Legislature(2007 - 2008)CAPITOL 120
02/05/2007 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB25 | |
| HB7 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 90 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 25 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 7 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 25 - RECREATIONAL LAND USE LIABILITY/ADV. POSS 1:38:30 PM REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 25, "An Act relating to landowners' immunity for allowing use of land without charge for a recreational activity; relating to landowners' liability where landowner conduct involves gross negligence or reckless or intentional misconduct; relating to claims of adverse possession and prescriptive easements, or similar claims; and providing for an effective date." 1:38:45 PM REPRESENTATIVE PAUL SEATON, Alaska State Legislature, joint prime sponsor, relayed that at the last meeting on HB 25, it was requested that he research the statutory uses of the phrases "directly [or] indirectly" and "explicitly [or] implicitly." Referring to a memorandum dated 2/2/07 that he'd written and provided to members, he explained that the phrase "directly or indirectly" occurs 192 times in current statute, while the phrase "explicitly or implicitly" occurs 1 time. He opined that the examples show common knowledge and use of the phrase "directly or indirectly", and that the meaning would be clear to the public. Regarding a request made during the previous hearing that the drafter be present, he relayed that the member who'd made that request no longer felt that such was necessary. REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS referred to [Amendment 1], which, along with an explanation, read [original punctuation provided]: Page 1, line 9 Delete "indirectly" and insert "implicitly." Explanation: This change would clarify how a landowner allows recreational activity on a landowner's land. The current language - "indirectly allows" could be interpreted to indicate some positive action though not directly to the person using the land; while "implicitly allows" would not necessitate any positive action on the part of the landowner. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated his belief regarding the importance of clearly drafting legislation in order to have uniform interpretation of the resulting law. He expressed that he is not comfortable with the use of "indirectly allows", and offered his understanding that in the examples given, "indirectly" is used actively, rather than passively. He pointed out that this may be interpreted many ways, perhaps more broadly or more narrowly than intended. Referring to Amendment 1, he stated that the term "implicitly" would indicate that no action was taken, thus signifying direct allowance. He then stated that he would be amenable to amending Amendment 1 to reduce ambiguity in its interpretation. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON reiterated that the phrase "directly or indirectly" is used many times throughout the current statutes. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Amendment 1. REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS objected. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked whether the phrase "indirectly allows" appears anywhere in the current statutes. 1:45:58 PM KATIE SHOWS, Staff to Representative Paul Seaton, Alaska State Legislature, speaking on behalf of Representative Seaton, joint prime sponsor, explained that she did perform a quick search for the phrase "indirectly allows", and the search did not return any results. However, she said, she was unable to search for any passive reference to that phrase. REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS commented that the drafter has researched this issue, and therefore he is maintaining his objection to adopting Amendment 1. REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES commented that the intention is to clarify the intent of the bill. She inquired as to whether the phrase "implicitly allows" will more clearly define the intent, adding that she is not convinced that it will. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG offered his belief that Amendment 1 would clarify the intent. He inquired as to whether the drafter researched the phrase "indirectly allows". REPRESENTATIVE SEATON offered his understanding that the drafter used the drafter's manual, adding that while he is aware of the definition of "indirectly allows", he is uncertain regarding the definition of "implicitly allows". He reiterated that the former wording occurs 192 times in statute, while the latter wording is found 1 time. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested defining the term "indirectly" in order to provide further clarity. REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES stated that she spoke with the drafter and was unable to develop superior language. She further stated that although she would like the legislation to be as specific as possible, the committee has yet to develop better language. She noted that the drafter did relay that a list specifying what the term "indirectly" means could be added later if determined necessary. Representative Holmes relayed her desire to report the legislation, as written, from the committee. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG withdrew Amendment 1. 1:50:39 PM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved to report HB 25 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal notes. There being no objection, HB 25 was reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|