Legislature(2001 - 2002)
2002-04-29 House Journal
Full Journal pdf2002-04-29 House Journal Page 3219 HB 498 The following, which was advanced to third reading from the April 26, 2002, calendar (page 3177), was read the third time: CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 498(FIN) am "An Act expressing legislative intent regarding privately operated correctional facility space and services; relating to the development and financing of privately operated correctional facility space and services; authorizing the Department of Corrections to enter into an agreement for the confinement and care of prisoners in privately operated correctional facility space in the City of Whittier; giving notice of and approving the entry into and the issuance of certificates of participation for the upgrade, expansion, and replacement of a certain correctional facility in the City of Bethel; giving notice of and approving the entry into lease-financing agreements for that project; and providing for an effective date." Amendment No. 6 (title amendment) was offered by Representatives Berkowitz and Halcro: Page 1, line 8, following "project;": Insert "authorizing the Department of Corrections to enter into agreements with municipalities relating to correctional facilities;" Representative Berkowitz moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 6 be adopted. Representative Harris objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 6 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 498(FIN) am Third Reading Amendment No. 6 - title amendment YEAS: 12 NAYS: 25 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 2 2002-04-29 House Journal Page 3220 Yeas: Berkowitz, Cissna, Crawford, Croft, Davies, Green, Guess, Halcro, Hayes, Kapsner, Kerttula, Kookesh Nays: Bunde, Chenault, Coghill, Dyson, Fate, Foster, Harris, Hudson, James, Joule, Kohring, Kott, Lancaster, McGuire, Meyer, Morgan, Mulder, Murkowski, Porter, Rokeberg, Scalzi, Stevens, Whitaker, Williams, Wilson Excused: Ogan Absent: Masek, Moses And so, Amendment No. 6 was not adopted. The question being: "Shall CSHB 498(FIN) am pass the House?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 498(FIN) am Third Reading Final Passage YEAS: 24 NAYS: 14 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 1 Yeas: Bunde, Chenault, Coghill, Dyson, Fate, Foster, Harris, Hudson, James, Joule, Kapsner, Kohring, Kookesh, Kott, Masek, Meyer, Morgan, Mulder, Porter, Rokeberg, Stevens, Whitaker, Williams, Wilson Nays: Berkowitz, Cissna, Crawford, Croft, Davies, Green, Guess, Halcro, Hayes, Kerttula, Lancaster, McGuire, Murkowski, Scalzi Excused: Ogan Absent: Moses And so, CSHB 498(FIN) am passed the House. Representative James moved the effective date clause. The question being: "Shall the effective date clause be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 498(FIN) am Third Reading Effective Date YEAS: 34 NAYS: 4 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 1 2002-04-29 House Journal Page 3221 Yeas: Bunde, Chenault, Coghill, Croft, Davies, Dyson, Fate, Foster, Green, Guess, Halcro, Harris, Hudson, James, Joule, Kapsner, Kerttula, Kohring, Kookesh, Kott, Lancaster, Masek, McGuire, Meyer, Morgan, Mulder, Murkowski, Porter, Rokeberg, Scalzi, Stevens, Whitaker, Williams, Wilson Nays: Berkowitz, Cissna, Crawford, Hayes Excused: Ogan Absent: Moses And so, the effective date clause was adopted. Representative Halcro gave notice of reconsideration of the vote on CSHB 498(FIN) am.