No. 45
STATE OF MICHIGAN
Journal of the Senate
96th Legislature
REGULAR SESSION OF 2012
Senate Chamber, Lansing, Thursday, May 10, 2012.
10:00 a.m.
The Senate was called to order by the President, Lieutenant Governor Brian N. Calley.
The roll was called by the Secretary of the Senate, who announced that a quorum was present.
Anderson—present Hood—present Pappageorge—present
Bieda—present Hopgood—present Pavlov—present
Booher—present Hune—present Proos—present
Brandenburg—present Hunter—present Richardville—present
Casperson—present Jansen—present Robertson—present
Caswell—present Johnson—present Rocca—present
Colbeck—present Jones—present Schuitmaker—present
Emmons—present Kahn—present Smith—present
Gleason—present Kowall—present Walker—present
Green—present Marleau—present Warren—present
Gregory—present Meekhof—present Whitmer—present
Hansen—present Moolenaar—present Young—present
Hildenbrand—present Nofs—present
Pastor Dave Denzer of St. Michael’s Lutheran Church of Canton offered the following invocation:
Lord our God, we do thank You for gathering us here today. I pray for each person here in the Senate. I pray for the protection around them, Lord, that You would guide each one of them and guard their families. Lord, guide them as they deliberate today. Guide their decision making, Lord. Help them to put aside various things that might be distractions from doing what would be right and from following Your will. We remember, Lord, that there is a court that is higher than personal opinion or even public opinion.
Lord God, we pray for each one of them, and we pray for unity; not unity for unity sake, but unity for the sake of that which is right.
Lord God, we also lift up to You the family of Matthew Schwartz, a fallen soldier. We pray for them, Lord, that You would comfort them and support them as we also remember him today.
We pray each of these things, Lord. In Your name we pray. Amen.
The President, Lieutenant Governor Calley, led the members of the Senate in recital of the Pledge of Allegiance.
Motions and Communications
Senators Meekhof, Brandenburg and Hood entered the Senate Chamber.
Senator Bieda moved that Senators Gleason and Johnson be temporarily excused from today’s session.
The motion prevailed.
Senator Meekhof moved that Senator Casperson be temporarily excused from today’s session.
The motion prevailed.
Senator Meekhof moved that rule 2.106 be suspended to allow committees to meet during Senate session.
The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
Senator Meekhof moved that rule 3.902 be suspended to allow the guests of Senator Walker admittance to the Senate floor.
The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
Senators Gleason and Casperson entered the Senate Chamber.
Senator Walker asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal.
The motion prevailed.
Senator Walker’s statement is as follows:
It is my honor to be recognizing a family in my district who has shared in one of the greatest sacrifices one of our young people can make, and that is serving their country and giving his life in defense of our country. With me I have the Matthew Schwartz family, along with this tribute I would like to present to them. I would like to read this tribute and present it to the family of Matthew Schwartz. I believe we are not only here with their family, but we have a number of friends here in the balcony as well. Let me begin presenting this tribute to the family of Technical Sergeant Matthew S. Schwartz in celebrating his life and honoring his sacrifice to our country:
“LET IT BE KNOWN, That it is with sad hearts, but also deep appreciation for his service to our country, that we present this tribute to the family of Technical Sergeant Matthew S. Schwartz. Our country owes a deep debt of gratitude that cannot be overstated, and we will always be thankful for all Matthew has done to keep our homeland safe from harm. Matthew will be greatly missed by all who knew him.
Matthew was born on April 2, 1977, and grew up in Traverse City, where he often returned with wife Jennifer and three daughters Aliza Grace, Emily Rose and Morgan Marieto to visit extended family and close friends. Matthew treasured every moment spent with his family and made everlasting memories with them hiking, camping, and playing on the soccer fields.
Matthew courageously answered the call of duty, enlisting in the United States Air Force after graduating from Traverse City Central High School in 1996. Matthew served as the Non-Commissioned Officer in charge of Explosive Ordnance Disposal Operations for the 90th Civil Engineer Squadron, Francis E. Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming. Matthew’s brave heart and courageousness in the service earned him numerous awards and decorations, including the Purple Heart and Air Force Achievement Medal.
Sergeant Matthew Schwartz was killed by an IED while defending our country in Shir Ghazay, Helmand Province, Afghanistan, on January 5, 2012. He was the leader of a three-person team deployed worldwide in support of the Department of Defense Overseas Contingency Operations and was responsible for ordnance disposal in an expansive territory covering eastern Wyoming, western Nebraska, and northern Colorado.
While Matthew left us too soon, the sacrifice he made on the battlefield protecting our freedoms will never be forgotten.
IN SPECIAL TRIBUTE, Therefore, This document is signed to honor and celebrate the life of Technical Sergeant Matthew S. Schwartz. May his family grow strong in the memory of Matthew’s caring spirit, and may they find comfort in the knowledge of our shared grief in his passing.”
It is my pleasure to recognize them today.
The Secretary announced that the following official bills were printed on Wednesday, May 9, and are available at the legislative website:
Senate Bill Nos. 1120 1121 1122
House Bill Nos. 5599 5600 5601
Recess
Senator Meekhof moved that the Senate recess subject to the call of the Chair.
The motion prevailed, the time being 10:14 a.m.
11:00 a.m.
The Senate was called to order by the President, Lieutenant Governor Calley.
During the recess, Senator Johnson entered the Senate Chamber.
By unanimous consent the Senate proceeded to the order of
Third Reading of Bills
Senator Meekhof moved that the following bills be placed at the head of the Third Reading of Bills calendar:
Senate Bill No. 1072
Senate Bill No. 1065
Senate Bill No. 1066
Senate Bill No. 1067
Senate Bill No. 1068
Senate Bill No. 1069
Senate Bill No. 1070
Senate Bill No. 1071
Senate Bill No. 884
The motion prevailed.
Recess
Senator Meekhof moved that the Senate recess subject to the call of the Chair.
The motion prevailed, the time being 11:02 a.m.
11:10 a.m.
The Senate was called to order by the President, Lieutenant Governor Calley.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 1072, entitled
A bill to provide for the reimbursement of certain funds to local taxing units; to create certain funds; and to set forth the powers and duties of certain state departments and state officials.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Walker offered the following substitute:
Substitute (S-2).
The question being on the adoption of the substitute,
Senator Nofs offered the following amendments to the substitute:
1. Amend page 3, line 27, after “mills” by inserting “or voter-approved qualified mills”.
2. Amend page 5, following line 20, by inserting:
“(p) “Voter-approved qualified mill loss” means revenue lost associated with voter-approved qualified mills.
(q) “Voter-approved qualified mills” means a millage levied in the 2012 fiscal year or that will be levied in a subsequent fiscal year for a specific purpose or activity as stated in the question presented to and approved by the voters prior to the 2013 fiscal year and that is not a general operating millage for a county, city, village, or township.”.
3. Amend page 6, line 11, after “loss” by inserting “and voter-approved qualified mill loss”.
4. Amend page 6, line 19, after “2012” by inserting “and the number of voter-approved qualified mills approved by the voters prior to the 2013 fiscal year that are levied in fiscal year 2012 or will be levied in a subsequent fiscal year”.
5. Amend page 6, line 21, after “loss” by inserting “and voter-approved qualified mill loss”.
6. Amend page 7, line 25, after “loss” by inserting a comma and “voter-approved qualified mill loss,”.
7. Amend page 9, line 17, after “loss” by inserting “and voter-approved qualified mill loss”.
8. Amend page 10, line 4, after “loss” by inserting “and voter-approved qualified mill loss”.
The amendments to the substitute were adopted.
Senator Meekhof moved that Senator Green be excused from the balance of today’s session.
The motion prevailed.
Senator Brandenburg offered the following amendments to the substitute:
1. Amend page 3, line 24, by striking out all of subdivision (h) and relettering the remaining subdivisions.
2. Amend page 7, line 5, after the first “the” by striking out “governmental funds” and inserting “general fund”.
3. Amend page 7, line 14, after the first “the” by striking out “governmental funds” and inserting “general fund”.
4. Amend page 8, line 9, after “unit’s” by striking out “governmental funds” and inserting “general fund”.
The amendments to the substitute were adopted.
The substitute as amended was adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
Senator Meekhof moved to reconsider the vote by which the substitute as amended was adopted.
The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on the adoption of the substitute as amended,
Senator Bieda offered the following amendments to the substitute:
1. Amend page 3, line 10, by striking out “that” and inserting “all of the following conditions are satisfied:
(i) The”.
