Bill Proposed to Sell Advertising on California Changeable Message Signs

[andy3175]

A new bill is being considered in California. Senator Bob Huff of San Dimas is calling for the sale of commercial advertisements on electronic highway message signs (sometimes called changeable or variable message signs) on California state highways. Ad revenue would be divided between Caltrans and entity that purchases the ad, but that is being negotiated as part of the bill. The bill has cleared the Senate Committee on Transportation and Housing. We'll see if it becomes law someday.

http://www.abc10.com/news/politics/caltrans-could-sell-ads-on-highway-message-signs/154746332

http://huff.cssrc.us/content/innovative-highway-funding-bill-passes-key-policy-test - press release

SB 1397 would enact the Highway Safety and Information Act, allowing the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) to sell advertising displays on changeable message signs (CMS) located on or near state highways.

Through a pilot project and ultimate full implementation, the CMS public-private partnership could generate new revenue of $200 million or more annually for road maintenance and repair by using the CMS network for commercial advertising purposes when Caltrans is not using it for public and emergency communication.

"This is a win-win scenario for California taxpayers,"  explained Senator Huff. "It won't cost taxpayers a dime. It will be funded through a public-private partnership and the existing CalTrans CMS network would be upgraded to provide state of the art responsive, high definition information capability for enhanced statewide emergency and traveler communications."

[Max Rockatansky]

No problem with this on my end....I basically feel like the message signs are useless as they currently stand.  Generally the signs include something about not texting or wearing a seat belt rather than supplying useful information.  If it nets Caltrans a couple more dollars to sell some ads then so be it.  I rely more on the road information phone system anyways since it generally seems to provide infinitely more detail...that along with the state quick map.

[roadfro]

When you talk about distracted driving and "zero fatalities" campaigns, this seems like an unnecessary distraction. I can't get behind this idea.

The Feds are gonna have something to say about this, too. The MUTCD does not allow advertising like this for a reason.

[Max Rockatansky]

When you talk about distracted driving and "zero fatalities" campaigns, this seems like an unnecessary distraction. I can't get behind this idea.

The Feds are gonna have something to say about this, too. The MUTCD does not allow advertising like this for a reason.

Since when does California care about what the MUTCD has to say?    I'd rather they just take all the changeable message sings down since they really don't supply useful information.  The only ones I would keep would be in urban areas for traffic congestion warnings or in the mountains for chain controls. 

[jakeroot]

No problem with this on my end....I basically feel like the message signs are useless as they currently stand.  Generally the signs include something about not texting or wearing a seat belt rather than supplying useful information.  If it nets Caltrans a couple more dollars to sell some ads then so be it.  I rely more on the road information phone system anyways since it generally seems to provide infinitely more detail...that along with the state quick map.

I'd rather they just take all the changeable message sings down since they really don't supply useful information.  The only ones I would keep would be in urban areas for traffic congestion warnings or in the mountains for chain controls. 

Depends on the area. Some are worse than others about this. BC has a lot of "watch your speed" and "slow down ... keep your distance" messages on their matrix displays, whereas other places, like Washington State, generally have the sign turned off if there's nothing important to say, or, if there is, will list what's going, how long the delay might be, how far ahead the problem is, etc. Variable message signs are popping up along Seattle freeways like nothing else, even in generally rural areas. I've always found them to be helpful, because they keep drivers calm -- if you're stuck in a huge jam with no obvious cause, people get pissed off.

--

I am personally opposed to the idea To me, VMS/Matrix displays are most effective when they are used sparingly. If the signs are always on, drivers focus on them may wain over time. And, if they display advertisements during some times of the day, I think drivers will indistinctly begin to ignore the signs, because they just display ads all day.

[Max Rockatansky]

No problem with this on my end....I basically feel like the message signs are useless as they currently stand.  Generally the signs include something about not texting or wearing a seat belt rather than supplying useful information.  If it nets Caltrans a couple more dollars to sell some ads then so be it.  I rely more on the road information phone system anyways since it generally seems to provide infinitely more detail...that along with the state quick map.

I'd rather they just take all the changeable message sings down since they really don't supply useful information.  The only ones I would keep would be in urban areas for traffic congestion warnings or in the mountains for chain controls. 

Depends on the area. Some are worse than others about this. BC has a lot of "watch your speed" and "slow down ... keep your distance" messages on their matrix displays, whereas other places, like Washington State, generally have the sign turned off if there's nothing important to say, or, if there is, will list what's going, how long the delay might be, how far ahead the problem is, etc. Variable message signs are popping up along Seattle freeways like nothing else, even in generally rural areas. I've always found them to be helpful, because they keep drivers calm -- if you're stuck in a huge jam with no obvious cause, people get pissed off.

--

I am personally opposed to the idea To me, VMS/Matrix displays are most effective when they are used sparingly. If the signs are always on, drivers focus on them may wain over time. And, if they display advertisements during some times of the day, I think drivers will indistinctly begin to ignore the signs, because they just display ads all day.

