & Ongoing)

Category	First-Year Cost	Annual Ongoing Cost
License Plate Manufacturing	$54.3M	$5M - $10M
DMV Admin & IT Upgrades	$10M	$2M - $5M
Distribution & Logistics	$10M	$3M
Law Enforcement & Compliance	$5M	$5M
Total	$79.3M	$15M - $23M

• First-year costs could exceed $79M, with ongoing costs of $15M-$23M per year.

• Taxpayers could be forced to pay additional registration fees to cover the cost of the second plate.

• Golf cart compliance would be especially difficult, as many street-legal carts lack front plate mounting areas, requiring modifications.

• 
  

  Ultimately, the costs may outweigh the benefits, especially considering that Florida has operated efficiently with single plates for decades. The only real beneficiaries would be law enforcement agencies pushing for easier identification in front-facing camera systems.

So it would seem that a seemingly innocuous law that has misappropriated the name of a young victim, will instead have the opportunity victimize 1000s of Florida motor vehicle owners....

So who is this law made to protect? or Benefit to be more exact.

While the Act is framed as a motor vehicle safety measure, its actual beneficiaries may not include Florida taxpayers. Instead, the primary winners are likely insurance companies, law enforcement, and possibly large corporate auto repair chains. Below is a breakdown of who gains the most and why.

1. Insurance Companies – The Biggest Beneficiaries

Insurance companies stand to gain significantly from this Act because it increases accident documentation and repair tracking, which can be used to:

• Reduce fraudulent claims: By requiring repair shops to collect crash reports or create transaction records, insurers can better track damage histories and dispute fraudulent claims.

• Increase premium adjustments: More accident reports mean insurers have more data to justify premium increases, even for minor, previously unreported accidents.

• Push for preferred repair networks: Insurance companies already pressure policyholders to use large corporate repair chains instead of independent shops. If small businesses struggle with compliance, insurers can further monopolize the repair market by directing consumers to shops they control.

✅ Verdict: Insurance companies win big—more data, fewer fraudulent claims, and more control over repair costs.

2. Law Enforcement & Government Agencies

• More oversight: The law gives law enforcement agencies daily access to repair records, allowing them to track accident trends and enforce vehicle safety laws more aggressively.

• Potential revenue from citations: If repair shops fail to comply, they could be fined or even shut down, generating revenue for the state.

• Surveillance expansion: A database of damaged vehicles could be used for traffic monitoring, civil asset forfeiture cases, or even tracking individuals' movements based on vehicle repair data.

✅ Verdict: Government and law enforcement gain increased oversight and revenue opportunities.

3. Large Corporate Repair Chains (Like Caliber Collision, Gerber Collision, etc.)

• Market consolidation: Smaller, independent repair shops may struggle to comply with the law’s requirements, while large corporate chains have legal teams and administrative support to handle the paperwork.

• Less competition = higher prices: With fewer independent shops, the large players can raise prices without fear of competition.

• More insurer partnerships: Insurance companies prefer working with large repair chains, so eliminating small competitors funnels more business to big corporate networks.

✅ Verdict: Big collision chains benefit by eliminating small competitors and strengthening ties with insurers.

Who Does Not Benefit?

1. Florida Taxpayers & Vehicle Owners

• Higher repair costs: As independent shops shut down, prices may increase due to lack of competition.

• More bureaucracy & delays: Repair processes could slow down due to the extra paperwork required before a repair can even begin.

• Potential tax burden: If the law requires new enforcement measures (e.g., database maintenance, increased DMV staffing), taxpayers could end up footing the bill.

❌ Verdict: Taxpayers get little to no benefit—just more costs and headaches.

2. Small & Independent Collision Repair Shops

• Compliance costs: Shops must handle extra paperwork, maintain records for law enforcement, and submit reports.

• Risk of penalties: If a shop makes a clerical error or misses a submission deadline, it could face fines or even revocation of its business license.

• Less customer trust: Some customers may avoid official repair shops to prevent insurance premium hikes, leading to revenue loss.

❌ Verdict: Small businesses face major risks and could be driven out of the market.

Final Conclusion – Who Wins & Who Loses?

✅ Winners:✔ Insurance companies – More data, fewer fraud cases, easier premium increases.✔ Law enforcement & government agencies – More tracking, potential revenue from fines, surveillance expansion.✔ Large corporate repair chains – Less competition, higher profits.

❌ Losers:✘ Florida taxpayers & vehicle owners – Higher repair costs, more bureaucracy, potential tax burden.✘ Small & independent repair shops – Increased costs, penalties, possible closures.

The law appears not to be designed for the average Floridian’s benefit, but rather to protect corporate interests, increase surveillance, and drive market consolidation.

Funny enough, it would seem that Sen Gruters has at least one dog in the fight. Do a cursory scan of his political donors and we see at least...

An examination of Florida Senator Joe Gruters' campaign contributions reveals that the insurance industry has been a notable supporter of his political endeavors. According to OpenSecrets, during the 2022 election cycle, the insurance sector contributed $6,000 to his campaign, positioning it among his top contributors. ​OpenSecrets+1OpenSecrets+1

This financial backing suggests a potential alignment between Senator Gruters and insurance companies, which are among the primary beneficiaries of the proposed legislation. The Act's provisions, such as requiring auto repair shops to collect and submit crash reports before initiating repairs, could enhance insurers' ability to monitor and manage claims, thereby reducing fraud and potentially lowering their operational costs.​WUSF

While the available data does not specify contributions from large corporate auto repair chains, the support from the insurance industry indicates that stakeholders who stand to gain from increased oversight and regulation in vehicle repairs have financially supported Senator Gruters' campaigns. This correlation suggests that the Act may serve the interests of these contributors by promoting measures that could lead to more stringent control over the auto repair and insurance claims processes.​

WHAT TO DO NOW???

Floridians can contact their local Senator and Representative and tell them to kill this nonsensical Act before it gets a chance to see the light of day.

Senate: https://www.flsenate.gov/about/contact

Rep: https://www.flhouse.gov/contentViewer.aspx?Category=website&File=contact%20us.htm

And of course, Governor Ron Desantis: https://www.flgov.com/eog/leadership/people/ron-desantis/contact

This is the oldest trick in the book. While all eyes are on Washington, the swamp oozes out locally. let's work on Liberty and Fiscal Responsibility here at home as well as nationally