2. Amend page 3, line 15, by striking out “(i)” and inserting “(A)”.
3. Amend page 3, line 19, by striking out “(ii)” and inserting “(B)”.
4. Amend page 3, line 19, after “under” by striking out “subparagraph (i)” and inserting “sub-subparagraph (A)”.
5. Amend page 3, line 21, by striking out “(iii)” and inserting “(C)”.
6. Amend page 3, line 21, after “under” by striking out “subparagraph (ii)” and inserting “sub-subparagraph (B)”.
7. Amend page 3, following line 23, by inserting:
“(ii) The owner of that personal property is not a debtor in bankruptcy under the bankruptcy code, 11 USC 101 to 1532. Personal property previously identified as eligible manufacturing personal property shall no longer be considered eligible manufacturing personal property in any year in which the owner of that personal property files a voluntary petition under the bankruptcy code, 11 USC 101 to 1532.”.
The amendments to the substitute were not adopted.
Senator Bieda offered the following amendments to the substitute:
1. Amend page 3, line 10, by striking out “that” and inserting “all of the following conditions are satisfied:
(i) The”.
2. Amend page 3, line 15, by striking out “(i)” and inserting “(A)”.
3. Amend page 3, line 19, by striking out “(ii)” and inserting “(B)”.
4. Amend page 3, line 19, after “under” by striking out “subparagraph (i)” and inserting “sub-subparagraph (A)”.
5. Amend page 3, line 21, by striking out “(iii)” and inserting “(C)”.
6. Amend page 3, line 21, after “under” by striking out “subparagraph (ii)” and inserting “sub-subparagraph (B)”.
7. Amend page 3, following line 23, by inserting:
“(ii) The owner of that personal property has, in the aggregate, increased total employment in this state by 5% or more in the immediately preceding 5-year period. Personal property previously identified as eligible manufacturing personal property shall no longer be considered eligible manufacturing personal property in any year in which the owner of that personal property fails to maintain an aggregate increase in employment in this state of 5% or more in the immediately preceding 5-year period.”.
The amendments to the substitute were not adopted.
Senator Hunter requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The amendments to the substitute were not adopted, a majority of the members not voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 314 Yeas—12
Anderson Gregory Hunter Warren
Bieda Hood Johnson Whitmer
Gleason Hopgood Smith Young
Nays—25
Booher Hildenbrand Marleau Proos
Brandenburg Hune Meekhof Richardville
Casperson Jansen Moolenaar Robertson
Caswell Jones Nofs Rocca
Colbeck Kahn Pappageorge Schuitmaker
Emmons Kowall Pavlov Walker
Hansen
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: President
Senator Bieda offered the following amendments to the substitute:
1. Amend page 3, line 10, by striking out “that” and inserting “all of the following conditions are satisfied:
(i) The”.
2. Amend page 3, line 15, by striking out “(i)” and inserting “(A)”.
3. Amend page 3, line 19, by striking out “(ii)” and inserting “(B)”.
4. Amend page 3, line 19, after “under” by striking out “subparagraph (i)” and inserting “sub-subparagraph (A)”.
5. Amend page 3, line 21, by striking out “(iii)” and inserting “(C)”.
6. Amend page 3, line 21, after “under” by striking out “subparagraph (ii)” and inserting “sub-subparagraph (B)”.
7. Amend page 3, following line 23, by inserting:
“(ii) The owner of that personal property has not relocated manufacturing or discontinued sourcing of manufactured goods from the United States to any foreign country in the immediately preceding 5-year period.”.
The amendments to the substitute were not adopted.
Senator Hunter requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The amendments to the substitute were not adopted, a majority of the members not voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 315 Yeas—14
Anderson Gregory Johnson Warren
Bieda Hood Rocca Whitmer
Emmons Hopgood Smith Young
Gleason Hunter
Nays—23
Booher Hildenbrand Marleau Proos
Brandenburg Hune Meekhof Richardville
Casperson Jansen Moolenaar Robertson
Caswell Jones Nofs Schuitmaker
Colbeck Kahn Pappageorge Walker
Hansen Kowall Pavlov
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: President
The question being on the adoption of the substitute as amended,
The substitute as amended was adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 316 Yeas—22
Booher Hune Meekhof Richardville
Brandenburg Jansen Nofs Robertson
Caswell Jones Pappageorge Rocca
Emmons Kahn Pavlov Schuitmaker
Hansen Kowall Proos Walker
Hildenbrand Marleau
Nays—15
Anderson Gleason Hunter Warren
Bieda Gregory Johnson Whitmer
Casperson Hood Moolenaar Young
Colbeck Hopgood Smith
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: President
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
Protests
Senators Colbeck, Bieda, Moolenaar, Young, Hopgood, Johnson, Hood, Anderson, Smith, Gleason, Gregory, Warren, Hunter and Whitmer under their constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill No. 1072.
Senators Colbeck, Bieda, Gleason, Gregory, Warren, Hunter, Johnson, Whitmer and Anderson moved that the statements they made during the discussion of the bill be printed as their reasons for voting “no.”
The motion prevailed.
Senator Colbeck’s statement is as follows:
I rise in opposition to the passage of Senate Bill No. 1072 as it is currently offered. I do so with difficulty because, first and foremost, I support the concept of repealing the personal property tax. It is a bad tax for the state of Michigan, and it discourages investment. That makes our businesses less competitive. However, I think it is important for us to replace all of the revenue that is going to be lost to our local taxable units as a result of this.
While Senate Bill No. 1072 made great strides since we first started the discussion around the personal property tax, when we started, there was no such thing as a reimbursement fund. Senate Bill No. 1072 does have a reimbursement fund for the communities. Later on during the discussions, that reimbursement fund didn’t kick in until 2016, and now we are talking about it kicking in 2013 to help out with some of the smaller parcels and exemption from that. Those are really good things. The bottom line is that we do not have 100 percent coverage when this is all said and done for our municipalities. Right now they are struggling just like the rest of us with depreciated tax values and revenue for their communities.
I want to make sure that we are sensitive to what is going on in local government, just like we are sensitive to what is going on in state government. With the current version of the bill, it still leaves about a $50 million hole that has to be made up by our local governments. These are local taxable units such as libraries, community colleges, cities, and townships. These are civic organizations that deal directly with and have the closest interaction with our communities, and a lot of people depend on them. It is for police, fire, and our schools. I think it is very important that we are sensitive to their needs as we go forward with this tax reform. I think there are other options on how to fill that $50 million hole. We are talking about economic development. The personal property tax repeal is an economic development tool. I think we should be trading that investment off with other economic development incentives and investments that we are making in our state budget, and I think we will find sufficient funds to make this 100 percent revenue neutral. For those reasons, I am a “no” vote on Senate Bill No. 1072.
Senator Bieda’s statement, in which Senators Moolenaar, Young, Hopgood, Johnson, Hood, Anderson and Smith concurred, is as follows:
I’m glad I don’t need to pay a user fee to use this microphone today. I don’t usually speak that often, but I think this is a very important piece of legislation. First of all, I would like to commend everybody who has worked on that. There has been a considerable amount of work on it. Sadly, I have to rise today because I can’t really support the legislation before us.
The substitute that was adopted is moving in the right direction and the amendments that were adopted by the good Senator from the 29th District. I think it assuages a lot of the fears that we have as to the funding for local units of government. As the substitute was presented to us this morning, there is no ability to go through and see how each of the communities are impacted. I think it is really important that we have that ability to go to our school districts and local units of governments and see the various impacts this would have.
I know the six communities I represent, the personal property tax is a significant amount of revenue for those entities. In this troubling time of economic duress, those local units of government that provide those needed services of public safety, it is really essential that we guarantee, or at least move towards that direction, that we are not doing any harm to them as we try to address another issue that is also very important.
I have been a longtime critic of the personal property tax and have worked in the past on legislation to eliminate it. I think we are moving in the right direction as to the elimination. The problem that we face is that each community and school district and libraries have a significant amount of their revenue that is dependent on that. Until we really make sure that we take care of those issues, this proposal to repeal the tax without a concrete plan to replace the revenue is irresponsible.
The bigger picture that we need to put on the table: How do we fund local units of government? How do we fund our schools? A death by a thousand cuts is still a death. I think we need to have something in place. I would like to quote my good colleague from the 1st District when he likes to begin something with a quote. Well, I would like to put a quote out there, and I can understand where local units of government are coming from on this: “Trust, but verify.”
I look at them as our partners; our partners in government and providing services, but I also understand their concern with the list of broken promises from Lansing over the years on revenue sharing, the Michigan Renaissance Zone Act, the industrial property exemption, the state education tax, the industrial personal property exemption from school operating mills, and the commercial personal property exemption from 12 of the school operating mills—a history over the last ten years of breaking promises to our local units of government. I think it is really important that we look out for our citizens as we are working to make Michigan a better place to do business.
