Legislature(2003 - 2004)
2003-05-02 House Journal
Full Journal pdf2003-05-02 House Journal Page 1284 HB 86 Representative McGuire brought up reconsideration of the vote on CSSSHB 86(JUD) am (page 1252). The following was again before the House in third reading: CS FOR SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 86(JUD) am "An Act relating to civil liability for malicious claims for injunctive relief against state permitted projects; and providing for an effective date." 2003-05-02 House Journal Page 1285 Representative McGuire moved and asked unanimous consent that CSSSHB 86(JUD) am be returned to second reading for the specific purpose of considering Amendment No. 2. Representative Kerttula objected. The question being: "Shall CSSSHB 86(JUD) am be returned to second reading for the specific purpose of considering Amendment No. 2?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSSHB 86(JUD) am--RECONSIDERATION Third Reading Return to Second for Amendment No. 2 YEAS: 23 NAYS: 11 EXCUSED: 3 ABSENT: 3 Yeas: Coghill, Dahlstrom, Fate, Foster, Harris, Hawker, Heinze, Holm, Kohring, Kott, Lynn, Masek, McGuire, Meyer, Morgan, Ogg, Rokeberg, Samuels, Stoltze, Weyhrauch, Whitaker, Wilson, Wolf Nays: Berkowitz, Cissna, Crawford, Croft, Gara, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Joule, Kerttula, Kookesh, Moses Excused: Chenault, Gatto, Williams Absent: Anderson, Kapsner, Seaton And so, CSSSHB 86(JUD) am was returned to second reading. Amendment No. 2 was offered by Representative McGuire: Page 1, line 1 (title amendment): Delete "civil liability for malicious claims for injunctive relief against" Page 1, line 5, following "claim": Delete "for injunctive relief" Page 1, line 7, following "claim": Delete "for injunctive relief" Page 2, line 9, following "claim": Delete "for injunctive relief" 2003-05-02 House Journal Page 1286 Representative McGuire moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 2 be adopted. Representative Kerttula objected. Representative McGuire placed a call of the House. Amendment No. 1 to Amendment No. 2 was offered by Representative Gara: Delete the following: "Page 1, line 7, following "claim": Delete "for injunctive relief"" Representative Gara moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 1 to Amendment No. 2 be adopted. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Representative McGuire lifted the call. Amendment No. 2 to Amendment No. 2 as amended was offered by Representative Gruenberg: Delete the following: "Page 2, line 9, following "claim": Delete "for injunctive relief"" Representative Gruenberg moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 2 to Amendment No. 2 as amended be adopted. There being no objection, it was so ordered. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 2 as amended be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSSHB 86(JUD) am--RECONSIDERATION Second Reading Amendment No. 2 as amended YEAS: 23 NAYS: 9 EXCUSED: 3 ABSENT: 5 2003-05-02 House Journal Page 1287 Yeas: Anderson, Coghill, Dahlstrom, Fate, Foster, Harris, Hawker, Heinze, Holm, Kohring, Kott, Lynn, McGuire, Morgan, Ogg, Rokeberg, Samuels, Seaton, Stoltze, Weyhrauch, Whitaker, Wilson, Wolf Nays: Berkowitz, Cissna, Crawford, Croft, Gara, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Joule, Kerttula Excused: Chenault, Gatto, Williams Absent: Kapsner, Kookesh, Masek, Meyer, Moses And so, Amendment No. 2 as amended was adopted and the new title follows: CS FOR SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 86(JUD) am "An Act relating to state permitted projects; and providing for an effective date." Amendment No. 3 (title amendment) was offered by Representative Berkowitz: Page 1, line 1, following "to": Insert "civil liability for malicious claims against" Representative Berkowitz moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 3 be adopted. Representative McGuire objected. Representative Rokeberg moved the previous question. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 3 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSSHB 86(JUD) am--RECONSIDERATION Third Reading Amendment No. 3 YEAS: 15 NAYS: 19 EXCUSED: 3 ABSENT: 3 Yeas: Berkowitz, Cissna, Crawford, Croft, Gara, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Joule, Kerttula, Kohring, Kookesh, Kott, Masek, Seaton, Weyhrauch 2003-05-02 House Journal Page 1288 Nays: Anderson, Coghill, Dahlstrom, Fate, Foster, Harris, Hawker, Heinze, Holm, Lynn, McGuire, Morgan, Ogg, Rokeberg, Samuels, Stoltze, Whitaker, Wilson, Wolf Excused: Chenault, Gatto, Williams Absent: Kapsner, Meyer, Moses And so, Amendment No. 3 was not adopted. The question to be reconsidered: "Shall CSSSHB 86(JUD) am pass the House?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSSHB 86(JUD) am--RECONSIDERATION Third Reading Final Passage YEAS: 28 NAYS: 6 EXCUSED: 3 ABSENT: 3 Yeas: Anderson, Coghill, Crawford, Croft, Dahlstrom, Fate, Foster, Gara, Gruenberg, Harris, Hawker, Heinze, Holm, Kohring, Kott, Lynn, Masek, McGuire, Morgan, Ogg, Rokeberg, Samuels, Seaton, Stoltze, Weyhrauch, Whitaker, Wilson, Wolf Nays: Berkowitz, Cissna, Guttenberg, Joule, Kerttula, Kookesh Excused: Chenault, Gatto, Williams Absent: Kapsner, Meyer, Moses Gara changed from "Nay" to "Yea". And so, CSSSHB 86(JUD) am passed the House on reconsideration. Representative Coghill 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. Representative Berkowitz objected. The question being: "Shall the effective date clause be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: 2003-05-02 House Journal Page 1289 CSSSHB 86(JUD) am--RECONSIDERATION Third Reading Effective Date YEAS: 31 NAYS: 4 EXCUSED: 3 ABSENT: 2 Yeas: Anderson, Berkowitz, Cissna, Coghill, Crawford, Dahlstrom, Fate, Foster, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Harris, Hawker, Heinze, Holm, Joule, Kohring, Kott, Lynn, Masek, McGuire, Meyer, Morgan, Ogg, Rokeberg, Samuels, Seaton, Stoltze, Weyhrauch, Whitaker, Wilson, Wolf Nays: Croft, Gara, Kerttula, Kookesh Excused: Chenault, Gatto, Williams Absent: Kapsner, Moses And so, the effective date clause was adopted. CSSSHB 86(JUD) am was referred to the Chief Clerk for engrossment.