[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6346570,"mediaKeyId","2246687-771c6a02839af3e935f3f5a6b2f6920e","parentId",2246687,"title","Votes at a glance: North Dakota Senate final tallies, Feb. 6, 2025","audioSeconds",152,"startMs",3529000,"endMs",3681000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2246687-771c6a02839af3e935f3f5a6b2f6920e&start=3529&end=3681","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2246687-771c6a02839af3e935f3f5a6b2f6920e/thumbnail_3529000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6346570/North-Dakota/Votes-at-a-glance-North-Dakota-Senate-final-tallies-Feb-6-2025","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6346570-0c3edff6b02d9f011ef8ee1ea3f0da93/orig.mp4?Expires=1771159094&Signature=hwn2W8HYKlMr2TjHSZxmnr~rBc52t7tSx4EyY947830T3~0UI0Yid0wzoiRj-nwq0fCDO7oeZEUVsEr8txxSRjzOnAnQic7hI84S2eMfZBkBebyI7rQLAuNC103lpu19ppJzr9nsnCQ9x8DGjctZIqIqO-lhjfmjyKZLC5jhRtLjYyo2iJAJS8GybzQb2Tt~zUVfxzhc5IvtImqGOPDk~54f3ZYLbO6prRDkyIS0tdVtmevsJPqVrBZzSXFhmJ9zKU9BiVUx3FtfXfdJsMem~gLEisehwe8YsntPCK96Nabte79h7AxCbBlCe9LH0XLYlZeV6ngX25Uk-hkRtqPQVA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Senate Floor Session, ND","date","2025-02-05T00:00:00Z","article","The following is a synopsis of final passage votes and recorded tallies from the North Dakota Senate session on Feb. 6, 2025. Where the transcript provided a bill description, it is included; where the transcript did not, the description is marked \"not specified.\" All tallies and outcomes are taken from the session transcript.

- Senate Bill 22-06 — \"To amend and reenact section 28-01-17 relating to civil actions having 3-year limitations.\" Final tally: 9 ayes, 36 nays, 2 absent; outcome: failed.
- Senate Bill 2,171 — \"To amend and reenact section 205-03.1-26 relating to an emergency mental health petition and to declare an emergency.\" Final tally: 45 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent; outcome: passed (emergency clause carried).
- Senate Bill 20-10 — Appropriation for Council on the Arts and related transfers and report/exemption (bill text summarized in transcript). Final tally: 42 ayes, 3 nays, 2 absent; outcome: passed.
- Senate Bill 23-24 — Creates new sections relating to county and city home rule charter conformity and amends charter amendment/repeal sections. Final tally: 44 ayes, 1 nay, 2 absent; outcome: passed.
- Senate Bill 22-44 — Parental involvement in a child's education / parental-rights codification (transcript contains sponsor statements and committee vote). Final tally: 36 ayes, 9 nays, 2 absent; outcome: passed.
- Senate Bill 22-85 — Creation of a new section to chapter 28-32 relating to judicial deference. Final tally: 45 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent; outcome: passed.
- Senate Bill 23-66 — Amendment related to contents of a notice of intention to evict (transcript: educational notice language); final tally: 8 ayes, 37 nays, 2 absent; outcome: failed.
- Senate Bill 22-84 — Amendments relating to disclosure in adoption proceedings and access to birth records; final tally: 5 ayes, 40 nays, 2 absent; outcome: failed.
- Senate Bill 22-90 — Amendments relating to exemplary/punitive damages and definition of malice; final tally: 45 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent; outcome: passed.

Ending: These tallies reflect the votes recorded in the session transcript. Where the transcript included bill summaries or sponsor remarks, those are condensed above; if a bill referenced specific statutory sections in its engrossing language, that is noted.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Floor Session Feb 5, 2025\t","oneSentenceSummary","Summary of final passage votes recorded during the Senate session on Feb. 6, 2025, including bill descriptions (when provided in transcript) and final tallies.","taxTitle","Senate, Legislative, North Dakota","taxId",28311,"location","North Dakota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6346575,"Senate passes bill allowing up to 72-hour emergency psychiatric holds with medical-necessity showing",162,2095000,2257000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2246687-771c6a02839af3e935f3f5a6b2f6920e&start=2095&end=2257","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2246687-771c6a02839af3e935f3f5a6b2f6920e/thumbnail_2095000.jpg","/articles/6346575/North-Dakota/Senate-passes-bill-allowing-up-to-72-hour-emergency-psychiatric-holds-with-medical-necessity-showing","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6346575-a4c46d925ad6d3e3f3b187cf370d506f/orig.mp4?Expires=1771159094&Signature=NPo0pncWMHtIjMUpkw4b50gXpXHWvzLA43cizTP0J9tQim8k6DS4JwGayOVSu5rAssvCGe~Dehl7YN5JNWLAOcg4TBgiNYcbfE6DZLuNn6qPuYl0VuNpV-3C0nnlM87KHcsbvl3YOssFx~t6xYE-Ziygp9FB8hPVJQhomN2meZcQ5vxagFRS7dGO3STWKbgnVjv0SPC-BIUSQt31huFBMfMSnxdl5kOuyM3LXH2J~dmYKJeASEj5~N532TXaNLKYCN7BflLbA~jhD6SsTNXgUIwCdsokaVSVEqBn6KSX~UUVqQQ2UMTk6EuLzOVj~IknxDxIBOK7gSSgPtz1WytpPA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The North Dakota Senate on Feb. 6 approved Senate Bill 2,171 to expand the maximum emergency psychiatric hold from 24 hours to up to 72 hours when medical necessity is demonstrated. The final roll call on the bill was 45 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent; the emergency clause also carried.

