Legislature(1993 - 1994)
1994-02-11 House Journal
Full Journal pdf1994-02-11 House Journal Page 2350 SCR 4 The following was read the second time: SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 4 Relating to the Alaska Supreme Court's interpretation of Alaska Rule of Civil Procedure 82 and requesting that the court modify its interpretation of that rule. with the: Journal Page JUD RPT 2DP 2DNP 1NR 1AM 2202 -ZERO FISCAL NOTE (S.JUD) 1/31/94 2202 Amendment No. 1 was offered by Representative Phillips: Page 2, line 26, after "Honorable": Delete "Edmond W. Burke" Insert "Robert L. Eastaugh" Representative Phillips moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 1 be adopted. There being no objection, it was so ordered. 1994-02-11 House Journal Page 2351 SCR 4 Amendment No. 2 was offered by Representative Ulmer: Page 2, lines 7, 10, and 12: Delete " special litigation organizations" Insert "public interest litigants" Page 2, lines 19 and 20: Delete "parties represented by special litigation organizations" Insert "public interest litigants" Representative Ulmer moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 2 be adopted. Representative Porter objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 2 be adopted? The roll was taken with the following result: SCR 4 am H Second Reading Amendment No. 2 YEAS: 8 NAYS: 23 EXCUSED: 9 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Brown, Davidson, B.Davis, Finkelstein, Grussendorf, Nicholia, Nordlund, Ulmer Nays: Barnes, Bunde, G.Davis, Green, Hanley, Hudson, James, Kott, Larson, Mackie, MacLean, Martin, Moses, Mulder, Olberg, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey, Williams Excused: Brice, Carney, Davies, Foster, Hoffman, Menard, Navarre, Sitton, Willis And so, Amendment No. 2 was not adopted. 1994-02-11 House Journal Page 2352 SCR 4 Amendment No. 3 was offered by Representative Finkelstein: Page 2, lines 2 - 5: Delete all material. Representative Finkelstein moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 3 be adopted. Representative Phillips objected. Representative Vezey objected and rose to a point of order stating that the amendment was out of order under Section 401 of Mason's Manual. The Speaker ruled the amendment in order. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 3 be adopted? The roll was taken with the following result: SCR 4 am H Second Reading Amendment No. 3 YEAS: 7 NAYS: 24 EXCUSED: 9 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Brown, Davidson, B.Davis, Finkelstein, Nicholia, Nordlund, Ulmer Nays: Barnes, Bunde, G.Davis, Green, Grussendorf, Hanley, Hudson, James, Kott, Larson, Mackie, MacLean, Martin, Moses, Mulder, Olberg, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey, Williams Excused: Brice, Carney, Davies, Foster, Hoffman, Menard, Navarre, Sitton, Willis And so, Amendment No. 3 was not adopted. 1994-02-11 House Journal Page 2353 SCR 4 Amendment No. 4 was offered by Representative Finkelstein: Page 2, line 7: Delete "if successful" Insert "that the party prevails and it is shown that a violation of State or Federal laws or laws or regulations had occurred," Representative Finkelstein moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 4 be adopted. Representative Porter objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 4 be adopted? The roll was taken with the following result: SCR 4 am H Second Reading Amendment No. 4 YEAS: 6 NAYS: 25 EXCUSED: 9 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Brown, Davidson, Finkelstein, Nicholia, Nordlund, Ulmer Nays: Barnes, Bunde, B.Davis, G.Davis, Green, Grussendorf, Hanley, Hudson, James, Kott, Larson, Mackie, MacLean, Martin, Moses, Mulder, Olberg, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey, Williams Excused: Brice, Carney, Davies, Foster, Hoffman, Menard, Navarre, Sitton, Willis And so, Amendment No. 4 was not adopted. Amendment No. 5 was offered by Representative Finkelstein: Page 