[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6335883,"mediaKeyId","2288461-9fc1dd77ccdceb3bce900aaf488f7e98","parentId",2288461,"title","Senate committee examines statewide moratorium on billboards; proponents cite safety and scenic benefits, industry warns economic harm","audioSeconds",3072,"startMs",4183515,"endMs",7256055,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2288461-9fc1dd77ccdceb3bce900aaf488f7e98&start=4183&end=7256","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2288461-9fc1dd77ccdceb3bce900aaf488f7e98/thumbnail_4183515.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6335883/Minnesota/Senate-committee-examines-statewide-moratorium-on-billboards-proponents-cite-safety-and-scenic-benefits-industry-warns-economic-harm","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6335883-7892e8ca585ca8204a0e9b09c9c4109f/orig.mp4?Expires=1775405669&Signature=UgyaOyZkyNcoTe4RsOpIVHseRKlvYKqZLZPfOTeClsbn7RcenuJBeuiaaxdQZRj2CgYC6Xalkj9Pd58jIi0ZpSg7vbLgbx0C0H79Ndco543-C7PFXihokctKsNzNNvEIOiNq7U~bs1mkCU-haBJSeaR6LTQezyZzgm01b78TnDQl~Ricb04jj9JUaxG6DLkaIHCu4bQ8Myp58EwKtHjxAw8vSQmdZwGk2C0tOmxv27kNWatNvRwY21UrQ7Ds1VFxyGWY11p63tJOZ7Kc0sowsODd2x17teynELM8jN8z~6Laan-W0FzKpI6KDJxlRY3k3u7LSSNaCOBy2-QYdfbSuQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Minnesota Senate Media Services","date","2025-02-12T00:00:00Z","article","ST. PAUL, Minn. — The Senate Transportation Committee heard competing testimony Feb. 12 on Senate File 4-85, a bill from Senator Marty that would place a statewide moratorium on new off‑premise billboards, declare existing off‑premise billboards nonconforming and allow jurisdictions to phase removal via amortization. After extended testimony from both supporters and the outdoor‑advertising industry, the committee laid the bill on the table.

Senator John Marty (sponsor) framed the bill as a modest, statewide moratorium that preserves local control for existing billboards while preventing new installations. “It’s just simply saying, don't we have enough billboards?” Marty said, adding concerns about scenic character, safety and taxpayer costs when billboards must be removed for road projects.

Mark Falzone, president of Scenic America, told the committee his group supports the bill, citing studies that link billboards — especially digital and dynamic signs — to driver distraction and increased risk of accidents. Falzone also highlighted energy and light‑pollution concerns and pointed to a previously reported payment of about $4.32 million by MnDOT (reported in testimony as a Ramsey County District Court award related to a Lafayette Bridge relocation) to compensate a billboard company when a digital billboard had to be removed during a highway project.

Local residents and community advocates described billboards as “visual pollution” and urged limiting expansion. Jeanne Weigam and John Manillo of Scenic Saint Paul said billboards capture a taxpayer‑funded audience (road users) without producing commensurate public benefit and make redevelopment more expensive by creating buy‑out liabilities for property owners and the state.

Industry witnesses strongly opposed the bill. Andrew Carlson, representing the Minnesota Outdoor Advertising Association, said billboards are a cost‑effective advertising medium relied on primarily by local businesses and noted national surveys that advertisers value out‑of‑home placements. Brian Huntington, an attorney for the association, warned the committee that a statewide moratorium would face First Amendment challenges and cited U.S. Supreme Court and circuit precedents that require careful tailoring of restrictions on commercial speech (he referenced Lorillard Tobacco and Eighth Circuit decisions). Huntington provided the committee with written legal materials elaborating those points.

Operators from family‑owned firms testified on the economic role of billboards in local markets. Nels Pearson of Reagan Outdoor and Mike Hilandson of Schubert & Hoy said that most of their Minnesota advertisers are local businesses reliant on out‑of‑home advertising to reach driving customers. Representatives also noted industry jobs, permit fees, property rents to landowners hosting signs and the unionized workforce in some operations.

Committee members returned repeatedly to two practical questions: (1) how amortization would work in practice and whether removing signage for road projects results in large state payouts, and (2) whether a statewide rule would unduly limit local governments’ ability to manage signage. Staff counsel referenced a 1968 Minnesota Supreme Court case in an amortization context and noted that amortization and buyouts raise constitutional and takings questions that often involve public funds.

Senator Marty offered an author amendment to clarify the bill applies only to off‑premise billboard advertising and not to on‑premise business signage. Opponents proposed amendments and cautioned that any statewide ban risks constitutional challenges and economic impacts on small businesses.

The committee did not advance the bill. Chair Dibble said members would continue discussion with stakeholders; Senate File 4-85 was laid on the table. Committee members requested additional materials and a fiscal analysis, and proponents and opponents agreed to continue working with the sponsor and staff before the bill returns.

