Legislature(2011 - 2012)
2012-03-23 House Journal
Full Journal pdf2012-03-23 House Journal Page 1988 HB 264 The following was read the second time: 2012-03-23 House Journal Page 1989 HOUSE BILL NO. 264 "An Act allowing a deferral of municipal property taxes on the increase in the value of real property attributable to subdivision of that property; and providing for an effective date." with the: Journal Page CRA RPT CS(CRA) 5DP 1611 FN1: ZERO(CED) 1612 FIN RPT CS(CRA) 5DP 3NR 1688 FN2: ZERO(CED) 1688 Representative Austerman moved and asked unanimous consent that the following committee substitute be adopted in lieu of the original bill: CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 264(CRA) (same title) There being no objection, it was so ordered. Amendment No. 1 was offered by Representative T. Wilson: Page 1, line 1, following "deferral of" (title amendment): Insert "certain" Page 1, line 7, following "taxes": Insert ", other than taxes for road service areas established under AS 29.35.450," Representative T. Wilson moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 1 be adopted. Representative Munoz objected. **Representatives Kawasaki, Feige, and Gara, who were excused (pages 1563, 1965, 1973), left the Chamber. 2012-03-23 House Journal Page 1990 The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 1 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 264(CRA) Second Reading Amendment No. 1 YEAS: 2 NAYS: 29 EXCUSED: 9 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Doogan, T.Wilson Nays: Austerman, Chenault, Cissna, Dick, Edgmon, Foster, Gardner, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Hawker, Herron, Holmes, Johansen, Johnson, Joule, Keller, Kerttula, Lynn, Miller, Munoz, Neuman, Olson, Petersen, Saddler, Seaton, Stoltze, Thomas, Tuck, P.Wilson Excused: Costello, Fairclough, Feige, Gara, Gatto, Kawasaki, Millett, Pruitt, Thompson And so, Amendment No. 1 was not adopted. Representative Austerman moved and asked unanimous consent that CSHB 264(CRA) be considered engrossed, advanced to third reading, and placed on final passage. There being no objection, it was so ordered. CSHB 264(CRA) was read the third time. The question being: "Shall CSHB 264(CRA) pass the House?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 264(CRA) Third Reading Final Passage YEAS: 30 NAYS: 1 EXCUSED: 9 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Austerman, Chenault, Cissna, Dick, Doogan, Edgmon, Foster, Gardner, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Hawker, Herron, Holmes, Johansen, Johnson, Joule, Keller, Kerttula, Lynn, Miller, Munoz, Neuman, Olson, Petersen, Saddler, Seaton, Stoltze, Thomas, Tuck, P.Wilson Nays: T.Wilson 2012-03-23 House Journal Page 1991 Excused: Costello, Fairclough, Feige, Gara, Gatto, Kawasaki, Millett, Pruitt, Thompson And so, CSHB 264(CRA) passed the House. Representative Austerman 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. Representative Kerttula gave notice of reconsideration of the vote on CSHB 264(CRA).