Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next
- Introduced by Rep. Sherry Appleton (D) on January 20, 2011, to include federally recognized Indian tribes in the authorized sale, exchange, transfer, or lease of real or personal property to federal, state , and municipal governments. (Companion: SB 5208).
- Referred to the House State Government & Tribal Affairs Committee on January 20, 2011.
- Referred to the House Rules Committee on February 17, 2011.
- Amendment offered by Rep. David Taylor (R) on March 5, 2011, to require that any real property transaction between a public entity and a federally recognized Indian tribe retain existing lease agreements, easements, and public access provisions in place at the time of the transaction. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on March 5, 2011.
- Passed 63 to 34 in the House on March 5, 2011, to include a federally recognized Indian tribe as an entity to which the state, a municipality, or a political subdivision may sell, transfer, exchange, lease, or dispose of real or personal property.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the Senate on March 8, 2011.
- Referred to the Senate Government Operations, Tribal Relations & Elections Committee on March 8, 2011.
- Amendment offered in the Senate on April 7, 2011, to remove the provision that the terms and conditions for any sale, transfer, exchange, lease, or disposal of real property from a public entity to a federally recognized Indian tribe must retain existing lease agreements, easements, and public access provisions in place at the time of the transaction. The amendment passed by voice vote in the Senate on April 7, 2011.
- Referred to the Senate Rules Committee on March 22, 2011.
- Referred to the Senate Government Operations, Tribal Relations & Elections Committee on March 8, 2011.
- Passed 43 to 5 in the Senate on April 7, 2011, to include a federally recognized Indian tribe as an entity to which the state, a municipality, or a political subdivision may sell, transfer, exchange, lease, or dispose of real or personal property. This act does not require the rentention of any lease agreements, easements, or public access provisions in existence at the time of the transaction.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the House on April 13, 2011.
- Passed 60 to 36 in the House on April 13, 2011, House concurred with Senate amendments. This bill includes a federally recognized Indian tribe as an entity to which the state, a municipality, or a political subdivision may sell, transfer, exchange, lease, or dispose of real or personal property. This act does not require the rentention of any lease agreements, easements, or public access provisions in existence at the time of the transaction.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Signed by Gov. Christine Gregoire on May 5, 2011, to include a federally recognized Indian tribe as an entity to which the state, a municipality, or a political subdivision may sell, transfer, exchange, lease, or dispose of real or personal property. This act does not require the rentention of any lease agreements, easements, or public access provisions in existence at the time of the transaction.
Comments
1) Re: 2011 House Bill 1409 (Authorizing the sale of public property to Indian tribes) by denny16 on October 26, 2011I just think it's the fair thing to do, no wonder the bill got more votes in it's favor. These people should have the right to do whatever they want with the properties. It's a good thing I am not personally involved in this issue, all I am interested in at the moment is to make an investment for apartments in Detroit, the real estate market everywhere is reviving and I need to take advantage of that.
As a new approach to the sale of publically owned land why don't we only allow a sale to an entity that will pay taxes on the land or personal property being sold. That is unless we have more money then the state needs to pay it bills.
It is time to STOP taking property off of the tax rolls and start putting it back on. We the people need help paying our taxes and as our rulers have demonstrated there should be no option left out when it comes to crrating new revenue.
And yes I understand that this bill is addressing lands and property that is most likely already untaxed but is that any reason not to look at a sale that would create new tax revenue?
Introduced in the House on January 20, 2011, to include a federally recognized Indian tribe as an entity to which the state, a municipality, or a political subdivision may sell, transfer, exchange, lease, or dispose of real or personal property
The vote was 63 in favor, 34 opposed and 1 not voting
(House Roll Call 0 at House Journal 0)
Click here to view bill details.
Your new comments should be made in the box below.