Legislature(2021 - 2022)
2022-05-09 House Journal
Full Journal pdf2022-05-09 House Journal Page 2813 HB 64 The following was read the second time: HOUSE BILL NO. 64 "An Act relating to regional fishery development associations; and relating to developing fishery management assessments." with the: Journal Page FSH RPT CS(FSH) 4DP 2NR 671 FN1: INDETERMINATE(DFG) 671 FN2: INDETERMINATE(REV) 671 2022-05-09 House Journal Page 2814 FIN RPT CS(FSH) 5DP 4NR 1971 FN3: ZERO(DFG) 1971 FN4: INDETERMINATE(DFG) 1971 FN5: INDETERMINATE(REV) 1971 Representative Tuck moved and asked unanimous consent that the following committee substitute be adopted in lieu of the original bill: CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 64(FSH) (same title) Representative Eastman objected. **The presence of Representative Kreiss-Tomkins was noted. The question being: "Shall the House adopt CSHB 64(FSH)?" The roll was taken with the following result: HB 64 Second Reading Adopt Fisheries CS YEAS: 35 NAYS: 2 EXCUSED: 3 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Carpenter, Claman, Cronk, Drummond, Edgmon, Fields, Foster, Gillham, Hannan, Hopkins, Johnson, Josephson, Kaufman, Kreiss-Tomkins, LeBon, McCabe, McKay, Merrick, Nelson, Ortiz, Patkotak, Prax, Rauscher, Schrage, Shaw, Snyder, Spohnholz, Story, Stutes, Tarr, Thompson, Tilton, Tuck, Vance, Zulkosky Nays: Eastman, Kurka Excused: McCarty, Rasmussen, Wool And so, CSHB 64(FSH) was adopted. Amendment No. 1 was offered by Representative Eastman: Page 8, line 22: Delete "75 percent" Insert "50 percent" 2022-05-09 House Journal Page 2815 Page 9, line 23: Delete "75 percent" Insert "50 percent" Representative Eastman moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 1 be adopted. There was objection. Representative Tuck moved and asked unanimous consent to divide the question. There being no objection, Amendment No. 1 was divided. Representative Eastman moved and asked unanimous consent to withdraw Amendment No. 1.A. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Amendment No. 1.B: Page 9, line 23: Delete "75 percent" Insert "50 percent" The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 1.B be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 64(FSH) Second Reading Amendment No. 1.B - Page 9, line 23 YEAS: 6 NAYS: 31 EXCUSED: 3 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Carpenter, Eastman, Johnson, Kaufman, Kurka, McKay Nays: Claman, Cronk, Drummond, Edgmon, Fields, Foster, Gillham, Hannan, Hopkins, Josephson, Kreiss-Tomkins, LeBon, McCabe, Merrick, Nelson, Ortiz, Patkotak, Prax, Rauscher, Schrage, Shaw, Snyder, Spohnholz, Story, Stutes, Tarr, Thompson, Tilton, Tuck, Vance, Zulkosky Excused: McCarty, Rasmussen, Wool And so, Amendment No. 1.B was not adopted. 2022-05-09 House Journal Page 2816 Amendment No. 2 was not offered. Representative Tuck moved and asked unanimous consent that CSHB 64(FSH) be considered engrossed, advanced to third reading, and placed on final passage. There was objection. CSHB 64(FSH) will advance to third reading on tomorrow's calendar.