Committee strips local‑preemption from racetrack immunity bill after property‑rights objections

Senate File 44‑33, a proposal to protect motorsports venues from nuisance lawsuits, drew competing claims Tuesday in the Minnesota Senate Judiciary Committee before members adopted an amendment removing a contested local‑preemption provision.

The sponsor, Senator Kupak, framed the measure as a stability and fairness fix for small, multigenerational racetracks. "If a motorsports facility was established lawfully and continues to operate in compliance with the law, it should not be forced out by newcomers," said Tom Deary, who testified on behalf of the Performance Racing Industry and CEMA, adding that "the performance racing industry contributes nearly $1,000,000,000 in economic input annually and supports little over 5,300 full time jobs." He urged the committee to help get the bill "across the finish line."

Opponents told the committee the bill, as drafted, would remove protections property owners have relied on for more than a century. Joel Carlson, representing the Minnesota Association for Justice, cautioned that changing Minnesota’s nuisance framework would be "a step backwards." Carlson said the proposal’s geographic scope and preemption language were particularly troubling: "This absolutely takes all of those off the table," he said, referring to private and local government tools to abate nuisances.

Committee members pressed sponsors on concerns about "intensification" — for example, a facility operating more or under new lighting — and on disclosure to neighbors. Senator Holmstrom and others highlighted that models in other states often omit broad local preemption; Holmstrom offered an oral amendment to strike Subdivision 3, the committee adopted it by voice vote, and members agreed to lay the bill over for further drafting.

The action removes an immediate push to preempt local authority while leaving the core question of how to balance motorsports’ economic role with neighbors’ property rights unresolved. The chair said the committee would continue work on the bill before making a final recommendation.

The bill was laid over for further consideration; no final floor referral was taken at this hearing.