Our cities and schools have been asked to endure cut after cut. They have been asked to make every dime count, to find savings in every service that they provide, and to cut employees when more savings are needed. That is important. That is part of efficiency in government. But to pass these bills with no solid replacement would be to pull the rug from under our local communities.
One of my cities, the city of Warren, receives more than $7 million from the industrial tax. The loss of these funds would be a devastating blow to the city. I don’t think any of us want to endanger the fiscal solvency of our cities, local units of government, or our schools. We certainly don’t want the Governor and the Treasurer to become very busy appointing emergency financial managers.
At this time, sadly, I will be voting “no” on this bill. I don’t think it is a responsible action for the Legislature to take. I do want to commend everybody’s work on this. It is a complex problem. I look forward to working with you again, as we continue this debate. At this point, I would be a “no” vote on it. I would encourage my colleagues to vote “no” as well.
Senator Gleason’s statement is as follows:
I’m distinctly honored to represent the city of Flint. Flint now has an emergency manager who has been in place for over three months now. When our financial manager undertook that position, he was giving some direction to a troubled city. Now, with only a few months on the job, we are going to talk about how we are going to diminish even more resources from these troubled towns and schools. I don’t think there is a person in this room who wouldn’t say the personal property tax is a dog that just doesn’t hunt. We know it hasn’t worked and hasn’t worked for a long time, but our cities and our schools have worked for a long time. We are making it more stressful on them by impacting them with removal of much-needed resources.
The city of Flint, which I represent, and others in this room represent communities that have been taken over by financial managers as well. We not only didn’t give them their money, but we didn’t demand or even expect jobs to replace these tax cuts. When you look in your communities, I think every single one of us has had a tremendous impact with their public safety sector. Since we came to office, we have lost nearly 3,600 policemen across the state of Michigan by cutting taxes. Before we started cutting taxes, people could have expected a response from the local police department, rather than now, in some situations, the State Police come and respond in hours and, in some cases, days after the event has occurred.
Our local fire departments have been put in a tremendously harmful situation because they don’t have enough support to go to these scenes. We have diminished these forces so much. We have skeletonlike forces now in these cities. I think what we should expect is if we do something, somebody else will have to do something too.
The previous Senator quoted Ronald Reagan, “Trust, but verify.” We keep putting more and more pressure on these local communities and schools. Ronald Reagan’s opponent in 1980 called this voodoo economics because we keep pushing it down farther and farther. We take somebody else’s money to balance our budgets because we have a statutory obligation to have a balanced budget. We impact others who should have a balanced budget. I think this is a very, very harsh way to do business when we take from our locals and our schools.
The good Senator brought up several past votes and actions that we have taken when we didn’t keep our promise. This is another one that we are breaking today when we promise these communities that we would help fund the same constituencies that we serve. This is a troubling tax. I think the only thing that exceeds the troubling aspect of this tax is us, once again, taking and putting our hands in somebody else’s purse. They need this money to keep their services running day to day.
I’m going to vote “no” on this. This is not only a backward effort on this vote taking money from the communities, but the whole aspect of what we are trying to do today is backwards. This is the first tax that we should have gotten rid of, not the next one. This tax should have been removed long ago. Let’s stand up for our locals. We were all given a communication that the MML is now neutral on its position. I would question the validity of that position. I know if my hometown folks came here today and were given their singular voices, not as a member of an organization, they would say to vote “no” on this. That is what I intend to do, and you should also.
Senator Gregory’s statement is as follows:
I rise today to offer my “no” vote explanation and why I am opposed to this legislation. I rise to oppose this legislation as a Senator, former police officer, and as a citizen. This move to repeal the personal property tax with no legitimate replacement revenue is bad business, bad policy, and out-and-out a bad idea. As a former police officer, I am particularly concerned that the Senate majority continues to compromise public safety and make severe cuts to vital funding for our communities, all to continue to give tax breaks to businesses. Business owners, employers, employees, and residents alike equally share and value safe communities to work and live in. My colleagues across the aisle continue to cut money to schools and public safety to reduce taxes for businesses.
In last year’s budget, you cut $100 million from local revenue sharing for cities, villages, and townships to help pay for your $1.8 billion tax break for big businesses. That is money that these communities relied on for essential police officers and firefighters. These cuts put more qualified brave men and women in law enforcement and fire protection out of jobs. Today’s PPT repeal only furthers the continued robbery of public safety funding from our municipalities. You are not only putting local public safety personnel out of their jobs, but you are putting the residents who rely on them in direct jeopardy.
We already have fewer police officers and firefighters in our communities than we have had in many, many years. This poorly crafted legislation will force local governments to either cut vital services like police and fire or raise taxes on residents.
In my communities, the cities of Ferndale, Southfield, Farmington, and Farmington Hills receive right now from the personal property tax almost $2 million. Many communities in your districts equally depend on this money, but with the push of a button today, that money they receive will be taken away. With the loss of the money, there will be devastating cuts to our schools, police officers, and firefighters. Taxes will once again be raised on the already-cash-strapped families of Michigan.
These continued one-sided policies that pat the backs of businesses while breaking the backs of workers, kids, and seniors are not only disappointing, but it is disgusting. I urge a “no” vote on this legislation.
Senator Warren’s statement is as follows:
In all the years I’ve served up here, I don’t remember ever having the kind of conversation in front of committee that we had when we looked at this package. The good chair of Finance did take hours and hours of testimony, and we heard from folks in local communities, be they cities or county governments or school districts or libraries. We heard from businesses of all shapes and sizes. It is the first time I can ever remember hearing from all of these folks that we know we have a problem. We have a tax policy that isn’t working for our businesses that pay it. We have a tax policy that is difficult to implement by our communities that need to assess it and implement it. So I think there is broad across-the-board interest in finding a new way to gather revenue in our communities besides the PPT.
Also there wasn’t any organization that testified in front of that committee that said this is absolutely the right way to fix it. They said that these are the communities that we live, work, and play in, and we want them to have the resources to have police and fire, good roads, good parks, and good libraries and schools.
I guess I stand here, as part of my “no” vote explanation, just to express some disappointment—all the things we could do up here in a really bipartisan way, in a way of bringing some of the best and brightest minds together who are willing to put the work in to find a solution to this problem. We had people on both sides saying we know it’s was a problem. We had people on both sides saying we need to find a solution. That is not what we are doing here today.
I will be voting “no” here today, but extending an offer to work to find a solution that works better for both our communities and the folks in our communities who are paying this personal property tax at this time.
Senator Hunter’s statement is as follows:
Colleagues, I would like to start by taking a bit of creative license with a quote from a giant in satirical comedy, namely the late Leslie Nielson: “Cutting sorely-needed tax revenue in the name of creating jobs is like drinking Drano. Oh sure, it will clean you out; it will leave you hollow on the inside.” The message is that we should not do it.
I rise today to oppose legislation before us that would rashly repeal the personal property tax. This is just the latest in a long line of ill-advised policies pushed forth by the Senate majority that slashes funding for public education and public safety to give more tax breaks to big business. My colleagues across the aisle like to think that every tax is a job killer. But if that is the case, why have your reckless repeals not been job creators so far? We are still waiting to see the jobs created by your corporate income tax that cut our schools and raised taxes on our seniors to give $1.8 billion to big business.
Now you are making the same mistake again. These bills will not create jobs and are more likely to line CEOs’ pockets than to increase assembly lines or reduce unemployment lines. Many of our state’s manufacturers have been shifting to more automation and computerization. Cutting taxes on Michigan equipment and machines is not going to incentivize businesses to hire more people. It will encourage them to buy more machines tax-free. While this will certainly help big businesses, this is just another thinly-veiled attack on our Michigan workers. Not only that, but this proposal will also continue the devastating cuts to our schools and local public safety.
Last year, you cut K-12 public schools by over $400 per pupil. Your increase in per-pupil funding this year is but a pittance in comparison. Now you want to cut schools again by taking away this revenue that they rely on with no replacement. Your continued apparent lack of real commitment to investing in public education and the students who rely on it is unconscionable. I can’t believe you are yet again mortgaging our future to give more goodies to big business with this legislation today. I oppose this legislation and any other proposals that give unfair favors to businesses and special interests at the expense of our kids, our seniors, our workers, and our public safety officers.
I urge you to reconsider this ill-advised vote that you are about to take, and think long and hard about the message this sends to the people across this state—the people who trusted you and I to serve their best interests, not special interests.
Senator Johnson’s statement is as follows:
I rise today to describe my strong opposition to the legislation before this body. Once again, we are considering a bill that lets corporations raid the candy store and then look to cities and schools to pay the tab. I ask: Why is the majority party insistent on bleeding our schools dry? Why do they insist on robbing our children and grandchildren in order to line the pockets of already-wealthy CEOs?
