North Dakota House Bill HB1246

North Dakota 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/10/23
• Refer: 1/10/23
• Report Pass: 1/24/23
• Engrossed: 1/26/23
• Refer: 2/10/23
• Report Pass: 3/21/23
• Enrolled: 3/24/23
• Passed: 3/30/23

Caption

Required traffic-control devices.

Impact

The implications of HB 1246 on state laws involve strengthening the criteria under which traffic control laws are enforced. It seeks to provide a legal standard that emphasizes the necessity of visible and appropriately placed traffic-control devices, which aligns with broader safety objectives on roadways, particularly around schools. The requirement for consultation with local authorities prior to removing or deactivating traffic signals in school zones is a significant component of the bill, aimed at preserving safety measures for school children.

Summary

House Bill 1246 aims to amend the North Dakota Century Code by establishing new requirements related to traffic-control devices. The bill specifically addresses the enforcement of traffic regulations in relation to the visibility and positioning of traffic-control devices. It mandates that no enforcement action can be taken against an alleged violator of traffic laws unless the relevant traffic-control device is in proper position and sufficiently visible to an ordinarily observant person. This adjustment intends to enhance traffic safety and ensure that drivers are only penalized when clear and proper signage is in place.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 1246 appears largely supportive among lawmakers, as indicated by strong voting results—90 in favor with no opposition in the House and a significant majority in the Senate. This suggests a consensus on the importance of traffic safety, particularly concerning regulations that affect children in school zones. However, it also raises discussions about local governance's role in traffic enforcement and how such measures might affect local communities differently.

Contention

Despite the general support for HB 1246, there are notable points of contention, particularly regarding the balance between state mandates and local control. Critics may raise concerns that the bill could impose additional constraints on municipalities by requiring state-level standards for traffic control that vary from local needs. This potential for tension between ensuring uniform safety standards and maintaining local discretion could act as a point of debate as the bill is implemented.