Bills · 2017-2018 Regular Session
Relating to: outdoor advertising signs that do not conform to local ordinances and that are affected by certain transportation-related projects. (FE)
Billboard Ordinance Road — Construction and repair Road — Expressway Transportation, department of — Roads
- 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
This bill revises the standards governing the treatment of outdoor advertising
signs that do not conform to local ordinances (signs) and that are affected by certain
transportation-related public projects.
Under current law, if a highway project of the Department of Transportation
causes the realignment of a sign, the realignment does not affect the sign's
nonconforming status under the ordinance. “Realignment” is defined as relocation
on the same site. If DOT proposes the realignment of a sign in connection with a
highway project, DOT must notify the municipality or county that adopted the
ordinance to which the sign does not conform of the sign's proposed realignment. The
municipality or county may then petition DOT to condemn the sign instead of
realigning the sign, but must pay DOT for certain costs of condemnation if DOT
succeeds in condemning the sign.
This bill expands the types of projects covered, eliminates the realignment
provision, and creates provisions related to signs that are removed and signs whose
visibility is reduced. Under this bill, if a transportation project for which DOT has
allocated state or federal funds (state project) causes the removal of a sign, the sign's
nonconforming status under the ordinance is not affected if the sign is repositioned
or, if the sign cannot be repositioned, the sign is transferred to a parcel on the same
highway or, if the sign cannot be transferred to a parcel on the same highway, to
another parcel to which the sign owner and the municipality agree the sign may be
transferred. If a state project reduces the visibility of a sign, the sign's
nonconforming status under the ordinance is not affected if the sign is repositioned,
or, if the sign cannot be repositioned, the sign face is raised, lowered, or rotated so
as to provide substantially the same view of the sign from the roadway from which
motorists are intended to view the sign as existed before the state project, or, if the
sign cannot be repositioned and the sign face cannot be adjusted, the sign is
transferred. “Reposition” under this bill means to remove a sign and erect the sign
or a replacement sign on the same parcel and not more than 25 feet in either
direction, measured parallel to the roadway, and not more than 660 feet, measured
perpendicular to the roadway, from the location from which the sign is removed.
“Transfer” under this bill means to remove a sign and erect the sign or a replacement
sign within the same municipality.
Also under this bill, if DOT proposes the repositioning or transfer of a sign in
connection with a state project, DOT must notify the municipality or county that
adopted the ordinance to which the sign does not conform of the sign's proposed
repositioning or transfer. The municipality or county may then petition DOT to
condemn the sign instead of repositioning or transferring the sign, but must pay DOT
for certain costs of condemnation if DOT succeeds in condemning the sign.
What it would cost
Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs
Sponsors
Votes
Assembly: Report Assembly Amendment 3 adoption recommended by Committee on Transportation, Ayes 9, Noes 4
Passed 9–4 Feb 15, 2018 official source full pageNo individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Assembly: Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Transportation, Ayes 9, Noes 4
Passed 9–4 Feb 15, 2018 official source full pageNo individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Full history
- Oct 27, 2017 · Assembly
Introduced by Representatives Vorpagel, Allen, Ballweg, R. Brooks, Considine, Felzkowski, Fields, Horlacher, Jacque, Kulp, Thiesfeldt and VanderMeer; cosponsored by Senators Feyen, Olsen and Wanggaard
- Oct 27, 2017 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to Committee on Transportation
- Nov 15, 2017 · Assembly
Representative Vruwink added as a coauthor
- Dec 5, 2017 · Assembly
Public hearing held
- Dec 14, 2017 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Dec 15, 2017 · Assembly
Assembly Amendment 1 offered by Representative Billings
- Dec 15, 2017 · Assembly
Assembly Amendment 2 offered by Representative Billings
- Feb 13, 2018 · Assembly
Assembly Amendment 3 offered by Representative Vorpagel
- Feb 15, 2018 · Assembly
Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Transportation, Ayes 9, Noes 4
- Feb 15, 2018 · Assembly
Referred to committee on Rules
- Feb 15, 2018 · Assembly
Made a special order of business at 1:15 PM on 2-20-2018 pursuant to Assembly Resolution 26
- Feb 15, 2018 · Assembly
Executive action taken
- Feb 15, 2018 · Assembly
Report Assembly Amendment 3 adoption recommended by Committee on Transportation, Ayes 9, Noes 4
- Feb 20, 2018 · Assembly
Read a second time
- Feb 20, 2018 · Assembly
Assembly Amendment 3 adopted
- Feb 20, 2018 · Assembly
Ordered to a third reading
- Feb 20, 2018 · Assembly
Rules suspended
- Feb 20, 2018 · Assembly
Read a third time and passed
- Feb 20, 2018 · Assembly
Ordered immediately messaged
- Feb 21, 2018 · Senate
Received from Assembly
- Mar 13, 2018 · Senate
Read first time and referred to committee on Transportation and Veterans Affairs
- Mar 28, 2018 · Senate
Failed to concur in pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1