We could make Michigan entirely tax-free for businesses, but we will never attract the types of businesses we want if we can’t educate our students. If this legislation passes as-is, we will be unquestionably raising the taxes on citizens across this great state. The residents of Detroit will have their taxes raised by more than $5.5 million without a vote of the people in order to recover the shortfall for Detroit schools. That is a $5.5 million new tab in taxes on the citizens of Detroit—new taxes with no vote of the people and an automatic increase. The debt service must be paid, and the services have already been provided. You are not cutting taxes, but you are merely shifting them on the backs of already-struggling families. These struggling families will now have less money in their pockets, less money to buy groceries, less money to purchase goods, and less money to purchase the goods made by the businesses who are receiving this tax break.
The schools in Detroit already facing their own difficulties will now be short a total of $3.3 million. Detroit’s revenues will fall by nearly $15 million and be short by nearly $5 million for its debt service payments. The Governor has already taken over our city and schools, and now you seek to choke off the funds that keep the lights on and the police on the streets. What business will come to Michigan after you destroy its largest city? You may be creating a tax-free paradise for corporations, but the land will be uninhabitable for the people—the men and women who are needed to make these businesses run.
I was sent here by citizens, as were you, to represent them in a state government. I can safely say that this legislation is bad for people, families, and children. I cannot vote to support it, and I would ask my colleagues to pause for a moment and simply think about the people they represent, not the businesses that fill their campaign coffers. Vote against this legislation.
Senator Whitmer’s statement is as follows:
My colleague who just spoke talked about if you can’t compete, you get beat. I agree, but you know what? You can’t compete if you don’t have the workforce. You can have no taxes and guess what? Not a single business is going to come to Michigan if you don’t have the workforce. The workforce is our people, the education of our people.
You know, Bill Gates who has been pretty successful in business—I think we can all agree on that—says the No. 1 consideration about whether or not to locate his business somewhere is: Do they have an educated workforce? Can the people there do my jobs? It is not the tax rate. It is whether or not the people can do their jobs. So if we take money out of our schools, you are hurting the workforce, and you are hurting our economic development because education is not an expense; it is an investment.
Now I know my colleagues on the other side of the aisle like to talk about how great things are in Indiana. Well, guess what? Indiana took this same course of action, but they replaced the revenue with a gross receipts tax. That is the other side of the story you’re not telling the public; that you’re not telling the business community. That is the other side of the story. They took this same action, but they replaced it with a gross receipts tax. Guess what about Indiana? Their per-capita income is abysmal. Their growth for personal prosperity is not good, not something we want to replicate here in Michigan. More of their people rely on state aid. That is what happens when you take money out of investing in your people and education. Is that what we want Michigan to look like?
Earlier this week, the Business Leaders for Michigan had their education summit right here in town. Do you know what they talked about? The fact is if Michigan is going to continue where we are with the jobs we have, we need a million more degree holders by 2025. That represents a 17 percent increase in the trend on education, not going backwards like you propose to do.
I would also tell you about the great story in Kalamazoo with the Kalamazoo Promise, where they said they were going to make an investment in our people, an investment in college education. It has had an astounding impact on the K-12 classroom. Kaiser chose to locate in Kalamazoo because of the Kalamazoo Promise, just read the Wall Street Journal.
So you want to talk about making Michigan competitive, let’s put Michigan on the map and say we are going to do it better educating our workforce than anywhere else; as opposed to these tax breaks that you have no metrics for to show they created jobs, and it is an article of faith that they do. You continue to take money out of education to pay for them.
Senator Anderson’s statement is as follows:
What we are doing here today is nothing less than insanity. You across the aisle are continuing your attack on our locals with this legislation. There is no guarantee of replacement revenue to allow local governments to continue to provide essential services to our citizens like fire and police. There should be no doubt that this legislation will push more of our communities and school districts into insolvency.
The Senator from the 13th District alluded to the provision that would allow locals to pass a millage to replace lost revenue. This clearly would continue the Republican plan to shift the burden from corporations and onto our citizens who can least afford it. Tim Bartik, a senior economist with the Upjohn Institute for Employment Research in Kalamazoo, has said this legislation will not change businesses’ “employment and business activity significantly regardless of taxes.”
One of the previous speakers read a memo from the MML that says they will continue to work on this bill in the House. Why not fix this legislation before it leaves the Senate? We should stop punting to the House and stop passing bills that are flawed. Because this legislation is not ready for passage and will harm our communities and schools, we should reject this bill and tell the committee to fix it. I urge you to vote “no.”
Senators Nofs, Bieda, Caswell and Johnson asked and were granted unanimous consent to make statements and moved that the statements be printed in the Journal.
The motion prevailed.
Senator Nofs’ statement is as follows:
I want to explain what my amendment basically does in dealing with this personal property tax bill. I want to give a specific example: In the Battle Creek community back in the 1960s, the voters of Battle Creek voted for a special millage just to fund the police and fire pension obligation to the city’s police and fire departments. Since that has passed, there is no sunset date and automatically, just by the vote of a local city commission, they can raise the mill rate there without a vote of the people. That is okay under the 1963 action that the voters of Battle Creek took.
What this does and what this amendment will do is that any loss of revenue from the special millage—in this case, police and fire pension—amount of money they would receive with the PPT calculated in those calculations of taxes levied. Any loss of that revenue because of the action we are taking today in the package of bills we are taking up today would be reimbursed by the state at 100 percent starting January 1, 2013. I would ask members to support this amendment.
Senator Bieda’s first statement is as follows:
This amendment was created with the new substitute that we just got today. It is something that is important. With all of the testimony, I have been a longtime opponent of the personal property tax. I do believe it is antiquated, and we need to move forward and work towards its elimination. I am offering this amendment today to ensure that the businesses that receive these tax credits that we have the desired outcome for the citizens of Michigan that these credits created.
This body has been giving tax breaks to businesses while raising taxes on seniors and working families and cutting funding to our schools. These sacrifices have been made in the name of job creation. As of yet, we have not required businesses to create a single job. This amendment would redefine eligible personal property to exclude personal property of an entity that fails to add only 1 percent to its Michigan-based employment for a cumulative 5 percent for the preceding five-year period. This is a very simple metric, the kind the Governor likes to promote and that I think is a good idea. If these tax breaks are meant to create jobs, then we should be making sure that jobs are created. If this business tax credit does not meet its metric, it is an inefficient credit, and we should be looking for more effective ways to promote job creation.
Keeping metrics is what Michigan citizens voted for. Let’s make good on that promise.
Senator Bieda’s second statement, in which Senators Young, Johnson and Gleason concurred, is as follows:
I share the committee chairman’s concern. This morning is the first I saw the substitute to the bill before us. It is a complex issue, and I know there has been a considerable amount of work on both sides of the aisle on this. I appreciate the good nature and openness that everybody has had on this process and you, Mr. Lieutenant Governor, because you have always been a good friend to work with.
I offer this amendment today in the interest of fairness for the citizens of Michigan. My amendment simply makes businesses that are outsourcing jobs to places outside of the United States to not be eligible for this exemption. This is a business tax break that is being sold as being necessary for creating jobs in Michigan, but if the company is instead creating jobs elsewhere, why should Michigan taxpayers be subsidizing that outsourcing. I think it is only fair that if Michigan citizens are paying for a business tax break, they should at least get the benefit of the jobs it creates.
This is a common-sense amendment that says that we will not subsidize job creation in other countries, a concept that I’m sure that every one of my colleagues should be willing to support.
Senator Caswell’s statement is as follows:
I have heard a lot of discussion today on this bill. This bill starts off by helping every small business owner in this state. The people in this state can support our communities, buy our Little League uniforms, put ads in our local newspapers, and put on benefit dinners for those kids who don’t have health insurance so that they can get cancer coverage. For these small business people, it has been a question for years that I have been confronted with as a tax assessor: Why in the world do I have to report and pay tax on this desk that sits in front of me that I have had for 50 years? It never goes off the roll; it never stops being taxed.
This particular bill that we are passing today gives immediate help to small businesses. I have been through town after town in my district and through this state seeing empty storefronts in small towns and large cities. It is time to rebuild this state. It is time to become competitive again. It is time for us to quit talking about Indiana and Ohio and have Ohio and Indiana talk about us. That’s what I believe that this bill can create.
There is a business over in Sturgis that came here to Michigan two years ago because our buildings were much, much cheaper than they were in Indiana. They have been quite successful and were going to put in a second line, but the management made the decision that they weren’t coming back to Michigan because they have to pay the personal property tax. So they went to their other location.