I agree fully with everything you just said.  I would prefer a huge reduction in the number of message signs and have them turned off in most instances.  The problem is that Caltrans spent a crap ton of money installing these variable message boards in areas they ought not be in.  You can always wheel a temporary sign board in just like so many states do with construction zones.  Ironically the quickmap for California shows the majority of signs active in the state:

http://quickmap.dot.ca.gov/

Seems the message of the day state wide is:  SHARE THE ROAD LOOK TWICE FOR MOTORCYCLISTS

[GaryV]

I saw a newspaper article once that said (MI) DOT always had a sign on the board, because if it was blank people would start calling up DOT to tell them the sign wasn't working.

I question the wisdom of putting advertising on the signs.  First, there would need to be a standards committee to approve messages.  For example, would you allow advertising of alcohol?  Firearms?  Cigarettes?

Second, I can see pressure being put on the DOT to maximize the ad revenue.  That might mean they'd decline to post a warning about a slow-down or wreck ahead so the sign could continue to extol the benefits of Bud (oops, America).  If they took down the ad to tell you about the wreck, they'd have to refund some of the ad dollars.

[Max Rockatansky]

I saw a newspaper article once that said (MI) DOT always had a sign on the board, because if it was blank people would start calling up DOT to tell them the sign wasn't working.

I question the wisdom of putting advertising on the signs.  First, there would need to be a standards committee to approve messages.  For example, would you allow advertising of alcohol?  Firearms?  Cigarettes?

Second, I can see pressure being put on the DOT to maximize the ad revenue.  That might mean they'd decline to post a warning about a slow-down or wreck ahead so the sign could continue to extol the benefits of Bud (oops, America).  If they took down the ad to tell you about the wreck, they'd have to refund some of the ad dollars.

Actually in 1997 there was something called the Tobacco Master Agreement that banned tobacco advertisements on highway billboards.  One of the four states that didn't sign the agreement was actually Michigan.  I'm fairly certain the law with alcohol is that they can place media ads in places that have a 70% 21 or older audience.  I really don't see Caltrans going for something like beer...it would probably be just gas stations and fast food joints.  So basically I'm running under the assumption that billboard rules/laws would apply in the instances of variable message boards.

[triplemultiplex]

"Highway Safety and Information Act" ???
That's rich.  It's like they want us to make fun of them when legislators name bills with words that mean the opposite of what the law does.

But I guess the "Chump Change Act to Shove More Goddamn Advertisements Down Your Throat Instead of Properly Funding Transportation" would get too wordy.

[Duke87]

So you're telling me I'll be able to pay money to make the sign say "Beware of Zombies", and they can't take the message down or get me in trouble? Hey look, a silver lining.

[jfs1988]

Advertise at rest areas.

[Bobby5280]

These electronic variable message signs would be a LOUSY tool for businesses to use for advertising. They're only text-based, with very basic character definition. Limited character count greatly limits what kind of message can be displayed. Just about all VMS signs for traffic use are monochromatic (amber color LED clusters usually). No color.

Compare this to a modern full color LED-based billboard sign, 30' X 10' or 48' X 14'. These billboards have RGB LED clusters in high enough resolution to contain photo imagery, graphics, logos, etc. They're a far more effective advertising tool than a crude traffic sign, even if the traffic sign is in the highway ROW or even over the roadway.

If a business actually chooses to buy ad time on a traffic VMS sign, how will he be reimbursed for ad time he lost when traffic advisories and emergency messages over-rode his ad? I can see this really being a big headache for whoever gets stuck managing this kind of setup. They'll be tearing out their hair trying to re-schedule "make good" runs of these ads.

Obviously the politician who dreamed up this scheme didn't bother thinking about the details. Aside from the conflicts with federal highway regulations, this won't be a good revenue generator at all.

[The Ghostbuster]

If you ask me, Changeable Message Signs should stick to conditions on the roadway itself (travel times, congestion alerts, construction alerts, etc.).

[hotdogPi]

If you ask me, Changeable Message Signs should stick to conditions on the roadway itself (travel times, congestion alerts, construction alerts, etc.).

We don't need messages that say "U DRIVE U LOSE U DRINK" (I actually saw this one) or "366 1/2 TRAFFIC DEATHS THIS YEAR" either.

Soon, we'll be seeing "REMEMBER TO VOTE" signs in the more [insert political party here] areas of the state but not in the [opposing party] areas.

[kphoger]

If you ask me, Changeable Message Signs should stick to conditions on the roadway itself (travel times, congestion alerts, construction alerts, etc.).

We don't need messages that say "U DRIVE U LOSE U DRINK" (I actually saw this one) or "366 1/2 TRAFFIC DEATHS THIS YEAR" either.

Soon, we'll be seeing "REMEMBER TO VOTE" signs in the more [insert political party here] areas of the state but not in the [opposing party] areas.

On May 1, 2014, I saw "C your BFF tonight / Buckle up" on a MoDOT VMS along I-35.

But that's still worse than "Win big at Lucky's Casino!", isn't it?

