Become a Founder Member Now!

Minnesota Legislature authorizes purple paint for trespassing signage

March 24, 2025 | Senate Bills, Introduced Bills, 2025 Bills, Minnesota Legislation Bills, Minnesota


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Minnesota Legislature authorizes purple paint for trespassing signage
On March 24, 2025, the Minnesota State Legislature introduced Senate Bill 742, aimed at modernizing the state's regulations regarding trespassing on private and public lands. The bill proposes the use of purple paint as a legal alternative to traditional signage for indicating no trespassing, amending Minnesota Statutes 2024, section 97B.001.

The primary purpose of Senate Bill 742 is to simplify the process of marking private property and enhance landowners' ability to protect their land from unauthorized access. Under the current law, landowners must post signs that explicitly state "no trespassing" or similar terms, which can be cumbersome and costly. The new provision allows landowners to use purple paint on trees or fence posts as a clear visual indicator of restricted access, provided the paint is applied in a specific manner.

Key provisions of the bill include stipulations on how the purple paint must be displayed—specifically, it must be applied in vertical stripes at least 8 inches long and 2 inches wide, spaced no more than 100 feet apart. This change is expected to reduce the need for physical signage, which can be subject to vandalism or weather damage.

The introduction of Senate Bill 742 has sparked discussions among lawmakers and stakeholders. Proponents argue that the bill will empower landowners and reduce confusion regarding property boundaries, while opponents express concerns about potential misuse of the purple paint system, fearing it may lead to misunderstandings about property rights and trespassing laws.

Economic implications of the bill could be significant, particularly for rural landowners who often face challenges in managing access to their properties. By streamlining the process of marking boundaries, the bill may help reduce legal disputes and enhance land management practices.

As the bill progresses through the legislative process, it will be subject to further debate and potential amendments. If passed, Senate Bill 742 could reshape how property rights are communicated in Minnesota, reflecting a growing trend towards more accessible and visually intuitive methods of land management. The next steps will involve committee reviews and discussions, with stakeholders closely monitoring the bill's trajectory.

View Bill

This article is based on a bill currently being presented in the state government—explore the full text of the bill for a deeper understanding and compare it to the constitution

View Bill

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Minnesota articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI