House passes overhaul of speeding fines and point assignments after divided floor debate

The North Dakota House on April 10 passed Senate Bill 22-43, a package that consolidates statutory speeding fine tables, raises fines for higher-speed offenses, adjusts point assignments for certain moving violations and limits some local doubling of fines and penalties.

Representative Ben Koppelman, the bill carrier during floor consideration, framed the bill as a consolidation and modernization of three existing speeding fine tables into a simpler structure while adding a $100 surcharge for significant speeders (the bill text sets the additional charge for more excessive speeding). Koppelman said the bill also increases points for select offenses (for example, distracted driving or failure to maintain control in ways the committee believed lead to crashes) and removes the ability of local political subdivisions to double some moving-violation fines in certain residential settings.

The House granted a division of the question at Representative Murphy’s request and took separate votes on division A (which addressed reporting of minor offenses to insurance companies and other discrete sections) and division B (the remainder). Division A passed 72-20 on the roll call; division B passed 68-23. The full bill was then considered and passed on final passage; the clerk recorded the final roll-call on the engrossed bill as recorded on the House floor and declared the bill passed.

Floor debate was at times sharply divided. Opponents, including Representative Schatz, argued the bill increases fines and point assignments for many subjective or minor offenses (he cited examples such as careless driving, exhibition driving and several other provisions) and said that raising fines and points would unduly punish drivers. Supporters said the changes balance safety and fairness, simplify administration, and restore deterrence that local law enforcement and cities have requested.

Several members questioned whether the change would have local fiscal impacts because the bill removes certain local doubling authority; Representative Porter asked why a fiscal note on local revenue impacts was not available. Koppelman replied that the bill’s amendments were compiled late in the working session and a legislative fiscal note had not been requested for that provision; he said impacts were uncertain and could be small or offset by other changes.

Several members described personal stories of insurance impacts and employment consequences for commercial drivers tied to point thresholds. Sponsors said the bill attempts compromise: raising penalties for the most serious speeding and creating uniformity for point assignments while limiting some local doubling of fines to avoid outsized penalties.

The House recorded final passage for Senate Bill 22-43 after the two division votes and the final roll-call on the floor; the bill will proceed in the enrollment process.