New businesses that come to this state, in many cases, get some kind of a break. What we are doing today is helping those businesses that have been in this state for years; the people who have stuck with us through this ten-year downturn; the people who didn’t leave and go to China or down South; who have struggled every single day to try to keep things together; who have spent their 401(k)s and done all they could to keep people employed. This is for those people because they don’t get any of the breaks we currently have in place.
My friends, life is quite simple. You compete or you get beat. As a football coach, we thought we had a pretty good system. We went to Mendon one year in the playoffs and got beat 62-0. We could have come back and decided to tweak, change a little here and a little there, but we didn’t. We threw everything out and started over. The next year, we were state champs. The opportunity we have here today is this: To become the state in this country that people look to when they decide to locate a business. We can talk about automation, but a factory that comes into this state with automation and hires 20 people is a heck of a lot better than that factory going to South Carolina and we get nothing.
All I am saying to you is that it will take sacrifices. Change is hard, but it will be scary and we can do this. We can put Michigan back on top. That is what we are going to do with these personal property tax bills today. It is not about big business. It is about taking care of the little guy and the people who have stuck with us for years in this state. Let’s get back to work.
Senator Johnson’s statement is as follows:
Today is both an exciting and melancholy moment all at the same time. I am wishing my chief of staff a brand-new journey—a happy, a successful, and a great new journey into the world of public service—as he leaves my office and attempts to become the next State Representative in one of our beautiful Detroit districts. I would like to read a tribute I have prepared for him. It says:
“LET IT BE KNOWN, That it is an honor to present this tribute to Mr. Adam Hollier as he takes another step towards advancing his role in public service. He is endeavoring to take his skills acquired as a staffer and translate them into the tools necessary to serve his community as an elected representative.
Adam joined my office nearly three years ago following the completion of his master’s in urban planning degree from the University of Michigan. Prior to that, he earned his undergraduate degree from Cornell University. Adam immediately infused our team with an analytical, fact-focused and data-driven approach to tackling policy issues. Never to be outdone on that front, he quickly attained the nickname of Cliff Clavin in honor of his seemingly endless random facts and trivia.
The hours and dedication Adam has invested in ensuring that my office can function at a high level could never be matched by a commensurate salary. From serving as my point person for the past two sessions on regional transit authority legislation to attending countless block club and neighborhood organization meetings in the district, Adam represented me superbly in all settings.
As Adam embarks on another leg of his journey, I stand here today with the utmost pride in what we have achieved together thus far and overwhelming optimism for what future collaborations will indeed bring.
IN SPECIAL TRIBUTE, Therefore, this document is signed and dedicated to Mr. Hollier in recognition of his service to the people of House District 5 and now Senate District 2. He departs the Capitol Building today the employee of one person, but with the motivation to return as the employee of thousands of citizens in our beloved community.”
My staff and I do, indeed, wish Adam well, and he knows we expect nothing less than the best. This is a daunting task for anybody coming into public service, whether you are at the low end or an elected representative. I think that any person who humbles themselves to that end and performs in such a capacity is really to be commended. Adam has been my right hand, as Andy has been my left hand. We are not saying bye to Andy yet. I’m sure his future is just as bright.
It gives me great pride to offer up to the world another capable, competent, and qualified future public servant. Ladies and gentlemen, won’t you please join me in honoring Mr. Hollier for his work not just to my office, but to the people of the 2nd District in the Senate and to this great state.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 1065, entitled
A bill to amend 1974 PA 198, entitled “An act to provide for the establishment of plant rehabilitation districts and industrial development districts in local governmental units; to provide for the exemption from certain taxes; to levy and collect a specific tax upon the owners of certain facilities; to impose and provide for the disposition of an administrative fee; to provide for the disposition of the tax; to provide for the obtaining and transferring of an exemption certificate and to prescribe the contents of those certificates; to prescribe the powers and duties of the state tax commission and certain officers of local governmental units; and to provide penalties,” (MCL 207.551 to 207.572) by adding section 11a.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Whitmer offered the following amendment:
1. Amend page 2, following line 8, by inserting:
“Enacting section 1. This amendatory act does not take effect unless House Bill No. 5527 of the 96th Legislature is enacted into law.”.
The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.
Senator Hildenbrand offered the following amendments:
1. Amend page 1, line 1, after “(1)” by striking out “IF” and inserting “SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (2), IF”.
2. Amend page 2, following line 5, by inserting:
“(2) THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY IF THE LEGISLATURE FAILS TO APPROPRIATE THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE LOST TO EACH LOCAL TAXING UNIT AS PROVIDED IN THE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION REIMBURSEMENT ACT.” and renumbering the remaining subsection.
The amendments were adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 317 Yeas—23
Booher Hildenbrand Marleau Richardville
Brandenburg Hune Meekhof Robertson
Caswell Jansen Nofs Rocca
Colbeck Jones Pappageorge Schuitmaker
Emmons Kahn Pavlov Walker
Hansen Kowall Proos
Nays—14
Anderson Gregory Johnson Warren
Bieda Hood Moolenaar Whitmer
Casperson Hopgood Smith Young
Gleason Hunter
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: President
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 1066, entitled
A bill to amend 1984 PA 385, entitled “Technology park development act,” (MCL 207.701 to 207.718) by adding section 12a.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Hildenbrand offered the following amendments:
1. Amend page 1, line 1, after “(1)” by striking out “IF” and inserting “SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (2), IF”.
2. Amend page 1, following line 10, by inserting:
“(2) THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY IF THE LEGISLATURE FAILS TO APPROPRIATE THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE LOST TO EACH LOCAL TAXING UNIT AS PROVIDED IN THE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION REIMBURSEMENT ACT.” and renumbering the remaining subsection.
The amendments were adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 318 Yeas—23
Booher Hildenbrand Marleau Richardville
Brandenburg Hune Meekhof Robertson
Caswell Jansen Nofs Rocca
Colbeck Jones Pappageorge Schuitmaker
Emmons Kahn Pavlov Walker
Hansen Kowall Proos
Nays—14
Anderson Gregory Johnson Warren
Bieda Hood Moolenaar Whitmer
Casperson Hopgood Smith Young
Gleason Hunter
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: President
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 1067, entitled
A bill to amend 1893 PA 206, entitled “The general property tax act,” by amending section 9f (MCL 211.9f), as amended by 2010 PA 274.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Hildenbrand offered the following amendment:
1. Amend page 5, line 24, after “9o.” by inserting “THIS SUBSECTION DOES NOT APPLY IF THE LEGISLATURE FAILS TO APPROPRIATE THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE LOST TO EACH LOCAL TAXING UNIT AS PROVIDED IN THE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION REIMBURSEMENT ACT.”.
The amendment was adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 319 Yeas—23
Booher Hildenbrand Marleau Richardville
Brandenburg Hune Meekhof Robertson
Caswell Jansen Nofs Rocca
Colbeck Jones Pappageorge Schuitmaker
Emmons Kahn Pavlov Walker
Hansen Kowall Proos
Nays—14
Anderson Gregory Johnson Warren
Bieda Hood Moolenaar Whitmer
Casperson Hopgood Smith Young
Gleason Hunter
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: President
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 1068, entitled
A bill to amend 1985 PA 224, entitled “Enterprise zone act,” (MCL 125.2101 to 125.2123) by adding section 21d.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Hildenbrand offered the following amendments:
1. Amend page 1, line 1, after “(1)” by striking out “IF” and inserting “SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (2), IF”.
2. Amend page 1, following line 10, by inserting:
“(2) THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY IF THE LEGISLATURE FAILS TO APPROPRIATE THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE LOST TO EACH LOCAL TAXING UNIT AS PROVIDED IN THE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION REIMBURSEMENT ACT.” and renumbering the remaining subsection.
The amendments were adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 320 Yeas—23
Booher Hildenbrand Marleau Richardville
Brandenburg Hune Meekhof Robertson
Caswell Jansen Nofs Rocca
Colbeck Jones Pappageorge Schuitmaker
Emmons Kahn Pavlov Walker
Hansen Kowall Proos
Nays—14
Anderson Gregory Johnson Warren
Bieda Hood Moolenaar Whitmer
Casperson Hopgood Smith Young
Gleason Hunter
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: President
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 1069, entitled
A bill to amend 1893 PA 206, entitled “The general property tax act,” (MCL 211.1 to 211.155) by adding section 9m.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Hildenbrand offered the following amendments:
1. Amend page 1, line 1, after “(1)” by striking out “BEGINNING” and inserting “SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (5), BEGINNING”.
2. Amend page 2, following line 14, by inserting:
“(5) THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY IF THE LEGISLATURE FAILS TO APPROPRIATE THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE LOST TO EACH LOCAL TAXING UNIT AS PROVIDED IN THE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION REIMBURSEMENT ACT.” and renumbering the remaining subsection.
