Legislature(1993 - 1994)
1994-04-06 Senate Journal
Full Journal pdf1994-04-06 Senate Journal Page 3476 SB 310 SENATE BILL NO. 310 "An Act relating to the management and sale of state timber; relating to the classification of state land that would preclude harvesting of timber or would designate harvesting of timber as an incompatible use; relating to the administration of forest land, proposals for state forest, and the determination of sustained yield; and providing for an effective date" which had been held to the April 6 calendar (page 3449) was read the second time. Senator Miller moved for the adoption of the Resources Committee Substitute offered on page 3406. Senator Duncan objected. Senator Duncan rose to a point of order on Rule 24(d). 1994-04-06 Senate Journal Page 3477 SB 310 President Halford stated that the point of order was not well taken. Senator Duncan withdrew his objection. There being no further objections, CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 310(RES) "An Act relating to the management and sale of state timber and relating to the administration of forest land" was adopted. CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 310(RES) was read the second time. Senator Little offered Amendment No. 1 : Page 5, line 2, following "agreement." Insert "If a tentatively successful proposed agreement includes land within a municipality, the commissioner shall submit the tentatively successful proposed agreement to the municipality to determine if the agreement is consistent with municipal land use plans. The municipality shall make a consistency determination within 60 days of receipt of the tentatively successful proposed agreement and, if the agreement is not consistent with municipal land use plans, specifically set forth the provisions of the agreement that are not consistent." Page 5, following line 8: Insert a new paragraph to read: "(2) must be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with municipal land use plans if the agreement includes land within a municipality;" Renumber the following paragraph accordingly. Senator Little moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 1. Senator Taylor objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 1 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: 1994-04-06 Senate Journal Page 3478 SB 310 CSSB 310(RES) Second Reading Amendment No. 1 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 11 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Donley, Duncan, Ellis, Kerttula, Lincoln, Little, Salo, Zharoff Nays: Frank, Halford, Jacko, Kelly, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, Taylor Kelly changed from "Yea" to "Nay". and so, Amendment No. 1 failed. Senator Little offered Amendment No. 2 : Page 7, following line 3: Insert a new subsection to read: "(l) At least every five years during the term of an agreement under this section, the commissioner shall review the operator's performance under the agreement and, if the operator has not complied with the agreement's terms and conditions, the commissioner shall impose fines and penalties as permitted under the agreement or shall cancel the agreement if violations are substantial or environmental or other considerations warrant the cancellation." Reletter the following subsections accordingly. Senator Little moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 2. Senator Taylor objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 2 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 310(RES) Second Reading Amendment No. 2 1994-04-06 Senate Journal Page 3479 SB 310 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 11 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Donley, Duncan, Ellis, Kerttula, Lincoln, Little, Salo, Zharoff Nays: Frank, Halford, Jacko, Kelly, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, Taylor and so, Amendment No. 2 failed. Amendment No. 3 was not offered. Senator Little offered Amendment No. 4 : Page 8, lines 8 - 15: Delete all material. Renumber the following bill section accordingly. Senator Little moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 4. Senator Taylor objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 4 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 310(RES) Second Reading Amendment No. 4 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 11 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Donley, Duncan, Ellis, Kerttula, Lincoln, Little, Salo, Zharoff Nays: Frank, Halford, Jacko, Kelly, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, Taylor and so, Amendment No. 4 failed. Senator Duncan offered Amendment No. 5 : 1994-04-06 Senate Journal Page 3480 SB 310 Page 5, line 13: Delete "regarding compensation from the proposer" Insert "requiring the proposer to compensate the state for full costs incurred" Senator Duncan moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 5. Senator Taylor objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 5 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 310(RES) Second Reading Amendment No. 5 YEAS: 8 NAYS: 12 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Donley, Duncan, Ellis, Kerttula, Lincoln, Little, Zharoff Nays: Frank, Halford, Jacko, Kelly, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Salo, Sharp, Taylor and so, Amendment No. 5 failed. Senator Duncan offered Amendment No. 6 : Page 5, lines 15 - 16: Delete all material and insert: "(D) provisions requiring the proposer to pay the state's cost of administering, monitoring, and enforcing the terms and conditions of the agreement and other requirements of state law;" Senator Duncan moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 6. Senator Miller objected. 