[triplemultiplex]

[kphoger]

Needs punctuation.

Drive on, right?

[formulanone]

Needs punctuation.

Drive on, right?

No, money down! (Also, the bar association logo should be removed.)

Terrible idea. Tell me how many minutes to the next city if there's nothing awful or upcoming construction or accident delays occurring. That's it, that's all, nothing else.

[noelbotevera]

There's a clear contradiction here, but I can't put my finger on it.

If this ever gets opposed to somebody who's in the DOT and is high ranking, I'm calling them Poindexter.

[Occidental Tourist]

An impotent proposal like this is demonstrative of how the California Republican Party has been circling the drain since the 1990s.

Look like a shill for business, generate pocket change in terms of highway repair funds, and continue to erode the infrastructure legacy the Division of Public Works left before it got swallowed by a bureaucracy and environmental laws.

[RobbieL2415]

This would be a great way for the NJ Turnpike Authority to generate money, since their new VMS signs are actually color LED displays.

[roadman]

No problem with this on my end....I basically feel like the message signs are useless as they currently stand.  Generally the signs include something about not texting or wearing a seat belt rather than supplying useful information.

In other words, give drivers even MORE reasons to ignore VMS signs - that's a great strategy.  And it's high time we as a society stopped believing this farce that ad revenue is the magic panacea that will fix everything.  We really don't need to create more ways to give the marketing types even greater justification for forcing their idiotic messages promoting cheezy products most of us don't need anyway.

[kphoger]

In other words, give drivers even MORE reasons to ignore VMS signs - that's a great strategy. 

+1

[Max Rockatansky]

No problem with this on my end....I basically feel like the message signs are useless as they currently stand.  Generally the signs include something about not texting or wearing a seat belt rather than supplying useful information.

In other words, give drivers even MORE reasons to ignore VMS signs - that's a great strategy.  And it's high time we as a society stopped believing this farce that ad revenue is the magic panacea that will fix everything.  We really don't need to create more ways to give the marketing types even greater justification for forcing their idiotic messages promoting cheezy products most of us don't need anyway.

Essshhh...little dramatic with the break down of society with the mere mention of ads being run on VMS signage...let me qualify my stance then.  Fact is that they already ignore them here in California and there is too many VMS signs as is.  Have a look at the state map:

http://quickmap.dot.ca.gov/

The message of the day is "In a minor crash?  Pull to the shoulder."  So basically by and large it's useless messages like this that strewn about the state on way too many VMS signs.  Took a look at CA 99 from Fresno to Sacramento, that's a lot of redundant VMS signage. 

Basically we're talking about a state and a DOT that wastes a crap ton of state tax payer money on roads that ought to be relinquished to localities.  I as someone who has to pay close to 10% of my income in California would love to see the state take steps to control wasteful spending across the board.  If I recall correctly I believe that I also said something to the effect that getting a lot of these VMS signs would accomplish a larger savings over time than trying to get advertising on them.  So yes, sell some over allotment on Caltrans VMS and save me a couple bucks, I'm all for it....hell if it's possible sell as many billboards that will fit this side of a NASCAR track if it can be done.  While we're at it I'd say force some of the relinquishments I listed here:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=17993.0

Some of the savings might have mitigated debacles like this...hell giving CA 173 over to San Bernardino County likely would too:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=18058.msg2149861#new

Ironically the guy from Tulare County mentioning a state route looping from a freeway to a high school really was just showing the point I was trying to prove on California State Highways in general. 

[Bobby5280]

We don't need SPAM in the right of way of our highways. I think allowing highway VMS signs to show ads would establish a dangerous precedent and possibly open the door for things like billboards to be built right in the medians of highways rather than outside the ROW where they belong. Of course, this is all assuming the current VMS signs could even function properly for displaying ads, which they do not. I don't think taxpayers are going to be too keen on blowing anywhere from $50,000 to $200,000 per sign just to upgrade a crappy monochrome text display to a full color LED unit that can display graphics.

Worst case scenario is a free for all making guard rails and Jersey barriers necessary on all edges of the roadway due to billboard structures hugging along the highway at any point an advertiser saw fit to build. Another scenario is outdoor advertising companies taking the state to court citing unfair competition and violation of federal regulations.

There's a lot of rules regarding how advertising can be displayed along Interstate and US highways, most of which grew out of the Highway Beautification Act of 1965. There are some places, such as trust land held by tribes, where the rules don't seem to apply. You can see some astonishing levels of billboard clutter in some of those places. Here in the Lawton, OK area we have a parade of double stack and quad stack billboards on the South side of town and just North of the Medicine Park exit. It looks pretty awful. That's coming from someone who works in the sign industry. I'd prefer fewer but better looking billboards.

Basically we're talking about a state and a DOT that wastes a crap ton of state tax payer money on roads that ought to be relinquished to localities.

What makes you think a local town/city government is going to spend money on roads and streets any more wisely? If anything, diverting such money to hundreds of local governments will make it far easier for those tax dollars to disappear in very disorganized and questionable fashion.