Script-free related records · Release 2026-07-28.3
Related roll calls
Follow collected relationships through the same typed, immutable public API used by the enhanced record.
← Back to the script-free parent record
Showing 2 related records on this page. A total was not computed.
Related record
Open script-free record →
Inspect published fields
- Chamber
- house
- Context text
- The motion prevailed and the substitute (H-3) was adopted, a majority of the members serving voting
therefor.
Rep. Aiyash moved that the bill be placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.
The motion prevailed.
By unanimous consent the House returned to the order of
Third Reading of Bills
House Bill No. 5460, entitled
A bill to amend 1950 (Ex Sess) PA 27, entitled “Motor vehicle sales finance act,” by amending sections 12,
13, and 22 (MCL 492.112, 492.113, and 492.122), section 12 as amended by 1994 PA 2 and section 13 as
amended by 2009 PA 231.
Was read a third time and passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, by yeas and nays,
as follows:
- Excused
- Not recorded
- Motion text
- as follows:
- Nays
- 27
- Not voting
- Not recorded
- Result
- unknown
- Vote date
- 2024-05-23
- Vote number
- 145
- Yeas
- 80
Related record
Open script-free record →
Inspect published fields
- Chamber
- senate
- Context text
- A “no” vote on this bill is a show of support for our federalist system of government and to eliminate an unnecessary state agency. In my book, that is a win-win. Thank you, and I again urge a “no” vote.
Senator Albert asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal.
The motion prevailed.
Senator Albert’s statement is as follows:
This amendment would help balance the scales of justice in certain cases where MIOSHA-imposed penalties are appealed and found to be wrongfully assessed. The amendment states that if a court determines that a penalty was wrongfully assessed against an employer, the state will pay the employer’s attorney fees associated with the penalty. This remedy would only be applied in cases where an appeal of MIOSHA penalties winds up in the state court system. It takes several steps for that to even be a possibility, as state law currently is heavily weighted in MIOSHA’s favor during appeals.
The MIOSHA appeals process has two steps before it could even reach the court system. The first appeal is a petition to MIOSHA. The agency itself reviews the appeal and makes a decision on its own ruling. A second appeal can be filed with the Board of Health and Safety Compliance and Appeals. This board is housed within the Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity—the same department that houses MIOSHA. If a settlement cannot be reached at that step, a hearing is scheduled before an administrative law judge. And finally, an administrative law judge’s decision may be appealed to a circuit court. An employer may have to spend thousands upon thousands dollars in legal costs just to get their case heard in an actual courtroom. After all that, if the court decides that MIOSHA was wrong in the first place, the least the state should do is repay all those attorney fees.
Thank you, and I ask for support of my amendment.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 5460, entitled
A bill to amend 1950 (Ex Sess) PA 27, entitled “Motor vehicle sales finance act,” by amending sections 2, 12, 13, 22, and 31 (MCL 492.102, 492.112, 492.113, 492.122, and 492.131), section 2 as amended by 2013 PA 16, section 12 as amended by 1994 PA 2, section 13 as amended by 2009 PA 231, and section 31 as amended by 1995 PA 166.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
- Excused
- 0
- Motion text
- The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
- Nays
- 2
- Not voting
- 0
- Result
- passed
- Vote date
- 2024-06-26
- Vote number
- 291
- Yeas
- 36