North Dakota Senate Bill SB2183

North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/13/25
• Refer: 1/13/25
• Report Pass: 2/6/25
• Engrossed: 2/10/25
• Refer: 2/18/25
• Report Pass: 3/18/25
• Enrolled: 3/31/25
• Passed: 4/3/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend and reenact subsection 9 of section 39-06.1-06 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to a violation of a construction zone speed limit; and to provide a penalty.

Summary

SB 2183 amends North Dakota’s construction-zone speeding penalty law. The bill increases the minimum fee for a violation of a highway construction zone speed limit from $80 to $150 for driving 1 to 10 miles per hour over the posted limit, and it keeps the existing structure for higher-speed violations by adding $2 for each mile per hour over 10 mph, unless a greater fee already applies under other provisions of the section. The bill also narrows when the construction-zone fee applies. Under the amended language, the enhanced penalty applies only if workers are actually present at the time and place of the violation and the posted sign specifically states “Minimum Fee $80$150.” In effect, the bill ties the higher fine to active work zones with visible notice, rather than applying it broadly to all construction zones.

Impact

SB 2183 changes subsection 9 of section 39-06.1-06 of the North Dakota Century Code, which governs fees for speeding in highway construction zones. It raises the minimum fine amount and adds a condition requiring the presence of construction workers and specific signage before the enhanced fee can be imposed. The practical effect is to increase penalties for speeding in active work zones while limiting application in zones that are not actively staffed or do not display the required notice.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have received generally strong support in both chambers, passing the Senate and House by wide margins. The vote totals suggest broad agreement with the policy of increasing penalties in active construction zones, likely reflecting concern for worker safety and deterrence of speeding. There is no committee transcript available, so the record does not show detailed debate or amendments beyond the bill text itself.

Contention

The main point of potential contention is the balance between traffic safety enforcement and limiting penalties to clearly active work zones. Supporters likely favored the higher fee as a deterrent and as protection for road workers, while any opposition may have centered on the increased financial burden on drivers or on the requirement that workers be present and signage be specific before the enhanced fee applies. The recorded votes show only a small minority in opposition, indicating limited but present disagreement.