|
We have under consideration Committee
Recommendation SF-3, being presented by
the Vice Chairman of the Committee, Dele-
gate Case.
The Chair requests him to come forward
and resume the presentation of the report.
At the hour of adjournment last evening.
Delegate Hanson was engaged in asking a
series of questions to the Chairman of the
Committee. The Chair recognizes Delegate
Hanson for the purpose of resuming the
questioning.
Delegate Hanson.
DELEGATE HANSON: Mr. Case, our
discussion last night regarding section 8.02,
talking about the final clause in that sec-
tion relating to the property devoted to
agricultural uses as prescribed by law, will
you explain what difference there is in the
effect of the last phrase, "as described by
law," and the previous phrase in the pre-
ceding clause, "as may be determined by
law"? Does the latter add anything to the
former?
DELEGATE CASE: The purpose of the
latter is to give the General Assembly and/
or its creature, the State Department of
Assessments and Taxation, the power to
define a farm for the purpose of this par-
ticular clause.
I suppose that that would be a determina-
tion also, and therefore it is possible that
they are synonymous.
DELEGATE HANSON: Thank you.
Is there anything in the second clause
of 8.02 which through the use of the word
"shall" would prohibit the General As-
sembly from repealing the farmland as-
sessment act if it saw fit to do so?
DELEGATE CASE: You mean the
present farmland —
DELEGATE HANSON: Yes.
DELEGATE CASE: Well, Delegate
Hanson, if this is passed in the form that
it is now in, the General Assembly could
modify the present law in any way that it
saw fit.
Of course, you must understand that this
section as written mandates classification.
Nov/, among the classes that must be
struck is classification for agricultural use,
so the General Assembly could not repeal
absolutely the present law which is on the
books, leaving no law on the books with
respect to agricultural classifications, but
|
it could repeal and re-enact it to change it
to modify it, to bring it up to modern
standards, and so on.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Hanson,
will you pause just a second?
The Chair has been asked to announce —
I suppose the tag number, 883182, a Volvo,
is on the legislative parking lot with a
motor running. It is a very quiet motor.
(Laughter,)
Delegate Hanson.
DELEGATE HANSON: As I under-
stand your responses yesterday evening
and this morning, the General Assembly
could also leave the law as it is, assuming
that this is an adequate definition, subject
to the authority that it has given the De-
partment of Taxation and Assessment to
establish a criteria for the assessors, which
now I believe number twenty-nine various
criteria.
DELEGATE CASE: No. You are mis-
taken about that, Delegate Hanson. The
regulation has twenty-nine criteria. The
law has four.
Would you like to know what they are?
DELEGATE HANSON: No, I know
what they are.
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you have any
further questions, Delegate Hanson?
DELEGATE HANSON: No, Mr. Chair-
man. I believe this concludes my questions.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other
Delegate have questions?
Delegate Moser.
DELEGATE MOSER: I take it section
8.02 and 8.02(1) and 8.02(2) all look to
the General Assembly acting by general
law, that is, by law which is uniform. I
think that is very clear, and it will not
have county-by-county variations; is that
correct? When you say "law," you really
mean general law?
DELEGATE CASE: That is a pretty
broad question. I will have to take it ques-
tion by question.
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair was about
to observe that your last statement would
hardly seem correct. It would not seem that
it is clear they can act only on the general
law. The last sentence would seem to be
exactly to the contrary.
DELEGATE MOSER: I meant to refer
only to section 8.02(1) and (2). I am not
at all referring to 8.01.
|
