Legislature(1995 - 1996)
1996-04-01 House Journal
Full Journal pdf1996-04-01 House Journal Page 3518 HB 372 Representative Davies brought up reconsideration of the vote on CSHB 372(L&C) am (page 3483). The following was again before the House in third reading: CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 372(L&C) am An Act relating to the authority of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board to exempt certain restaurant or eating place licenses from requirements relating to operation of a restaurant and to food sales; and providing for an effective date. Representative Davies moved and asked unanimous consent that CSHB 372(L&C) am be returned to second reading for the specific purpose of considering Amendment No. 2. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Amendment No. 2 was offered by Representative Davies: Page 2, lines 1 - 19: Delete "(1) renew ªISSUE OR REISSUEß a license as provided under this subsection if (A) the renewal ªISSUANCE OR REISSUANCEß would result in more than one exempt restaurant or eating place license for every 10 restaurant or eating place licenses allowed under the provisions of AS04.11.400(a)(2) or (3); (B) the premises would be located in a building having a public entrance within 200 feet of the boundary line of a school or a church building in which religious services 1996-04-01 House Journal Page 3519 HB 372 are being regularly conducted; for purposes of this subparagraph, the 200-foot prohibition is measured from the outer boundary line of the school or the public entrance of the church building by the shortest pedestrian route to the nearest public entrance of the restaurant or eating place; or (2) ªREISSUE A RESTAURANT OR EATING PLACE LICENSE ASEXEMPT ASPROVIDED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SUBSECTION IF THE LICENSE WAS ISSUED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF AS04.11.400(g); OR (3)ß transfer an exempt license issued under this subsection to another person." Insert "ª(1) ISSUE OR REISSUE A LICENSE ASPROVIDED UNDER THIS SUBSECTION IF (A) THE ISSUANCE OR REISSUANCE WOULD RESULT IN MORE THAN ONE EXEMPT RESTAURANT OR EATING PLACE LICENSE FOR EVERY 10 RESTAURANT OR EATING PLACE LICENSES ALLOWED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF AS04.11.400(a)(2) OR (3); (B) THE PREMISES WOULD BE LOCATED IN A BUILDING HAVING A PUBLIC ENTRANCE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE BOUNDARY LINE OF A SCHOOL OR A CHURCH BUILDING IN WHICH RELIGIOUS SERVICES ARE BEING REGULARLY CONDUCTED; FOR PURPOSES OF THIS SUBPARAGRAPH, THE 200-FOOT PROHIBITION IS MEASURED FROM THE OUTER BOUNDARY LINE OF THE SCHOOL OR THE PUBLIC ENTRANCE OF THE CHURCH BUILDING BY THE SHORTEST PEDESTRIAN ROUTE TO THE NEAREST PUBLIC ENTRANCE OF THE RESTAURANT OR EATING PLACE; (2) REISSUE A RESTAURANT OR EATING PLACE LICENSE ASEXEMPT ASPROVIDED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SUBSECTION IF THE LICENSE WAS ISSUED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF AS04.11.400(g); OR (3)ß transfer an exempt license issued under this subsection to another person." Representative Davies moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 2 be adopted. 1996-04-01 House Journal Page 3520 HB 372 Representative Porter objected. Representative Mulder moved and asked unanimous consent that he be allowed to abstain from voting due to a conflict of interest. Objection was heard and Representative Mulder was required to vote. Amendment to Amendment No. 2 was offered by Representative Davies: Last line of the amendment, following person: Insert or location Representative Davies moved and asked unanimous consent that the amendment to Amendment No. 2 be adopted. Objection was heard. Representative Toohey placed a call of the House. The call was satisfied. The question being: Shall the amendment to Amendment No. 2 be adopted? The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 372(L&C) am--RECONSIDERATION Second Reading Amendment to Amendment No. 2 YEAS: 26 NAYS: 11 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 3 Yeas: Austerman, Brice, Brown, Bunde, Davies, B.Davis, G.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Green, Grussendorf, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kott, Long, Mackie, Moses, Mulder, Navarre, Nicholia, Parnell, Robinson, Therriault, Toohey Nays: Kohring, Martin, Masek, Ogan, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Vezey, Williams, Willis Absent: Barnes, Foster, Kubina And so, the amendment to Amendment No. 2 was adopted. 1996-04-01 House Journal Page 3521 HB 372 Representatives Mackie and Navarre declared a conflict of interest. The question being: Shall Amendment No. 2 as amended be adopted? The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 372(L&C) am--RECONSIDERATION Second Reading Amendment No. 2 as amended YEAS: 20 NAYS: 20 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Barnes, Brice, Brown, Bunde, Davies, B.Davis, G.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Foster, Grussendorf, James, Kubina, Masek, Moses, Mulder, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Toohey Nays: Austerman, Green, Hanley, Ivan, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Long, Mackie, Martin, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Vezey, Williams, Willis Kott changed from "Yea" to "Nay". And so, Amendment No. 2 as amended was not adopted. Representative Davies moved and asked unanimous consent that CSHB 372(L&C) am be returned to second reading for the specific purpose of considering Amendment No. 3. Objection was heard. The question being: Shall CSHB 372(L&C) am be returned to second reading for the specific purpose of considering Amendment No. 3? The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 372(L&C) am--RECONSIDERATION Third Reading Return to Second for Amendment No. 3 YEAS: 13 NAYS: 27 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Grussendorf, Kubina, Mackie, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Willis 1996-04-01 House Journal Page 3522 HB 372 Nays: Austerman, Barnes, Bunde, G.Davis, Foster, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Long, Martin, Masek, Moses, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey, Williams And so, the motion failed. The question to be reconsidered: Shall CSHB 372(L&C) am pass the House? The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 372(L&C) am--RECONSIDERATION Third Reading Final Passage YEAS: 29 NAYS: 11 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Austerman, Brice, Brown, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Foster, Green, Grussendorf, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Long, Mackie, Martin, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Robinson, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Vezey, Willis Nays: Barnes, Bunde, Davies, G.Davis, Kubina, Masek, Moses, Navarre, Nicholia, Toohey, Williams And so, CSHB 372(L&C) am passed the House on reconsideration. Representative Vezey moved and asked unanimous consent that the roll call on the passage of the bill be considered the roll call on the effective date clause. There being no objection, it was so ordered. CSHB 372(L&C) am was referred to the Chief Clerk for engrossment.