Michigan Legislative Activity Ledger

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.

  1. Related record

    The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:

    Open script-free record →

    Inspect published fields
    Chamber
    senate
    Context text
    Protests Senators Moss, Polehanki, McMorrow, Santana, Bayer, Brinks, Bullock, Geiss, Chang, Alexander and Wojno, under their constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill Nos. 353 and 354. Senator Moss moved that the statement he made during the discussion of Senate Bill No. 353 be printed as his reasons for voting “no.” The motion prevailed. Senator Moss’ statement, in which Senators Polehanki, McMorrow, Santana, Bayer, Brinks, Bullock, Geiss, Chang, Alexander and Wojno concurred, is as follows: Senate Bill No. 353 and its accompanying bill, Senate Bill No. 354, would actually prohibit local health departments or state departments from charging or collecting certain fees for the licensing year running from May 1, 2021 until April 30, 2022 and waives certain fees for food establishments and water bottlers that they pay for that licensing year. And I get it. It’s providing some relief for those who weren’t able to fully utilize the services that their 2020 fees paid for during the pandemic. But as originally introduced, it’s estimated that this bill would reduce revenue to the state by approximately $5 million, and it’s an indeterminate loss of how much revenue would be lost by the local public health departments and as a result, this bill is opposed by the department, by the Michigan Association of Counties, and by the Michigan Association of Local Public Health. This money is there and is part of the budget negotiation process. This money could be provided to make up for these losses to our health departments during the pandemic. So until that is guaranteed by the majority that these holes are going to be filled, I cannot support this bill. The following bill was read a third time: Senate Bill No. 48, entitled A bill to amend 2001 PA 142, entitled “Michigan memorial highway act,” (MCL 250.1001 to 250.2091) by adding section 110. 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
    Measure id
    measure-8550
    Motion text
    The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
    Nays
    1
    Not voting
    0
    Result
    passed
    Sitting id
    sitting-989
    Vote date
    2021-05-05
    Vote id
    vote-9521
    Vote number
    118
    Yeas
    35
  2. Related record

    as follows:

    Open script-free record →

    Inspect published fields
    Chamber
    house
    Context text
    The bill was read a second time. Rep. Frederick 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 Rep. Frederick moved that Senate Bill No. 48 be placed on its immediate passage. The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor. Senate Bill No. 48, entitled A bill to amend 2001 PA 142, entitled “Michigan memorial highway act,” (MCL 250.1001 to 250.2091) by adding section 110. Was read a third time and passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, by yeas and nays, as follows:
    Excused
    Not recorded
    Measure id
    measure-8550
    Motion text
    as follows:
    Nays
    3
    Not voting
    Not recorded
    Result
    unknown
    Sitting id
    sitting-830
    Vote date
    2021-09-14
    Vote id
    vote-8690
    Vote number
    437
    Yeas
    101