Senator Roars, explaining the bill on the floor, said the 24-hour standard frequently proved inadequate when patients in remote parts of the state required transport and assessment in another facility. \"By the time you got someone freed up by law enforcement to then take them, you could have been 22 in 22 hours into that 24 hours,\" Roars said, describing how transport delays consumed assessment time.

The bill allows clinicians additional time—up to 72 hours—to evaluate whether a patient requires commitment, to determine substance-influence versus a psychiatric break, and to arrange appropriate care. Roars emphasized the bill requires a showing of medical necessity for holds beyond 24 hours: \"What we are now instituting is up to 72 hour hold, but you do need to show that you have medical necessity to keep them up to that 72 hours.\"

Supporters framed the change as a balance between clinicians’ need for adequate assessment time and protection of patient rights. The Senate approved the bill unanimously among those voting; the emergency clause was carried, making the change effective immediately as recorded in the transcript.

Ending: With the emergency clause approved, the change to the emergency mental-health petition process takes effect immediately, per the recorded action; implementing details and administrative guidance were not included in the transcript.","Senators approved Senate Bill 2,171 to permit emergency mental-health holds of up to 72 hours when medical necessity is shown, arguing the change will give clinicians needed time for assessment; final vote was 45–0 with the emergency clause.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6346580,"Senate rejects amendment to narrow CO2 pipeline property-tax exemption",906,476000,1382000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2246687-771c6a02839af3e935f3f5a6b2f6920e&start=476&end=1382","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2246687-771c6a02839af3e935f3f5a6b2f6920e/thumbnail_476000.jpg","/articles/6346580/North-Dakota/Senate-rejects-amendment-to-narrow-CO2-pipeline-property-tax-exemption","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6346580-a3133f677dd6558b41fea04b55654482/orig.mp4?Expires=1771159094&Signature=dzMbgC2-j4TeAnyRBw2GZ6eWbmPCf4D9PxgLiJKlHCQeZp9bGIeybrh8NYhvZ5c-qr1UqIVs7zbf8~CtKOBM9LD7kuyCT-BOiCJlOG90Fzb-sDnhBahk0eQyvM0DDhDBh7V7d9TYxOaV6DrI4TLVWiEQSnkCZM2~hfHz7kiatUZAANCQIlhHtEwVT~CRkLuvng2u-0XRVtjzYLWOVQWDd7x2VZfRilijJ80aRa~ws69S8IjMBtUjvW~IpltVtbv-uQEzAh19-l~0Vtxk~uCvYTiHw7zsxh0YVfa~T0GRUep~EKHexkc5Io3oR4b7M2SnnHKiGNnX7bjyugQpuiTVgg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The North Dakota Senate on Feb. 6 rejected a proposed amendment to Senate Bill 23-20 that would have narrowed a property-tax exemption for carbon-dioxide (CO2) pipelines, a roll call showed 11 ayes, 34 nays and 2 absent.

Senator Jim Patton, sponsor of Senate Bill 23-20, told colleagues the bill would remove the property-tax exemption as it relates to secure geologic storage of CO2; the amendment under consideration would have left the exemption intact for CO2 used for enhanced oil and natural-gas recovery and removed the exemption only for storage. \"The amendment removes the language 'or use and enhanced recovery of oil and natural gas' and that component of this would remain exempt,\" Patton said during the committee amendment presentation.

The amendment drew sharply divided remarks on the Senate floor. Senator Megram argued the state should not extend exemptions to what he described as large foreign investors in an interstate pipeline permitted to store CO2 in North Dakota. \"Why are we giving them a property tax exemption when all the citizens in the state pay for property tax?\" Megram asked, adding his committee work showed the project’s investors include foreign entities and that the pipeline would store CO2 for about 12 years while the exemption period is 10 years.

Senator Wanzek urged colleagues to oppose the amendment on economic grounds, saying it would \"pick winners and losers\" and single out ethanol producers. He cited U.S. Department of Agriculture production figures to argue ethanol is critical to the state’s corn market and local economy. Other supporters of the amendment echoed concerns about state taxpayers assuming long-term liability for injected CO2 after federal credits and private investments expire.

A recorded roll call was requested before the vote. The secretary announced 11 ayes, 34 nays, 2 absent; the amendment failed.

The amendment vote does not by itself enact or kill the underlying bill; the transcript records only the amendment debate and its defeat. The bill’s next procedural status or any subsequent floor action on Senate Bill 23-20 is not specified in the transcript.

Ending: The amendment’s defeat leaves the underlying language described by Patton intact as of the recorded vote; Senate Bill 23-20’s future steps were not recorded in the provided transcript segment.","The North Dakota Senate defeated an amendment to Senate Bill 23-20 that would have limited a long-standing property-tax exemption for CO2 pipelines to exclude enhanced oil and gas recovery, voting 11–34 with 2 absent.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: North Dakota Senate final tallies, Feb. 6, 2025

Senate passes bill allowing up to 72-hour emergency psychiatric holds with medical-necessity showing

Senate rejects amendment to narrow CO2 pipeline property-tax exemption