Bills · 2009-2010 Regular Session
the removal of nonconforming outdoor advertising signs.
- Introduced, stopped here
- Passes Assembly, not reached
- Passes Senate, not reached
- Governor signs, not reached
- Law, not reached
Unfamiliar terms? Glossary
What this bill does
Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau
The federal Highway Beautification Act requires states to restrict advertising
along interstate and federal-aid primary highways, and current state law
incorporates these requirements. Current law prohibits, with certain exceptions,
the erection or maintenance of outdoor advertising signs within 660 feet of, or
otherwise visible (and intended to be visible) from, the main-traveled way of an
interstate or federal-aid primary highway. The Department of Transportation may
remove signs that do not conform to applicable requirements but, for each sign
removed, must pay just compensation to the owner of the sign and to the owner of
the land on which the sign is located. Current law permits customary maintenance
of certain nonconforming signs but, if the nonconforming sign is enlarged, replaced,
or relocated, the sign may be removed without compensation.
This bill provides that any nonconforming sign may be removed without
compensation if the costs of repairing and maintaining the sign within any 36
consecutive months exceed 50 percent of the replacement costs of the sign and that
such repairs and maintenance do not constitute customary maintenance.
What it would cost
Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs
Sponsors
Votes
Assembly: Report passage recommended by committee on Transportation, Ayes 9, Noes 2
Passed 9–2 Apr 15, 2010 official source full pageNo individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Assembly: Read a third time and passed, Ayes 83, Noes 15
Passed 83–15 Apr 20, 2010 official source full pageNo individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Full history
- Apr 30, 2009 · Assembly
Introduced by Representatives Staskunas, Fields, Friske, Gunderson, Honadel, Smith, Soletski, Spanbauer, Van Roy, Vos and Zepnick;Cosponsored by Senators Kreitlow, Taylor, Grothman, Hansen, Kapanke, Leibham, Olsen and Plale
- Apr 30, 2009 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to committee on Transportation
- May 21, 2009 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Sep 10, 2009 · Assembly
Public hearing held
- Dec 3, 2009 · Assembly
Executive action taken
- Apr 15, 2010 · Assembly
Report passage recommended by committee on Transportation, Ayes 9, Noes 2
- Apr 15, 2010 · Assembly
Referred to committee on Rules
- Apr 15, 2010 · Assembly
Made a special order of business at 11:03 A.M. on 4-20-2010 pursuant to Assembly Resolution 23
- Apr 20, 2010 · Assembly
Rules suspended
- Apr 20, 2010 · Assembly
Read a third time and passed, Ayes 83, Noes 15
- Apr 20, 2010 · Assembly
Ordered immediately messaged
- Apr 20, 2010 · Assembly
Read a second time
- Apr 20, 2010 · Assembly
Ordered to a third reading
- Apr 21, 2010 · Senate
Received from Assembly
- Apr 21, 2010 · Senate
Read first time and referred to committee on Transportation, Tourism, Forestry, and Natural Resources
- Apr 28, 2010 · Senate
Failed to concur in pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1