Bills would have forced municipalities to relocate outdoor advertising signs that need to be removed to make way for highway widening projects

By Charlie Mitchell     April 2, 2024

Bills intended to require that outdoor advertising signs which need to be removed to make way for highway reconstruction be transferred to a place elsewhere in the municipality died in committees as the 2023-24 legislative session came to a close last month. The bills would have required relocation even if the sign did not conform to local ordinances. The bills also specified that the Department of Transportation must pay the owner of the sign the costs of relocation.

Having opposed these bills during the course of the legislative session, Citizens for a Scenic Wisconsin can consider this a victory.

The companion bills, Senate Bill 467 and Assembly Bill 486, were the subject of public hearings in the Senate Transportation Committee in December and the Assembly Transportation Committee in January. The bills were promulgated by the Outdoor Advertising Association of Wisconsin. A representative of the OAA said that the measures called for in the bills are intended to help them serve the advertising needs of their customers.

However, it is the purpose of a local sign ordinance to manage the placement and size of outdoor advertising signs for the benefit of the citizens of their community. Outdoor advertising signs along streets or highways, commonly known as billboards, are considered intrusive in many municipalities. Residents often feel that billboards do not complement the way they want their community to look, so they enact ordinances that limit their size, height, location, spacing, and lighting. They might even prohibit them altogether.

Other organizations registered their support of the bills with the committees. These included trade associations for auto dealerships, restaurants, and hotels.

Opponents of the bills included Citizens for a Scenic Wisconsin, the Department of Transportation, the League of Municipalities, the City of Milwaukee, the City of Madison, and Wisconsin Conservation Voters.

Steve Arnold, former mayor of Fitchburg, speaking for CSW at the hearing in December,      made an effective case against AB468 by citing his experience controlling billboards when he was mayor. Steve said that the City of Fitchburg wants to get rid of billboards in their city, and he made that point at the hearing. He said when a billboard needs to come down for a good reason like a highway improvement project, he expects the billboard to be removed and not placed elsewhere. The DoT should buy out the billboard in the same way that it buys out land and buildings that are in the way of a highway improvement project.

Letters of opposition from CSW board of directors members Vernie Smith and Rich Eggleston were recognized by the committee. These letters made the case that to make municipalities which have ordinances to limit or prohibit billboards accept undesired relocation and placement of billboards by force of law runs counter to a municipality’s authority to govern itself.

In their statement to the committee, the DoT representatives presented their fiscal estimate that showed that the bill would be expensive to taxpayers in the range of $10s of millions. The DoT also stated their concern that to relocate a non-conforming billboard would be counter to the spirit of the federal Highway Beautification Act and could jeopardize highway funding from the federal government.

The hearing before the Senate Transportation Committee that took place in January was essentially a replay of the assembly hearing. Letters to the Committee were sent by CSW board members Vernie Smith and Charlie Mitchell.

Gary Goyke, president of CSW and legislative council to CSW, speaking on March 20, said that he thinks that the committee members were stymied by the opposition, especially from the DoT.

The bills would have undermined local community efforts at highway beautification. The scenic beauty of a community has a direct impact on its housing values, its ability to attract new residents and businesses, and it affects the quality of life of its residents.