1994-04-06 Senate Journal Page 3481 SB 310 The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 6 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 310(RES) Second Reading Amendment No. 6 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 11 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Donley, Duncan, Ellis, Kerttula, Lincoln, Little, Salo, Zharoff Nays: Frank, Halford, Jacko, Kelly, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, Taylor and so, Amendment No. 6 failed. Senator Duncan offered Amendment No. 7 : Page 5, line 17: Delete "regarding responsibilities for" Insert "making the proposer responsible for all costs of" Page 5, line 22, following "agreement;" Insert "provisions under this paragraph must provide that the proposer shall pay fair market value for all material purchased from the state;" Senator Duncan moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 7. Senator Frank objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 7 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 310(RES) Second Reading Amendment No. 7 1994-04-06 Senate Journal Page 3482 SB 310 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 11 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Donley, Duncan, Ellis, Kerttula, Lincoln, Little, Salo, Zharoff Nays: Frank, Halford, Jacko, Kelly, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, Taylor and so, Amendment No. 7 failed. Senator Duncan offered Amendment No. 8 : Page 6, line 2, following "agreement": Insert ", including provisions for fines and penalties for violations of the agreement by the proposer" Senator Duncan moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 8. Senator Frank objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 8 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 310(RES) Second Reading Amendment No. 8 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 11 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Donley, Duncan, Ellis, Kerttula, Lincoln, Little, Salo, Zharoff Nays: Frank, Halford, Jacko, Kelly, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, Taylor and so, Amendment No. 8 failed. Senator Lincoln offered Amendment No. 9 : 1994-04-06 Senate Journal Page 3483 SB 310 Page 4, line 4: Delete "and" Page 4, line 5: after "management" Insert "and (H) adjacent landowners;" Senator Lincoln moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 9. Senator Frank objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 9 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 310(RES) Second Reading Amendment No. 9 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 11 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Donley, Duncan, Ellis, Kerttula, Lincoln, Little, Salo, Zharoff Nays: Frank, Halford, Jacko, Kelly, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, Taylor and so, Amendment No. 9 failed. Senator Zharoff offered Amendment No. 10 : Page 2, line 20: Delete "1,000,000" Insert " 500,000" Senator Zharoff moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 10. Senator Taylor objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 10 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: 1994-04-06 Senate Journal Page 3484 SB 310 CSSB 310(RES) Second Reading Amendment No. 10 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 11 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Donley, Duncan, Ellis, Kerttula, Lincoln, Little, Salo, Zharoff Nays: Frank, Halford, Jacko, Kelly, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, Taylor and so, Amendment No. 10 failed. Senator Zharoff offered Amendment No. 11 : Page 6, line 4, following "years": Insert ", including provisions to adjust harvest plans under the agreement due to information received from the inventory" Senator Zharoff moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 11. Senator Miller objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 11 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 310(RES) Second Reading Amendment No. 11 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 11 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Donley, Duncan, Ellis, Kerttula, Lincoln, Little, Salo, Zharoff Nays: Frank, Halford, Jacko, Kelly, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, Taylor Duncan changed from "Nay" to "Yea". 1994-04-06 Senate Journal Page 3485 SB 310 and so, Amendment No. 11 failed. Senator Lincoln offered Amendment No. 12 : Page 8, line 7: Delete "allowance" Insert "protection" Delete "made for" Insert "given to" Senator Lincoln moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 12. Senator Sharp objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 12 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 310(RES) Second Reading Amendment No. 12 YEAS: 10 NAYS: 10 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Donley, Duncan, Ellis, Kerttula, Leman, Lincoln, Little, Salo, Zharoff Nays: Frank, Halford, Jacko, Kelly, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, Taylor and so, Amendment No. 12 failed. Senator Zharoff offered Amendment No. 13 : Page 5, lines 15 - 16: Delete all material. 1994-04-06 Senate Journal Page 3486 SB 310 Insert "(D) provisions requiring the proposer to pay any additional state's cost of administering, monitoring, and enforcing the terms and conditions of the agreement and other requirements of state law;" Senator Zharoff moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 13. Senator Taylor objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 13 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 310(RES) Second Reading Amendment No. 13 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 11 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Donley, Duncan, Ellis, Kerttula, Lincoln, Little, Salo, Zharoff Nays: Frank, Halford, Jacko, Kelly, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, Taylor and so, Amendment No. 13 failed. Senator Adams offered Amendment No. 14 : Page 2, line 29: after "yield." Insert "A forest management agreement under this section may not provide for the harvesting of more than 20 million board feet per forest management agreement." Senator Adams moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 14. Senator Frank objected. 1994-04-06 Senate Journal Page 3487 SB 310 The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 14 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 310(RES) Second Reading Amendment No. 14 YEAS: 8 NAYS: 12 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Duncan, Ellis, Kerttula, Lincoln, Little, Salo, Zharoff Nays: Donley, Frank, Halford, Jacko, Kelly, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, Taylor Kerttula changed from "Nay" to "Yea". and so, Amendment No. 14 failed. Senator Taylor moved and asked unanimous consent that CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 310(RES) be considered engrossed, advanced to third reading and placed on final passage. Senator Adams objected. The question being: "Shall CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 310(RES) be advanced to third reading?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 310(RES) Advance from Second to Third Reading? YEAS: 11 NAYS: 9 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Frank, Halford, Jacko, Kelly, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, Taylor Nays: Adams, Donley, Duncan, Ellis, Kerttula, Lincoln, Little, Salo, Zharoff and so, the bill failed to advance to third reading.