To Amend The Definitions Of "outdoor Recreation Operator" And "tramway Operator Under The Law Concerning Recreational Tramways".
Summary
HB1981 amends Arkansas law governing recreational tramways and related outdoor recreation areas by revising the definitions of “outdoor recreation operator” and “tramway operator.” Under the bill, both terms continue to include state agencies and other operators in general, but the bill expressly excludes political subdivisions of the state from each definition. In practical terms, counties, cities, and other local government entities would no longer be treated as “outdoor recreation operators” or “tramway operators” for purposes of the recreational tramways law.
The bill appears to be a narrow definitional cleanup tied to the state’s publicity and tourism/recreational tramway framework. It does not create a new regulatory program or impose new duties; instead, it changes which public entities are covered by existing statutory definitions. That change could affect liability, compliance obligations, insurance, and operational responsibilities for local governments that own or control recreational tramways or outdoor recreation areas.
Impact
HB1981 amends Arkansas Code § 15-11-1002, the definitional section for the law concerning recreational tramways, by carving political subdivisions of the state out of the terms “outdoor recreation operator” and “tramway operator.” This narrows the scope of the statute as applied to counties, municipalities, and other local governmental bodies, while leaving state agencies and private operators within the definitions. The bill therefore affects how the recreational tramways law applies to public entities and may alter the parties subject to any associated statutory duties, protections, or liabilities.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill was broadly supported, passing third reading by a wide margin of 90 yeas to 2 nays. No committee transcript is available, so there is no recorded debate to indicate substantial opposition or concern in committee. Overall, the bill appears to have been viewed as a technical or clarifying measure rather than a controversial policy change.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the decision to exclude political subdivisions from the definitions of “outdoor recreation operator” and “tramway operator.” Supporters likely view this as a clarification that local governments should not be treated the same as other operators under the recreational tramways law, while any opponents may have been concerned that the exclusion could reduce coverage, shift responsibility, or create uneven treatment between state and local public entities. The strong floor vote indicates that any disagreement was limited.