By Ray Gronberg
gronberg@heraldsun.com; 419-6648
DURHAM -- Two local legislators have joined a N.C. House colleague from Greensboro in sponsoring a bill that would slap a one-year moratorium on further placements of electronic billboards alongside the state's highways.
State Reps. Paul Luebke, D-Durham, Verla Insko, D-Orange, and Pricey Harrison, D-Guilford, are the lead sponsors of the measure, which was filed Tuesday. Also signing on as co-sponsors were Reps. Rosa Gill and Darren Jackson, Democrats from Wake County.
Harrison "initiated the conversation" about whether the General Assembly should intervene, and the others decided to join her, Luebke said.
He added that he signed on because of the ongoing controversy in Durham about whether the city and county should loosen an existing ban on new billboards to allow companies like Fairway Outdoor Advertising to replace some existing displays with digital models.
"Many of my constituents are concerned about digital billboards," Luebke said. "That's become very clear in public debate."
A moratorium, he added, would "save local governments from having to go through" debates like Durham's until federal regulators figure out whether the electronic displays distract drivers and pose a safety hazard.
The bill included a provision allotting $25,000 to the N.C. Department of Transportation to enforce the proposed moratorium. By including it, the sponsors got the bill past rules meant to limit the number of new bills legislators can bring up in the General Assembly's election-year "short session."
But Luebke conceded that there might not be time enough in the session to debate a moratorium.
House Speaker Joe Hackney, D-Orange, on Wednesday ruled that the bill will have to go through three House committees -- commerce, transportation and appropriations -- before it can come to the floor for a vote.
Requiring sequential committee reviews in one chamber is one tactic Hackney and other legislative leaders in this state use to increase the odds of a bill dying.
A moratorium would be certain to generate controversy, as billboard issues are traditionally among the most hard-fought in the General Assembly.
But Luebke noted that the filing served a purpose just by signaling legislative interest. "Sometimes bills don't move, but they send a message," he said.
The draft ordinance that would alter Durham's billboard rules awaits action by the city and county governments. Hearings are likely in August.
They in theory could have happened sooner, but City Manager Tom Bonfield earlier this spring instructed City/County Planning Director Steve Medlin not to schedule them before the City Council finishes its annual budget deliberations.
Running parallel budget and billboard debates "wouldn't be fair" to anyone involved, especially given the possibility that the council's late-spring meeting schedule could have forced officials to conduct them on the same night, Bonfield said on Wednesday.