The amendments were adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
Senator Whitmer offered the following amendment:
1. Amend page 3, following line 6, by inserting:
“Enacting section 1. This amendatory act does not take effect unless Senate Bill No. 117 of the 96th Legislature is enacted into law.”.
The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.
Senator Hunter requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 321 Yeas—13
Anderson Hood Johnson Warren
Bieda Hopgood Rocca Whitmer
Gleason Hunter Smith Young
Gregory
Nays—24
Booher Hansen Kowall Pavlov
Brandenburg Hildenbrand Marleau Proos
Casperson Hune Meekhof Richardville
Caswell Jansen Moolenaar Robertson
Colbeck Jones Nofs Schuitmaker
Emmons Kahn Pappageorge Walker
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: President
Senator Hopgood offered the following amendment:
1. Amend page 3, following line 6, by inserting:
“Enacting section 1. This amendatory act does not take effect unless all of the following bills of the 96th Legislature are enacted into law:
(a) Senate Bill No. 1016.
(b) Senate Bill No. 1017.”.
The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.
Senator Hunter requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 322 Yeas—12
Anderson Gregory Hunter Warren
Bieda Hood Johnson Whitmer
Gleason Hopgood Smith Young
Nays—25
Booher Hildenbrand Marleau Proos
Brandenburg Hune Meekhof Richardville
Casperson Jansen Moolenaar Robertson
Caswell Jones Nofs Rocca
Colbeck Kahn Pappageorge Schuitmaker
Emmons Kowall Pavlov Walker
Hansen
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: President
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 323 Yeas—23
Booher Hildenbrand Marleau Richardville
Brandenburg Hune Meekhof Robertson
Caswell Jansen Nofs Rocca
Colbeck Jones Pappageorge Schuitmaker
Emmons Kahn Pavlov Walker
Hansen Kowall Proos
Nays—14
Anderson Gregory Johnson Warren
Bieda Hood Moolenaar Whitmer
Casperson Hopgood Smith Young
Gleason Hunter
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: President
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
Senator Hopgood asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal.
The motion prevailed.
Senator Hopgood’s statement is as follows:
I rise to speak to the Hopgood amendment for Senate Bill No. 1069. This amendment would tie-bar this bill to Senate Bill Nos. 1016 and 1017, part of our Michigan 2020 Plan to offer free college tuition to all Michigan high school graduates. These bills would create a bipartisan sunset commission on tax exemptions to take a closer look at the billions of dollars in tax credits that the state gives away.
We should be more responsible policymakers by requiring job creation and investments in our economy with the millions of taxpayer dollars that are being given away with this rushed repeal of the PPT. Instead of causing our schools, students, working families, and seniors to endure drastic cuts or severe tax hikes to pay for this shortsighted corporate tax break, I am asking my colleagues to support an audit of the state’s tax credits to find money for this business tax break.
As a Senator recently said, what is so difficult about a sunset? Even the Mackinac Center has called for a review and repeal of many of the state’s tax credits. State government provides far too many tax breaks with hardly any oversight, many of which are outdated and ineffective. Meanwhile, classrooms are overcrowded, tuition is being raised, public safety is hurting, and seniors are being hung out to dry. This very bill before us makes every single one of those problems even worse.
If we are going to insist on moving forward with this rushed repeal of the PPT, you should at least consider how you are going to pay for it. Sunsetting our state’s current tax credits is one way to do that. It is certainly better than asking our kids or our seniors to foot the bill for this corporate tax break. Colleagues, I ask that you support this amendment.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 1070, entitled
A bill to amend 1893 PA 206, entitled “The general property tax act,” (MCL 211.1 to 211.155) by adding section 9o.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Hildenbrand offered the following amendments:
1. Amend page 1, line 1, after “(1)” by striking out “BEGINNING” and inserting “SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (4), BEGINNING”.
2. Amend page 2, following line 5, by inserting:
“(4) THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY IF THE LEGISLATURE FAILS TO APPROPRIATE THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE LOST TO EACH LOCAL TAXING UNIT AS PROVIDED IN THE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION REIMBURSEMENT ACT.” and renumbering the remaining subsection.
The amendments were adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
Senator Warren offered the following amendments:
1. Amend page 1, line 11, after “OWNER” by striking out the balance of the subsection and inserting “IN THIS STATE IS LESS THAN $40,000.00.”.
2. Amend page 2, line 15, after “SECTION” by striking out the balance of the subparagraph and inserting “IN THIS STATE IS LESS THAN $40,000.00.”.
The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.
Senator Hunter requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 324 Yeas—13
Anderson Hood Johnson Warren
Bieda Hopgood Meekhof Whitmer
Gleason Hunter Smith Young
Gregory
Nays—24
Booher Hansen Kowall Proos
Brandenburg Hildenbrand Marleau Richardville
Casperson Hune Moolenaar Robertson
Caswell Jansen Nofs Rocca
Colbeck Jones Pappageorge Schuitmaker
Emmons Kahn Pavlov Walker
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: President
Senator Warren offered the following amendment:
1. Amend page 2, following line 5, by inserting:
“(4) IN 2013, 2014, AND 2015, THIS STATE SHALL ANNUALLY APPROPRIATE TO ALL LOCAL TAXING UNITS IN THIS STATE FROM THE MICHIGAN-DESIGNATED FUNDS RECEIVED BY THIS STATE FROM THE JOINT STATE-FEDERAL FORECLOSURE SETTLEMENT AN AMOUNT DETERMINED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY THAT IS SUFFICIENT TO REIMBURSE EACH LOCAL TAXING UNIT IN THIS STATE FOR ALL REVENUE LOST AS A RESULT OF THE EXEMPTION UNDER THIS SECTION IN THAT YEAR.” and renumbering the remaining subsection.
The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.
Senator Hunter requested the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.
The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 325 Yeas—13
Anderson Gregory Hunter Warren
Bieda Hood Johnson Whitmer
Colbeck Hopgood Smith Young
Gleason
Nays—24
Booher Hildenbrand Marleau Proos
Brandenburg Hune Meekhof Richardville
Casperson Jansen Moolenaar Robertson
Caswell Jones Nofs Rocca
Emmons Kahn Pappageorge Schuitmaker
Hansen Kowall Pavlov Walker
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: President
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 326 Yeas—23
Booher Hildenbrand Marleau Richardville
Brandenburg Hune Meekhof Robertson
Caswell Jansen Nofs Rocca
Colbeck Jones Pappageorge Schuitmaker
Emmons Kahn Pavlov Walker
Hansen Kowall Proos
Nays—14
Anderson Gregory Johnson Warren
Bieda Hood Moolenaar Whitmer
Casperson Hopgood Smith Young
Gleason Hunter
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: President
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 1071, entitled
A bill to amend 1893 PA 206, entitled “The general property tax act,” (MCL 211.1 to 211.155) by adding section 9n.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
Senator Hildenbrand offered the following amendments:
1. Amend page 1, line 1, after “(1)” by striking out “BEGINNING” and inserting “SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (4), BEGINNING”.
2. Amend page 2, following line 7, by inserting:
“(4) THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY IF THE LEGISLATURE FAILS TO APPROPRIATE THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE LOST TO EACH LOCAL TAXING UNIT AS PROVIDED IN THE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION REIMBURSEMENT ACT.” and renumbering the remaining subsection.
The amendments were adopted, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 327 Yeas—24
Booher Hansen Kowall Proos
Brandenburg Hildenbrand Marleau Richardville
Caswell Hune Meekhof Robertson
Colbeck Jansen Nofs Rocca
Emmons Jones Pappageorge Schuitmaker
Gleason Kahn Pavlov Walker
Nays—13
Anderson Hood Johnson Warren
Bieda Hopgood Moolenaar Whitmer
Casperson Hunter Smith Young
Gregory
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: President
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
The President pro tempore, Senator Schuitmaker, assumed the Chair.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 884, entitled
A bill to amend 1978 PA 368, entitled “Public health code,” by amending section 20155 (MCL 333.20155), as amended by 2006 PA 195, and by adding section 20155a.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 328 Yeas—37
Anderson Hansen Kahn Richardville
Bieda Hildenbrand Kowall Robertson
Booher Hood Marleau Rocca
Brandenburg Hopgood Meekhof Schuitmaker
Casperson Hune Moolenaar Smith
Caswell Hunter Nofs Walker
Colbeck Jansen Pappageorge Warren
Emmons Johnson Pavlov Whitmer
Gleason Jones Proos Young
Gregory
Nays—0
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Schuitmaker
The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.
By unanimous consent the Senate returned to the order of
Messages from the House
Senate Bill No. 92, entitled
A bill to amend 1998 PA 386, entitled “Estates and protected individuals code,” by amending section 5501 (MCL 700.5501).