1, after line 15, insert a new paragraph to read: 1994-02-11 House Journal Page 2354 SCR 4 "WHEREAS public interest litigation has, in many circumstances, resulted in higher standards for protection of the Alaskan environment; and" Representative Finkelstein moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 5 be adopted. Representative Mackie objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 5 be adopted? The roll was taken with the following result: SCR 4 am H Second Reading Amendment No. 5 YEAS: 5 NAYS: 26 EXCUSED: 9 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Brown, Davidson, Finkelstein, Nordlund, Ulmer Nays: Barnes, Bunde, B.Davis, G.Davis, Green, Grussendorf, Hanley, Hudson, James, Kott, Larson, Mackie, MacLean, Martin, Moses, Mulder, Nicholia, Olberg, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey, Williams Excused: Brice, Carney, Davies, Foster, Hoffman, Menard, Navarre, Sitton, Willis And so, Amendment No. 5 was not adopted. Amendment No. 6 was offered by Representative Parnell: Page 2, line 10: Delete "the" Insert "this" 1994-02-11 House Journal Page 2355 SCR 4 Page 2, lines 10 and 11: Delete "that favors special litigation organizations" Representative Parnell moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 6 be adopted. Representative Phillips objected and withdrew the objection. Representative Olberg objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 6 be adopted? The roll was taken with the following result: SCR 4 am H Second Reading Amendment No. 6 YEAS: 16 NAYS: 15 EXCUSED: 9 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Brown, Bunde, Davidson, B.Davis, Finkelstein, Green, Grussendorf, Hudson, Larson, MacLean, Moses, Nicholia, Nordlund, Parnell, Ulmer, Williams Nays: Barnes, G.Davis, Hanley, James, Kott, Mackie, Martin, Mulder, Olberg, Phillips, Porter, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey Excused: Brice, Carney, Davies, Foster, Hoffman, Menard, Navarre, Sitton, Willis And so, Amendment No. 6 was adopted. Amendment No. 7 was offered by Representative Porter: Page 2, line 18, after "permit": Delete "all" 1994-02-11 House Journal Page 2356 SCR 4 Page 2, line 19, after "costs": Delete ", including those who prevail over" Insert "from" Representative Porter moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 7 be adopted. Representative Ulmer objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 7 be adopted? The roll was taken with the following result: SCR 4 am H Second Reading Amendment No. 7 YEAS: 10 NAYS: 21 EXCUSED: 9 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Brown, Green, Hudson, Moses, Mulder, Olberg, Phillips, Porter, Therriault, Vezey Nays: Barnes, Bunde, Davidson, B.Davis, G.Davis, Finkelstein, Grussendorf, Hanley, James, Kott, Larson, Mackie, MacLean, Martin, Nicholia, Nordlund, Parnell, Sanders, Toohey, Ulmer, Williams Excused: Brice, Carney, Davies, Foster, Hoffman, Menard, Navarre, Sitton, Willis And so, Amendment No. 7 was not adopted. Amendment No. 8 was offered by Representative Green: Page 2, line 2: Delete "is intended" Insert "appears" 1994-02-11 House Journal Page 2357 SCR 4 Representative Green moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 8 be adopted. There being no objection, it was so ordered. The question being: "Shall SCR 4 am H pass the House? The roll was taken with the following result: SCR 4 am H Second Reading Final Passage YEAS: 24 NAYS: 7 EXCUSED: 9 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Barnes, Bunde, G.Davis, Green, Grussendorf, Hanley, Hudson, James, Kott, Larson, Mackie, MacLean, Martin, Moses, Mulder, Olberg, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey, Williams Nays: Brown, Davidson, B.Davis, Finkelstein, Nicholia, Nordlund, Ulmer Excused: Brice, Carney, Davies, Foster, Hoffman, Menard, Navarre, Sitton, Willis And so, SCR 4 am H passed the House. Representative Vezey gave notice of reconsideration of his vote on SCR 4 am H.