STAND. COM. REP. NO.159

Honolulu, Hawaii

, 2001

RE: H.B. No. 280

H.D. 1

 

 

Honorable Calvin K.Y. Say

Speaker, House of Representatives

Twenty-First State Legislature

Regular Session of 2001

State of Hawaii

Sir:

Your Committee on Water and Land Use, to which was referred H.B. No. 280 entitled:

"A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO STATE AND COUNTY TORT LIABILITY,"

begs leave to report as follows:

The purpose of this bill is to ensure adequate lifeguard services at public beach parks to save lives. This bill provides the State, counties, and lifeguards with immunity from liability for providing lifeguard services, except for damages caused by gross negligence, wanton acts, or omissions.

Testimony in support of this measure was presented by the Hawaii State Association of Counties, two members of the Hawaii County Council, a member of the Kauai County Council, two members of the Maui County Council, the County of Kauai Office of the County Attorney, the County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation, the Hawaiian Lifeguard Association, and the Kona-Kohala Chamber of Commerce. The State Attorney General supported the intent of this measure. The City and County of Honolulu Department of the Corporation Counsel and the Consumer Lawyers of Hawaii opposed this bill. The Department of Land and Natural Resources offered comments.

Your Committee has amended this bill by incorporating changes developed by attorneys from the State, the counties, and the Consumer Lawyers of Hawaii. As amended, the State, the counties, and lifeguards will not be liable to any person for any civil damages resulting from providing lifeguard services at any public beach park or public beach.

As amended, this bill removes the exemption from liability for damages resulting from gross negligence, wanton acts, or omissions. Your Committee deliberated at length over this amendment. If the "gross negligence" provision were to remain, the counties would not be willing to provide the level of lifeguard services needed to protect ocean users due to the threat of costly lawsuits. Nor would this reduce the number of lawsuits going to trial.

However, by deleting the "gross negligence" provision, there would be no opportunity to question the "state of mind" of a lifeguard, and it would allow a public entity to remove itself from the lawsuit at the early stage. This would result in considerably lowering its exposure to an adverse judgment as well as reduce litigation costs.

As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your Committee on Water and Land Use that is attached to this report, your Committee is in accord with the intent and purpose of H.B. No. 280, as amended herein, and recommends that it pass Second Reading in the form attached hereto as H.B. No. 280, H.D. 1, and be referred to the Committee on Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs.

Respectfully submitted on behalf of the members of the Committee on Water and Land Use,

____________________________

EZRA KANOHO, Chair