"It came over to (the Senate education) committee this week, and we voted it 'do pass consent,' " said Sen. Gary Nodler, R-Joplin. "It should be coming on the Senate floor as a consent bill."
As a consent bill, Nodler said, amendments can’t be added to the measure.
In the House, legislators also added an emergency clause, meaning the bill would take immediate effect after being signed by Gov. Matt Blunt.
Saturday, April 07, 2007
Fast action promised on snow/ice makeup day bill
The Senate should make quick work of Rep. B. J. Marsh's bill to allow school districts to waive days missed due to the ice storms in January:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
The bill was passed by the House on March 4. It took the committee a month to act on it. Yeah, that sounds like fast action to me.
The fact that it was passed by the House on that day does not mean that the bill was sent to the Senate that day. You seem to have forgotten that there was a spring break for the legislature for 10 days and that this was the first week that a hearing could be scheduled in the Senate as the St. Louis Schools hearing was scheduled for last week. So yes the bill had its hearing, was passed out of the committee and reported to the floor and passed consent all in one week. I believe that you will find that that was the fastest action for any Senate bill this year and faster than the time it took in the House. So anonymous number 1, do you just want to complain or what?
I guarantee that if this bill had affected the KC or St. Louis school districts, it would have been a done deal within a month.
If you will check with the Legislature's website, you will find that Marsh's bill was assigned to Senator Nodler's committee on Tuesday March 12. That would mean that the next hearing of the Senate Education Committee was Wed. March 28 and had already been scheduled to hear all of the St. Louis Schools bills. That hearing went beyond the committee's allotted time. The Marsh bill was heard on the first day that it could be heard under Senate rules and was passed and granted consent status and reported to the full Senate the next day. As to your comments about St. Louis and Kansas City, as I just pointed out those bills were heard a week before the Marsh but only reported to the Senate on the same day as the Marsh Bill. You will find that no bill has been given faster consideration by the Senate Education Committee than Marsh's bill. I live in Joplin and obtained this information online from the Senate website. You could check the facts yourself before making these false complaints.
I think the reason it took so long for the bill to make it's way to the senate, was they were waiting for a day BJ was ACTUALLY in Jefferson City before they sent it over. I live down the street from him and it is always surprizing to me how many Monday, Tuesday , Wednesday and Thursdays the SUV with R136 plates is parked in his driveway. Maybe he carpools?
What 'wood' be 'surprizing' is you 'beeing' 'abel' to 'spel.'
Thank you for your detailed information Mr. Nodler, or is is Mr. Nodler's representative?
To the last anonymous, I am guessing that you are the person that put up the wrong info. You don't have to be the Senator or a member of his staff to use the Senate website. This information is available to all of us.
www.reedforcouncil.com
Media Cover Up
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI
Steven L. Reed, Petitioner )
vs )
)
Brenda M. Cirtin, City Clerk, )
City of Springfield, Respondent ) Case No. 107CC1310
)
)
)
PLAINTIFF EMERGENCY REQUEST FOR COURT ORDERED INJUNCTION
COMES NOW Plaintiff Steven Reed and asks the Court and Judge J Miles Sweeney to ISSUE AN EMERGENCY INJUNCTION requiring Brenda M. Cirtin, City Clerk of Springfield Missouri to not accept the election outcome of the Mayors election held on April 3, 2007 because it was not held according to state law. Also the court and judge need to order the Clerk to declare a new election will need to be had to adhere to the election laws of Missouri. Plaintiff ask for a review of this civil action as soon as possible.
Certificate of Service---I certify that on _____________ a true copy of the above was mailed, postage pre paid or electronically to the last known mailing address of each party to this lawsuit.
Steven L. Reed
Respectfully submitted,
Steven L. Reed _________________________________________________
Steven L. Reed, Plaintiff Pro Se
Signed and dated April 9, 2007
1441 S. Estate Avenue
Springfield MO 65804
stevenlloydreed@hotmail.com
Copy to Brenda M. Cirtin,
By way of:
David R. Wichmer, Esq.
City Attorney
City of Springfield
840 Boonville
Springfield, MO 65802
Attorney for the Defendants City of Springfield, MO,
e-mailed to the following is hereby completed on this date:
Daniel R. Wichmer dwichmer@ci.springfield.mo.us
Carl Stephen Yendes cyendes@ci.springfield.mo.us
Post a Comment