Meetings
Transcript: Select text below to play or share a clip
[David Durfee (Chair)]: Right. Thank you. Welcome back. Thank you. We went and had a hearty discussion, I might add. And I don't if there's anything that we have to go over again, Michael, as
[Michael O’Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: far as Well, I'll just summarize what I think you agreed to, and you can correct me if I'm wrong. Okay. So the language would still say if the plaintiff demonstrates one or more of the following. So it's on the plaintiff to to show to pierce the the nuisance protection. Sub two, sole would be changed approximate, and that would be the only change. In sub three, there would be agreement with general agreement with the language that you have proposed that the plaintiff must demonstrate that a reasonable person would find that the agricultural activity was approximate cause of obnoxious and significant interference with the use and enjoyment of the neighboring property. Sure.
[David Durfee (Chair)]: So we agree. I reluctantly agree. Thank you, sir. Have another day. Thank you, sir. Thank you for participating. Thank Thank you, guys. Thank you. Yeah. Thanks, Bob. So how will this work?
[Michael O’Grady (Legislative Counsel)]: I go make a change, and I come I can either give it to one of you to get the signatures, or I can track it down.
[David Durfee (Chair)]: No. Just whatever. We'll be