Legislature(2009 - 2010)
2009-04-18 Senate Journal
Full Journal pdf2009-04-18 Senate Journal Page 1038 SB 96 Message dated April 17 was read stating the House passed and returned for consideration CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 96(FIN) "An Act relating to nonpayment of child support, to the definition of the term "state" for the purposes of the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, to certain judicial and administrative orders for medical support of a child, to periodic review and adjustment of child support orders, to relief from administrative child support orders, to child support arrearages, and to medical support of a child and the Alaska Native family assistance program; amending Rule 90.3, Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure; and providing for an effective date" with the following amendment: HOUSE CS FOR CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 96(FIN) Senator Ellis moved that the Senate concur in the House amendment. 2009-04-18 Senate Journal Page 1039 The question being: "Shall the Senate concur in the House amendment?" The roll was taken with the following result: HCS CSSB 96(FIN) Shall the Senate Concur in the House Amendment to CSSB 96(FIN)? EFDs Court Rule Change YEAS: 18 NAYS: 0 EXCUSED: 0 ABSENT: 1 VACANT: 1 Yeas: Bunde, Davis, Dyson, Ellis, French, Huggins, Kookesh, McGuire, Menard, Meyer, Olson, Paskvan, Stedman, Stevens, Therriault, Thomas, Wagoner, Wielechowski Absent: Hoffman and so, the Senate concurred in the House amendment, thus adopting HOUSE CS FOR CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 96(FIN) "An Act relating to nonpayment of child support, to the definition of the term 'state' for the purposes of the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, to certain judicial and administrative orders for medical support of a child, to periodic review and adjustment of child support orders, to relief from administrative child support orders, to child support arrearages, and to medical support of a child and the Alaska Native family assistance program; amending Rule 90.3, Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure; and providing for an effective date." Senator Ellis moved and asked unanimous consent that the vote on concurrence be considered the vote on the effective date clauses. Without objection, it was so ordered. Senator Ellis moved and asked unanimous consent that the vote on the passage of the bill be considered the vote on the Court Rule change. Without objection, it was so ordered. The Secretary was requested to notify the House. The bill was referred to the Secretary for enrollment.