Substitute (H-2).
The question being on concurring in the substitute made to the bill by the House,
The substitute was concurred in, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 329 Yeas—37
Anderson Hansen Kahn Richardville
Bieda Hildenbrand Kowall Robertson
Booher Hood Marleau Rocca
Brandenburg Hopgood Meekhof Schuitmaker
Casperson Hune Moolenaar Smith
Caswell Hunter Nofs Walker
Colbeck Jansen Pappageorge Warren
Emmons Johnson Pavlov Whitmer
Gleason Jones Proos Young
Gregory
Nays—0
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Schuitmaker
The question being on concurring in the committee recommendation to give the bill immediate effect,
The recommendation was concurred in, 2/3 of the members serving voting therefor.
The Senate agreed to the full title.
The bill was referred to the Secretary for enrollment printing and presentation to the Governor.
Senate Bill No. 499, entitled
A bill to amend 1994 PA 451, entitled “Natural resources and environmental protection act,” (MCL 324.101 to 324.90106) by adding section 72116.
Substitute (H-5).
The question being on concurring in the substitute made to the bill by the House,
The substitute was concurred in, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
Roll Call No. 330 Yeas—37
Anderson Hansen Kahn Richardville
Bieda Hildenbrand Kowall Robertson
Booher Hood Marleau Rocca
Brandenburg Hopgood Meekhof Schuitmaker
Casperson Hune Moolenaar Smith
Caswell Hunter Nofs Walker
Colbeck Jansen Pappageorge Warren
Emmons Johnson Pavlov Whitmer
Gleason Jones Proos Young
Gregory
Nays—0
Excused—1
Green
Not Voting—0
In The Chair: Schuitmaker
The question being on concurring in the committee recommendation to give the bill immediate effect,
The recommendation was concurred in, 2/3 of the members serving voting therefor.
The Senate agreed to the full title.
The bill was referred to the Secretary for enrollment printing and presentation to the Governor.
By unanimous consent the Senate proceeded to the order of
General Orders
Senator Meekhof moved that the Senate resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole for consideration of the General Orders calendar.
The motion prevailed, and the President pro tempore, Senator Schuitmaker, designated Senator Jansen as Chairperson.
After some time spent therein, the Committee arose; and the President pro tempore, Senator Schuitmaker, having resumed the Chair, the Committee reported back to the Senate, favorably and without amendment, the following bills:
Senate Bill No. 941, entitled
A bill to amend 1978 PA 368, entitled “Public health code,” (MCL 333.1101 to 333.25211) by adding sections 13537 and 13832.
Senate Bill No. 942, entitled
A bill to amend 1976 PA 399, entitled “Safe drinking water act,” by amending section 23 (MCL 325.1023).
The bills were placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.
The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:
Senate Bill No. 939, entitled
A bill to amend 1994 PA 451, entitled “Natural resources and environmental protection act,” (MCL 324.101 to 324.90106) by adding part 14.
Substitute (S-2).
The Senate agreed to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.
The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:
Senate Bill No. 940, entitled
A bill to amend 1984 PA 431, entitled “The management and budget act,” by amending section 261 (MCL 18.1261), as amended by 2008 PA 133.
Substitute (S-1).
The Senate agreed to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.
Resolutions
Senator Meekhof moved that consideration of the following resolutions be postponed for today:
Senate Resolution No. 115
Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 26
Senate Resolution No. 34
Senate Resolution No. 85
Senate Resolution No. 105
House Concurrent Resolution No. 29
Senate Resolution No. 112
House Concurrent Resolution No. 6
Senate Resolution No. 120
Senate Resolution No. 127
The motion prevailed.
The question was placed on the adoption of the following resolution consent calendar:
Senate Resolution No. 150
Senate Resolution No. 151
Senate Resolution No. 152
The resolution consent calendar was adopted.
Senator Hune offered the following resolution:
Senate Resolution No. 150.
A resolution proclaiming May 13-19, 2012, as InfantSEE® Week in Michigan.
Whereas, The most critical stages of vision development occur in the first year of a child’s life; and
Whereas, Undetected eye and vision problems can lead to permanent vision impairment or loss of life; and
Whereas, 1 in 10 children is at risk from undiagnosed eye and vision problems, and 1 in 30 children will be affected by amblyopia—leading cause of vision loss in people younger than 45 years of age; and
Whereas, Undetected vision problems can contribute to a decrease in a child’s quality of life and may lead to developmental and behavioral difficulties which impede classroom learning, as well as increase the costs to society; and
Whereas, Early detection of vision problems is the best way to treat and prevent permanent vision impairment; and
Whereas, Member optometrists of the American Optometric Association and The Vision Care Institute of Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc., have partnered to create InfantSEE®, a public health program to provide a one-time, no-cost eye assessment for infants six to twelve months old; now therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate, That the members of this legislative body declare the week of May 13-19, 2012, as InfantSEE® Week in the state of Michigan. We aim to promote awareness of children’s vision care; and be it further
Resolved, That a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the Michigan Optometric Association with our highest esteem.
Senators Anderson, Bieda, Booher, Brandenburg, Emmons, Hansen, Hildenbrand, Hopgood, Kowall, Proos and Warren were named co‑sponsors of the resolution.
Senators Whitmer, Anderson, Warren, Jones, Pappageorge, Hunter, Green, Gleason, Marleau, Hood, Hansen, Gregory, Bieda, Hopgood, Young, Smith and Johnson offered the following resolution:
Senate Resolution No. 151.
A resolution recognizing May 6-12, 2012, as National Nurses Week.
Whereas, May 6-12, 2012, is recognized as National Nurses Week, beginning with International Nurses Day on May 6 and ending with the birthday of Florence Nightingale, the founder of modern nursing, on May 12; and
Whereas, Nurses are health care professionals who are globally recognized for their commitment to advocating for their patients and refusing to compromise their high standards for care; and
Whereas, Nurses are respected and revered for the difficult and demanding nature of their daily work. They are trained experts who perform the very demanding job of caring for the sick and injured when they are in need of around-the-clock medical attention; and
Whereas, These specially-trained caregivers are a vital part of the medical field for the assistance and knowledge they provide to doctors, surgeons, anesthesiologists, and other health care professionals; and
Whereas, Consistently on the frontlines of medicine, nurses fight for safe patient care and adequate staffing to ensure patient treatment and recovery; and
Whereas, In our public health departments, nurses help prevent the spread of communicable diseases by containing, controlling, and preventing outbreaks. They immunize our children to keep them healthy and strong so that they are able to fight off sickness and diseases; and
Whereas, Nurses in Michigan strongly advocate for the health, safety, and human rights not only of the sick, but also of the elderly, the young, those with disabilities, the injured, the economically disadvantaged, and the most vulnerable among us; and
Whereas, Nurses support their patients both at the bedside and beyond, working to create a world in which all people can be safe, healthy, and prosperous; now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate, That under the leadership of the Michigan Nurses Association, registered nurses across Michigan are committed to enhancing and protecting the nursing profession; and be it further
Resolved, That nurses be respected and promoted on a daily basis for the services and care they provide; and be it further
Resolved, That there is no time like the present to be energized about the future of nursing, especially here in Michigan; and be it further
Resolved, That in honor of the work and dedication of nurses around the world and right here in Michigan, May 10, 2012, be hereby observed as Nurses Day and May 6-12, 2012, be recognized as Nurses Week in the state of Michigan.
Senators Booher, Brandenburg, Emmons, Kowall and Proos were named co‑sponsors of the resolution.
Senator Meekhof offered the following resolution:
Senate Resolution No. 152.
A resolution congratulating the Republic of China (Taiwan) on its twentieth anniversary of participating in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum and Taiwan’s successful 2012 presidential and parliamentary elections; and expressing continued support of Michigan’s cordial relations with Taiwan and for increasing Taiwan’s international space as part of the global community.
