Outdoor advertising displays: redevelopment agency project areas.

Senator Rubio, with Assembly Member Ta as a coauthor, advances a measure that extends by three years the authorization for a narrowly defined set of redevelopment-era outdoor displays to be treated as on-premises for regulatory purposes through January 1, 2029. This constitutes the bill’s most significant change, preserving a limited grandfathered pathway for these legacy displays within the broader regulatory framework for outdoor advertising.

Eligible displays must meet a precise set of conditions: they are located within the historic boundary limits of a redevelopment project as they existed in 2011, were constructed by 2012, and were in use by the end of 2022. If federal highway funding could be impacted under federal law, the owner or operator must remove all advertising copy within 60 days of notice, and a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per day applies until removal. When the display’s ownership is not identified on the structure, notices are directed to the applicable city or county, rather than the owner/operator directly. Under the bill, these displays would be regulated under the on-premises display regime, rather than the standard off-premises framework, and would remain subject to the applicable provisions for on-premises displays.

The measure shifts primary enforcement responsibility to the local level. The applicable city, county, or city and county must ensure conformance and assess a public benefit from the display; the state Department of Transportation retains enforcement authority, but is not liable for cessation or removal actions. If local enforcement is not completed within 30 days of department notice, the local jurisdiction must hold the department harmless and indemnify it for costs incurred to secure compliance or defend challenges to the authorization.

Beyond the specific regulatory mechanics, the proposal operates within the existing regulatory regime for outdoor advertising by narrowing scope to a historic, pre-2012 class of displays and maintaining federal funding risk as a controlling factor. The approach relies on local determinations of public benefit and delineates a clear division of enforcement between local governments and the state, with no new state funding appropriations. Drafting ambiguities noted in analyses include how “public benefit” is defined, how boundaries are interpreted when jurisdictions change, and what documentary proof qualifies a display as “in use” by 2022, among other implementation questions.