Connect with us

North Dakota

Bills would increase North Dakota's interstate speed limit, but 1 would cost farmers

Published

on

Bills would increase North Dakota's interstate speed limit, but 1 would cost farmers


BISMARCK — North Dakota may increase the interstate’s speed limit to 80 mph, but one of the bills suggesting the long-requested change could cost farmers.

The House Transportation Committee heard testimony Thursday, Jan. 23, and Friday on two bills that would bump up the speed on Interstates 94 and 29 by 5 mph.

House Bill 1298

would increase the speed limit from 75 mph to 80 mph without a minimum speed.

Advertisement

That bill faced less opposition than

House Bill 1421,

which would set the minimum speed for I-29 and I-94 at 40 mph and the maximum at 80 mph. It also would require farmers who move large equipment on interstates to buy an annual permit, which would cost $25 for each tractor.

The bill initially called for a $100 permit, but the committee changed it to $25.

That fee drew the ire of several agricultural advocates, including the North Dakota Farmers Union and North Dakota Stockmen’s Association.

Advertisement

“HB 1421 raises taxes on farmers, creates farm operational inefficiency, provides unwarranted and unworkable mandates, is unenforceable and does nothing to improve public safety,” the North Dakota Grain Growers Association said in a letter.

The full House voted 69-22 to pass HB 1298 on Friday. HB 1421 has not made it to the House floor, but the Transportation Committee recommended in a 14-0 vote that the bill be killed.

If one of the bills becomes law, the increase would be the first since 2003, when North Dakota upped the speed limit from 70 to 75 mph. Other states, including South Dakota and Montana, have 80 mph speed limits on their interstates.

The I-29 and I-94 crossing in Fargo on Friday, Jan. 24, 2025.

Chris Flynn / The Forum

Advertisement

Minnesota’s interstate speed limit is 70 mph.

At least five other states, including Indiana and New York, also have proposed legislation to up their interstate speed limits to 80 mph.

North Dakota has tried but failed several times over the last decade to increase the interstates’ speed limit, most recently in 2023. Rep. Ben Koppelman, a Republican from West Fargo who introduced HB 1298, wrote the same bill two years ago.

The Legislature passed the bill, but then-Gov. Doug Burgum, a Republican, vetoed it over concerns of speeding-related deaths. He also said he could not support the proposed legislation without a “primary seat belt law.”

Advertisement

The House passed a bill requiring all occupants of a vehicle to wear a seat belt the day after the veto, sending it to Burgum’s office for final approval. The Legislature did not have enough votes to override Burgum’s rejection of the speed limit increase.

Koppelman told The Forum that he feels his bill has at least as much support as it has had in the past.

“This year, we won’t have a governor who’s going to veto what we passed last year as a threat to encourage the passage of the seat belt bill,” he said. “Last session, we did not quite have veto-proof majorities, but we had reasonable margins of victory in each chamber.”

North Dakota

Gov. Kelly Armstrong

Advertisement

has not expressed his view on increasing the speed limit.

“The governor generally doesn’t comment on bills (other than those he’s proposed, of course) before they reach his desk,” said Armstrong spokesman Mike Nowatzki.

In testifying in support of the bill, Geoff Simon said motorists need consistency on interstate. Simon is the executive director of the Western Dakota Energy Association but testified as an individual resident of the state.

No one spoke against HB 1298 when the committee held a hearing on Thursday, though there were letters against it saying it would present safety concerns.

Koppelman said the North Dakota Department of Transportation would prefer a minimum speed limit with a maximum. Rep. Eric Murphy, a Grand Forks Republican who also signed on to Koppelman’s bill, has put his name on such a legislation in the form of HB 1421.

Advertisement

“That was the poison pill that killed the bill that year because the farmers don’t want a minimum speed limit,” Koppelman said of the minimum speed. “I think that’s what is going to likely make my bill to the finish line and not Rep. Murphy’s bill.”

Murphy acknowledged the DOT’s recommendation for a minimum speed. He told The Forum his concerns about tractors not being allowed if a minimum speed is set.

Most modern tractors can drive a maximum of 25 mph.

“Clearly, they should seek other alternatives, but there are some farmers out there who literally have to use the interstate,” Murphy said.

He added language into HB 1421 that would give exceptions to farm tractors, but it would come at a cost.

Advertisement

Along with the $25 permit, a vehicle with flashing hazard signals would have to follow the tractor on the interstate. It also could not let debris fall onto the highway.

“That would allow them to move equipment well below the 40 mph speed limit,” Murphy said.

HB 1421 would also give the North Dakota Department of Transportation the ability to reduce the maximum limit in “a high accident zone,” such as extreme curves in the interstate, to 60 mph, Murphy said. The DOT could reduce the speed when weather impacts travel, according to the bill.

Ag producers use the interstate rarely and as a last resort, said Brent Baldwin, president of the Red River Valley Sugarbeet Growers Association. The bill could open the door to additional fees, he added.

For farmers to get across rivers, particularly at the North Dakota-Minnesota border, the only option is the interstate, said Pete Hanebutt, public policy director for the North Dakota Farm Bureau. Weather can flood roads and force farmers to take the interstate, he said.

Advertisement

“I think there are an awful lot of holes in this bill,” Hanebutt said during a House Transportation Committee hearing on Friday.

Koppelman said HB 1421 is an attempt at a compromise that does not leave anyone happy. There is no reason to support that, he said.