Whereas, The Republic of China (Taiwan) in 2012 is celebrating 20 years of Taiwan’s participation in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum and its active role in promoting economic cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region, particularly in the areas of broadening opportunities for digital computing, green technologies, and renewable energy; improving crisis management for small-size and medium-size enterprises; and establishing a research center for typhoons and society; and
Whereas, The Republic of China (ROC), which exists today on Taiwan, is a major trading nation with the world’s 18th-largest economy as of 2011. In the last two decades, ROC (Taiwan) has dramatically improved its record on human rights and taken great steps forward to enter the world arena as a trusted partner; and
Whereas, Taiwan continues to be praised as a beacon of democracy for Asia, having successfully completed its parliamentary elections and its fifth direct, popular presidential election on January 14, 2012, with fairness, accountability, and high voter turnout. Taiwan is preparing for the inauguration of Ma Ying-jeou to a second term as the ROC President on May 20, 2012; and
Whereas, Taiwan has a strong economic and historical relationship with the United States and has a vibrant economy, ranking in 2011 as our nation’s 9th-largest trading partner, with U.S.-Taiwan trade worth a total of US$62.12 billion, and America’s 13th-largest export market worldwide. Moreover, this robust trade and our shared values of freedom and democracy greatly benefit both sides; and
Whereas, Taiwan’s economic, cultural, and educational ties with Michigan run deep, and there are greater opportunities for exports of Michigan-grown agricultural goods to Taiwan, the world’s 6th-largest market for U.S. agricultural products. There are also opportunities for further economic cooperation and technical exchanges in emerging sectors, such as high-speed rail transit, renewable energy, photovoltaics, nanotechnology, and health care. Hundreds of Taiwanese students enroll in Michigan colleges and universities every year; business, professional, legislative, and other delegations reciprocate visits regularly; and cultural, educational, and teacher exchanges continue to flourish, strengthening friendships and enhancing relations between Michigan and Taiwan; and
Whereas, Taiwan’s absence from international organizations has impeded its ability to participate in global climate initiatives and to respond to natural disasters like Typhoon Morakot which struck Taiwan in the summer of 2009. An unusually destructive typhoon season existed in the Pacific, which was gratefully alleviated by the assistance of dozens of international organizations and nations that stepped up to help, including the United States, which supplied military equipment for rescue and recovery operations; and
Whereas, Since 2001, aviation safety has become a major global concern, and Taiwan is a key air transport hub in the Asia-Pacific region, with more than one million flights passing through the Taipei Flight Information Region and one of the world’s largest airports by cargo volume at Taoyuan International Airport; and
Whereas, Taiwan seeks greater regional integration in the Asian-Pacific and welcomes the opportunity presented by the United States announcement at the 2011 APEC leaders meeting of its intent to not only join the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the proposed 21st-century trade agreement between the United States and eight other Asia-Pacific Rim countries, but to expand TPP membership in the future to include other countries such as Taiwan; and
Whereas, The United States government has been added as a candidate for the U.S. Visa Waiver Program, for which Taiwan and its many American supporters are grateful in this regard; now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate, That we hereby congratulate the Republic of China (Taiwan) on its 20 years of participation in the APEC forum and the successful completion of its presidential and parliamentary elections in January and the May inauguration of President Ma Ying-jeou to a second term. We affirm our support for Taiwan’s efforts to secure entry to the TPP, along with the United States and other friendly Asia-Pacific Rim countries. We also reaffirm our support of the cordial relations between Michigan and Taiwan and for the meaningful participation of Taiwan in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to increase Taiwan’s international space and contribution to the global community; and be it further
Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to Governor Richard D. Snyder, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, UNFCCC Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres, ICAO Secretary General Raymond Benjamin, and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in Chicago.
Committee Reports
The Committee on Finance reported
Senate Bill No. 972, entitled
A bill to amend 1893 PA 206, entitled “The general property tax act,” by amending section 44 (MCL 211.44), as amended by 2011 PA 126.
With the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
The committee further recommends that the bill be given immediate effect.
Jack M. Brandenburg
Chairperson
To Report Out:
Yeas: Senators Brandenburg, Jansen, Pappageorge, Proos, Robertson, Bieda and Warren
Nays: None
The bill and the substitute recommended by the committee were referred to the Committee of the Whole.
The Committee on Finance reported
Senate Bill No. 1107, entitled
A bill to amend 1936 (Ex Sess) PA 1, entitled “Michigan employment security act,” by amending section 13m (MCL 421.13m), as amended by 2011 PA 269.
With the recommendation that the bill pass.
The committee further recommends that the bill be given immediate effect.
Jack M. Brandenburg
Chairperson
To Report Out:
Yeas: Senators Brandenburg, Jansen, Pappageorge, Proos, Robertson, Bieda and Warren
Nays: None
The bill was referred to the Committee of the Whole.
The Committee on Finance reported
House Bill No. 5232, entitled
A bill to amend 1967 PA 281, entitled “Income tax act of 1967,” by amending section 435 (MCL 206.435), as amended by 2010 PA 346.
With the recommendation that the bill pass.
The committee further recommends that the bill be given immediate effect.
Jack M. Brandenburg
Chairperson
To Report Out:
Yeas: Senators Brandenburg, Jansen, Pappageorge, Robertson, Bieda and Warren
Nays: Senator Proos
The bill was referred to the Committee of the Whole.
COMMITTEE ATTENDANCE REPORT
The Committee on Finance submitted the following:
Meeting held on Wednesday, May 9, 2012, at 12:30 p.m., Room 210, Farnum Building
Present: Senators Brandenburg (C), Jansen, Pappageorge, Proos, Robertson, Bieda and Warren
The Committee on Reforms, Restructuring and Reinventing reported
House Bill No. 5158, entitled
A bill to amend 1984 PA 431, entitled “The management and budget act,” (MCL 18.1101 to 18.1594) by adding section 470.
With the recommendation that the substitute (S-2) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
The committee further recommends that the bill be given immediate effect.
Mark C. Jansen
Chairperson
To Report Out:
Yeas: Senators Jansen, Colbeck, Casperson, Kowall, Young and Warren
Nays: None
The bill and the substitute recommended by the committee were referred to the Committee of the Whole.
COMMITTEE ATTENDANCE REPORT
The Committee on Reforms, Restructuring and Reinventing submitted the following:
Meeting held on Wednesday, May 9, 2012, at 8:30 a.m., Rooms 402 and 403, Capitol Building
Present: Senators Jansen (C), Colbeck, Casperson, Kowall, Robertson, Young and Warren
COMMITTEE ATTENDANCE REPORT
The Committee on Natural Resources, Environment and Great Lakes submitted the following:
Meeting held on Thursday, May 10, 2012, at 9:00 a.m., Room 210, Farnum Building
Present: Senators Casperson (C), Pavlov, Green, Kowall, Meekhof, Warren and Hood
Scheduled Meetings
Appropriations - Tuesday, May 15, 1:00 p.m., Senate Appropriations Room, 3rd Floor, Capitol Building (373-1760)
Energy and Technology - Tuesday, May 15, 1:00 p.m., Senate Hearing Room, Ground Floor, Boji Tower (373-5307)
Judiciary - Tuesday, May 15, 2:30 p.m., Room 110, Farnum Building (373-5323)
Reforms, Restructuring and Reinventing - Wednesday, May 16, 8:30 a.m., Rooms 402 and 403, Capitol Building (373‑5307)
Transportation - Monday, May 14, 2:30 p.m., University of Michigan, Lurie Engineering Center, 1221 Beal Avenue, Ann Arbor (373-5314)
Senator Meekhof moved that the Senate adjourn.
The motion prevailed, the time being 1:20 p.m.
The President pro tempore, Senator Schuitmaker, declared the Senate adjourned until Tuesday, May 15, 2012, at 10:00 a.m.
CAROL MOREY VIVENTI
Secretary of the Senate
780 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE [May 10, 2012] [No. 45
No. 45] [May 10, 2012] JOURNAL OF THE SENATE 781
782 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE [May 10, 2012] [No. 45
No. 45] [May 10, 2012] JOURNAL OF THE SENATE 783
784 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE [May 10, 2012] [No. 45
No. 45] [May 10, 2012] JOURNAL OF THE SENATE 785
786 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE [May 10, 2012] [No. 45
No. 45] [May 10, 2012] JOURNAL OF THE SENATE 787
788 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE [May 10, 2012] [No. 45
No. 45] [May 10, 2012] JOURNAL OF THE SENATE 789
790 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE [May 10, 2012] [No. 45
No. 45] [May 10, 2012] JOURNAL OF THE SENATE 791
792 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE [May 10, 2012] [No. 45
No. 45] [May 10, 2012] JOURNAL OF THE SENATE 793
794 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE [May 10, 2012] [No. 45
No. 45] [May 10, 2012] JOURNAL OF THE SENATE 795
796 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE [May 10, 2012] [No. 45
No. 45] [May 10, 2012] JOURNAL OF THE SENATE 797
798 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE [May 10, 2012] [No. 45
No. 45] [May 10, 2012] JOURNAL OF THE SENATE 799
800 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE [May 10, 2012] [No. 45
No. 45] [May 10, 2012] JOURNAL OF THE SENATE 801
802 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE [May 10, 2012] [No. 45
No. 45] [May 10, 2012] JOURNAL OF THE SENATE 803
804 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE [May 10, 2012] [No. 45
No. 45] [May 10, 2012] JOURNAL OF THE SENATE 805
806 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE [May 10, 2012] [No. 45