The hearing included extensive testimony on legal risks, taxpayer exposure to buy‑out claims, aesthetic and safety research, and local economic effects, leaving the committee to weigh tradeoffs between scenic goals and property‑rights, speech and small‑business interests.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Committee on Transportation - 02/12/25","oneSentenceSummary","Senate File 485, sponsored by Senator Marty, would impose a statewide moratorium on new off‑premise billboards and declare existing billboards nonconforming with phased amortization. Supporters emphasized safety, scenic and fiscal concerns; industry witnesses warned of economic harm and constitutional risk. Committee laid the bill on the table.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature MN, Minnesota","taxId",77817,"location","Minnesota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6335888,"Senate transportation committee considers tougher penalties for driving without insurance; bill laid on table",4152,29560,4181565,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2288461-9fc1dd77ccdceb3bce900aaf488f7e98&start=29&end=4181","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2288461-9fc1dd77ccdceb3bce900aaf488f7e98/thumbnail_29560.jpg","/articles/6335888/Minnesota/Senate-transportation-committee-considers-tougher-penalties-for-driving-without-insurance-bill-laid-on-table","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6335888-7d182e0c7336388c05364c2220e56501/orig.mp4?Expires=1775405669&Signature=S9ERVg3rYHLBC~Q2sHeGKrWp23qnp-t6Hn4QU7WbmN4Sk3h-Ip9jqih6uRJCiKdyMpLipkyjIQ7UDtHEJxYKgt4tX7I4zfqGmo~HTTPVWpQdWHHCilq4Bt2VR1VuHjy651yeBPrsLg4ghMHD56Le-8547WWxpM8IjyMAfa2I0rN1HsGAjrhvMynzUVSA3cjQJ2u1LeancFUqgaeeCjzHNBslI4tbQpZcC7iNvdK4IcN3CWhTeBm87tp1UJGm3EK8-nVzO4M7O8iFteLRgKg7mOW8R5pDi8fYQR52VG2tzDA7tnwHgRvYC9kSNXTviG1Gqj8gg0PBVQffLbFbPCJIWw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","ST. PAUL, Minn. — The Minnesota Senate Transportation Committee on Feb. 12 heard testimony on Senate File 11-79, a bipartisan measure authored by Senator Jasinski that would raise fines and penalties for drivers found operating vehicles without insurance. The committee laid the bill on the table for further work and potential future hearings.

The bill’s sponsor, Senator Jasinski, told the panel the measure responds to constituent concerns about people repeatedly driving without insurance and leaving victims to cover repair and medical costs. Jasinski said the bill increases fines and creates an escalating structure for repeat offenders.

Aaron Cocking, president and CEO of the Insurance Federation of Minnesota, testified in support. “According to a 02/2021 study done by the Insurance Research Council, 10 percent of all drivers in Minnesota are driving without insurance,” Cocking told the committee. He said the uninsured drive up costs for insured drivers and that the state’s compulsory-insurance framework requires enforcement. Cocking estimated that each uninsured vehicle raises costs for other drivers by about $78 per year.

Officer Tony Larson of the Faribault Police Department described routine traffic stops that find repeat uninsured drivers and said victims of crashes can face lengthy delays and uncertain reimbursement. “We encounter drivers on traffic stops who do not have insurance,” Larson said, adding many repeat offenders do not appear to change behavior after a citation.

Committee members pressed on two recurring issues: whether higher fines would deter repeat offenders, and whether increased penalties would disproportionately harm low-income drivers who lack reliable access to insurance. Senator Paul said the proposed penalties (which include an escalation up to $850 for repeated violations as described in committee remarks) would be “extremely high” and risk pushing people into deeper financial trouble. Senator McKeown and others argued that many people who drive uninsured do so because they cannot afford coverage and urged coupling enforcement with programs to increase access to affordable insurance and transportation alternatives.

Several senators and testifiers also discussed enforcement logistics. Members described gaps in post-accident follow-up by law enforcement—Cocking said the likelihood of law enforcement follow-up can be “a coin flip” depending on circumstances—and noted that when drivers report accidents during busy conditions, troopers may not respond. The committee discussed the state’s vehicle registration process and past attempts to require insurers’ policy numbers at renewal; witnesses said some motorists buy coverage long enough to obtain proof for tab renewal and then cancel the policy.

Lawmakers asked about technological fixes. Members referenced past efforts to validate insurance at registration (attestation → policy number recorded) and earlier systems such as MNLARS; witnesses said a real-time interface between law enforcement, Driver and Vehicle Services and insurers could be a “gold standard,” but building such interfaces has been constrained by state technology and cost.

The committee did not vote on the bill. Chair Dibble asked for additional conversations and indicated members and the sponsor would explore options, including ways to pair enforcement with prevention, education and technical fixes. Senate File 11-79 was laid on the table to be taken up at a future hearing.

The committee hearing included multiple personal accounts of uninsured crashes, data cited by industry representatives and repeated concerns that penalties must be designed so they deter repeat offenders without further destabilizing low-income households that lack affordable alternatives.

The committee asked staff to continue work on enforcement options and potential policy changes, including whether registration systems can be tied to insurer validation and whether court or diversion options (community service for first offenses, for example) should be expanded or clarified.","Senate File 1179, introduced by Senator Jasinski, would raise fines for drivers caught without insurance and create an escalating penalty for repeat offenses. Testimony cited Minnesota uninsured-driver estimates, enforcement gaps and equity concerns. Committee laid the bill on the table for further work.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Senate committee examines statewide moratorium on billboards; proponents cite safety and scenic benefits, industry warns economic harm

Senate transportation committee considers tougher penalties for driving without insurance; bill laid on table