“We don’t need to do that at the expense of farmers,” he said.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

North Dakota

Armstrong opens application period for Governor’s Band/Orchestra and Choral programs

Published

on

Armstrong opens application period for Governor’s Band/Orchestra and Choral programs


BISMARCK, N.D. – Gov. Kelly Armstrong today announced the opening of the application period for school, community and church bands, orchestras and choirs across North Dakota to apply to serve as the Governor’s Official State Band/Orchestra Program and Choral Program for the 2026-2027 school year. 

The Governor and First Lady will select the two groups from the applications received based on musical talent, achievement and community involvement. The governor may invite the groups to perform at official state functions held throughout the 2026-2027 school year, including the State of the State Address in January 2027 at the Capitol in Bismarck. 

Interested groups should submit an application with a musical recording to the Governor’s Office by 5 p.m. Monday, May 4. The Governor’s Band/Orchestra Program and Governor’s Choral Program will be announced in May. Please complete the application and provide materials at https://www.governor.nd.gov/governors-chorus-and-bandorchestra-program-application. 



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

North Dakota

Greenpeace seeks new trial, claiming jury pool biased in case over Dakota Access Pipeline

Published

on


Greenpeace has asked for a second trial after a judge entered a $345 million judgment against the organization in a landmark case brought by the developer of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

The case “threatens to result in one of the largest miscarriages of justice in North Dakota’s history,” attorneys for the environmental group wrote in a brief filed last week.

After a three-week trial roughly a year ago, a Morton County jury directed Greenpeace to pay Energy Transfer about $667 million, finding the environmental group at fault for inciting illegal acts against the company during anti-pipeline protests in North Dakota in 2016 and 2017 and for publishing false statements that harmed Energy Transfer’s reputation.

Greenpeace denies Energy Transfer’s claims and maintains that it brought the lawsuit to hurt the environmental movement.

Advertisement

Southwest Judicial District Judge James Gion in October slashed the jury’s award to $345 million, though he didn’t finalize the award until late February.

Greenpeace is now taking steps to fight the judgment, which includes its motion for a new trial.

The environmental group’s reasons for the request include claims that the jury instructions and verdict form contained errors, and that Energy Transfer was allowed to present unfair and irrelevant evidence to jurors. The group also alleges the jury pool was biased.

Greenpeace says the jury’s award assumes that Greenpeace was entirely responsible for any injury Energy Transfer sustained related to the protests. Jurors were not given the opportunity to consider whether Greenpeace was only at fault for a portion of the damages, the organization wrote in its brief.

Attorneys for Greenpeace also referenced the mailers and other media circulated to Mandan and Bismarck residents before the trial that contained anti-Dakota Access Pipeline protest and pro-energy industry content.

Advertisement

The environmental group seeks a new trial in Cass County, arguing in part that the jury pool in the Fargo area would be more fair because its residents did not directly experience the Dakota Access Pipeline protests and because the local economy is less dependent on the energy industry.

If Greenpeace’s request for a new trial is denied, it plans to appeal the case to the North Dakota Supreme Court, the organization has said.

Greenpeace previously asked for the trial to be moved from Morton County to Cass County in early 2025, which Gion and the North Dakota Supreme Court denied.

The lawsuit is against three separate Greenpeace organizations — Greenpeace USA, Greenpeace International and Greenpeace Fund.

Energy Transfer as of Wednesday morning had not submitted a response to Greenpeace’s motion for a new trial. Previously, the company has defended the jury’s verdict and disputed Greenpeace’s claims that the court proceedings were not fair.

Advertisement

Energy Transfer has indicated it may appeal Gion’s decision to reduce the award to $345 million.

Greenpeace will not have to pay any of the $345 million judgment for at least a couple of months, Gion ruled Tuesday.

Court documents indicate that the organization could have to pay a bond of up to $25 million while appeals proceed, though the environmental group has asked the judge to waive or reduce this amount. Gion has not decided on this motion.

He noted that obtaining such a large bond will be challenging.

“The magnitude of this matter defies simple decisions,” Gion wrote.

Advertisement

Energy Transfer in court filings urged the judge to require Greenpeace to post the full $25 million.

Any bond money Greenpeace provides would be held by a third party while the appeals proceed, according to Greenpeace USA.

Greenpeace International has filed a separate lawsuit in the Netherlands that accuses Energy Transfer of weaponizing the U.S. legal system against the environmental group. Energy Transfer asked Gion to order that the overseas suit be paused while the North Dakota case is still active, which Gion denied. The company appealed his ruling to the North Dakota Supreme Court, which has yet to make a decision on the matter.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

North Dakota

Minnkota Says Cost of Data Center Power Project Rises Won’t Affect Customers

Published

on

Minnkota Says Cost of Data Center Power Project Rises Won’t Affect Customers


(Photo by Jeff Beach/North Dakota Monitor)

 

(North Dakota Monitor) – The cost of the power line and substation needed by a data center north of Fargo has risen from $75 million to $110 million, but developers say the data center company will still cover the entire cost of the project.

Applied Digital needs the project to power its data center being built between Fargo and Harwood. The data center requires 280 megawatts of power at peak demand.

Advertisement

Applied Digital will pay for the project but it will be owned by Grand Forks based, Minnkota Power Cooperative.

The North Dakota Public Service Commission held a hearing in Fargo on what is known as the Agassiz Transmission Line and Substation.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending