Legislature(2023 - 2024)GRUENBERG 120
03/08/2023 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB28 | |
| HB82 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 82 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 28 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 28-ACCESS TO MARIJUANA CONVICTION RECORDS
1:03:57 PM
CHAIR VANCE announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 28, "An Act restricting the release of certain
records of convictions; and providing for an effective date."
CHAIR VANCE opened public testimony on HB 28.
1:04:11 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
1:04:41 PM
CHELSEA FOSTER, Board Member, Alaska Marijuana Industry
Association, stated her support for HB 28. As a result of
restricting access to conviction records, she listed the
following benefits: employment opportunities; higher wages;
access to housing; removing barriers to full engagement in
family life; and putting an end to the social stigma and anxiety
associated with a criminal record. She shared key research
findings. She urged the committee to support HB 28, describing
the bill as equitable and fiscally responsible for Alaska.
1:06:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether she was advocating for an
expungement of [marijuana conviction records].
MS. FOSTER clarified that she was advocating for the sealing of
records on Court View.
1:07:18 PM
LACY WILCOX, Legislative Liaison, Alaska Marijuana Industry
Association, offered a prepared statement [included in the
committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
The Alaska Marijuana Industry Association would like
to offer our support for HB 28.
We believe that this piece of legislation is an
incremental but important step in the right direction
towards destigmatizing cannabis consumption. While it
is hard for us to identify specific individuals whom
this legislation would impact due to confidentiality,
we do know anecdotally that public records impact an
individual's ability to secure fair housing, fruitful
employment, and education opportunity.
It is common knowledge that employers, schools, and
landlords use CourtView to perform background checks
on applicants. In CourtView a simple marijuana
possession charge appears similar to this,
"MisconductControlled Substance 6A". Very few
understand the drug schedule, and most people
performing background checks are unlikely to do the
next step of discovery to see that VIA is only
marijuana. They will simply put the application aside.
Therefore, anything that removes even a small barrier
to positive life outcomes, we will support.
We want to thank the sponsor and prior session
sponsors of similar legislation and urge its support
and passage by both bodies.
1:08:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether an employer had the right
to know whether an applicant had a marijuana conviction on
record.
MS. WILCOX shared her understanding that nothing in HB 28 would
prohibit employers from asking applicants about their criminal
history.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether dishonesty about one's
criminal history was a fireable offense.
MS. WILCOX suspected that consequences could ensue if a lie was
told. She indicated that it was up to employers to use their
discretion on such matters.
1:11:17 PM
CHAIR VANCE closed public testimony on HB 28. She invited the
bill sponsor to brief the committee on the merits of the
proposed legislation.
1:11:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STANLEY WRIGHT, Alaska State Legislature, prime
sponsor of HB 28, conveyed that the bill would provide an
opportunity to right a wrong. He acknowledged the severity of
breaking the law; however, he pointed out that the recreational
use and possession of marijuana was legalized in Alaska. He
opined that every person was deserving of hope and the ability
to move forward. He concluded by humbly asking the committee to
hear his words and take them to heart.
1:13:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked how the bill would impact background
checks.
1:14:43 PM
ALLAN RIORDAN-RANDALL, Staff, Representative Stanley Wright,
Alaska State Legislature, clarified that state or federal
background checks would not be impacted.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD expressed concern that employers could be
deceived by potential employees.
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT said he was not encouraging applicants to
lie. He reiterated that his intent was to right a wrong and to
encourage conversations between employers and employees.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD disagreed with the sentiment that the bill
would "right a wrong," as any person with a marijuana conviction
had committed a crime.
CHAIR VANCE requested a sectional analysis of the bill.
1:17:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT presented the sectional analysis for HB 28
[included in the committee packet], which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
SECTION I: It is the intention of the legislation to
reduce barriers to employment and other basic daily
functions for individuals who under past statute were
convicted of low level marijuana related crimes.
SECTION II: Describes when, why and to what agencies
or organizations information protected in this bill
may be released.
SECTION III: Persons aged 21 years or older shall in
the provisions of this bill have records of low level
marijuana convictions as detailed in this section,
which by todays statutes made to be inaccessible other
than as listed in section II.
SECTION IV: Records relating to the individuals and
occurrences in this bill shall not be publicly
published by the Alaska Court System. Information
shall be made available on how to obtain information
removed from public view.
SECTION V: Records currently posted by the Alaska
Court System shall be removed from public view.
SECTION VI: An effective date for this act shall be;
1st of January 2024.
CHAIR VANCE asked Ms. Purinton to describe how Section 2 would
impact the Department of Public Safety (DPS).
1:19:04 PM
LISA PURINTON, Chief, Criminal Records and Identification
Bureau, Department of Public Safety, stated that Section 2
sought to modify AS 12.62.160 [Release and use of criminal
justice information; fees]. She explained that the bill would
limit low-level marijuana convictions, as outlined in HB 28,
from being displayed on "any person" reports, which were
background checks often conducted by landlord/tenants or
generated by non-state/non-federal required record checks.
CHAIR VANCE asked Ms. Purinton to define "expunged" versus
"sealed."
1:21:36 PM
MS. PURINTON explained that an expunged record would no longer
exist in the system, whereas a sealed record was only accessible
in a limited capacity. She defined sealing as "limited
dissemination."
CHAIR VANCE asked whether HB 28 sought to seal or expunge [the
marijuana conviction records].
MS. PURINTON said the bill would seal the record of conviction,
as the marijuana conviction would still exist on record for
specific authorized purposes, such as federal and state
authorized background checks.
CHAIR VANCE sought questions from members of the committee.
1:23:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether an employer could receive
access to a person's full criminal history should the bill pass.
MS. PURUNTON said it would depend on whether the employer was
authorized by state or federal law. She shared, for example,
that the Anchorage School District (ASD) was authorized by state
law to perform background checks as a condition of employment;
therefore, ASD could obtain access to an applicant's full
criminal history report. She continued to explain that if the
bill were to pass, "any person" reports requested by employers
would exclude low-level marijuana convictions.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether a disclaimer would be
included with the background check.
MS. PURINTON confirmed that there was a "quasi" disclaimer
notice highlighting the limited scope of the "any person" report
in accordance with AS 12.62.160(b)(8). She explained that non-
conviction records were not displayed in addition to records
that had not been adjudicated.
1:25:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked who could access sealed conviction
records.
MS. PURINTON stated that the records would be available in the
state repository to all entities listed under AS 12.62.160.
CHAIR VANCE inquired about the DPS fiscal note.
1:27:20 PM
MS. PURINTON informed the committee that year one costs would be
higher to provide for a contract programmer at the estimated
cost of $56,000 to modify the main frame system to limit the
dissemination of the marijuana conviction records. The
additional cost, she explained, was to fund a temporary position
to research all record sealing requests and update the criminal
history repository accordingly.
CHAIR VANCE highlighted the language "upon request of the
defendant" and inquired about the impact of removing that
language from the fiscal note.
MS. PURINTON suspected that the temporary [criminal justice
technician] position would be needed for a longer period. She
estimated that 8,000 records could potentially qualify for
restricted access under the proposed legislation.
CHAIR VANCE indicated she was trying to understand the
anticipated workload.
1:31:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD sought to confirm that individuals who
were eligible for this policy could not have committed any other
crime.
MS. PURINTON shared her understanding that [marijuana
possession] must be the sole conviction in the case; further,
the offender must have been under the age of 21 when the offense
was committed.
MS. PURINTON, in response to a follow-up question from
Representative Allard, clarified that the bill pertained
specifically to crimes involving under one ounce of marijuana.
1:32:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked where the $56,000 [to fund the
contract programmer] was included on the fiscal note.
MS. PURINTON said the total cost in year one should include
$56,000 for the programming cost.
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY restated his question, referencing the "Year
1" and "Year 2" breakdown of costs on page 2. He asked where
the $56,000 was included in that.
MS. PURINTON, referring to page 1 of the fiscal note, indicated
that $56,000 was included in the $72,000 cost of services.
1:34:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN inquired about the process for people
under the age of 21 at the time of conviction.
MS. PURINTON shared her understanding that records of
individuals under the age of 21 would still be displayed and
available.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether the criminal records of
minors were handled differently.
MS. PURINTON said the state repository had limited criminal
history records for individuals under the age of 18.
1:36:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD said she would consider supporting the
bill if the individuals paid for the sealing of their records.
She asked whether the sponsor would consider implementing this
change into the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT said he would have to think about it.
Initially, however, he said he would not be supportive because
these individuals were already struggling financially.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD opined that the burden should not be
placed on taxpayers.
1:37:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked why the bill didn't seek to expunge
low-level marijuana conviction records.
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT shared his belief that sealing the
records, as opposed to expunging them, was more palatable. He
suggested that a conversation about expungement could be had in
the future.
1:38:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN directed attention to Section 3 of the
bill. He asked whether HB 28 would extend to charges that did
not result in a conviction.
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT reiterated that the bill only applied to
people that were charged solely with [a low-level marijuana]
conviction.
1:40:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD inquired about the price per person if all
8,000 records were to be sealed.
MS. PURINTON offered to follow up with the requested
information.
1:40:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to page 3, line 19, of HB 28 and
inquired about the notice that would be provided on how to
obtain a criminal history record.
1:41:36 PM
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Alaska Court System, pointed out
that a disclaimer and a notice on how to search criminal records
was already provided on Court View.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN expressed confusion. He remarked, "If
we're saying in Section 2 of the bill that DPS can't release
this information to just anybody, why are we saying in Section 4
of the bill that just anyone can go to DPS and get this
information."
MS. MEADE interpreted Section 4 of the bill to suggest that a
general notice would be posted on the website directing people
to DPS for criminal history record checks. Nonetheless, she
acknowledged that if HB 28 were to pass, [marijuana conviction
records] would not be accessible via DPS. She added that the
only way to obtain the records in question would be at the
courthouse.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether people would have access to
the sealed information at the courthouse.
MS. MEADE noted that from the perspective of the courts, these
records would not be considered "sealed," as the term meant
something different to the court system. She clarified that,
per Sections 3-4 of the bill, the marijuana convictions would
simply be removed from Court View. In response to
Representative Eastman, she answered yes, the kiosk at the
courthouse would provide access to an individual's full criminal
history.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to Section 3 and asked whether
the court fell within the statutory definition of "agency."
MS. MEADE answered no.
1:46:34 PM
CHAIR VANCE announced that HB 28 would be held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 82 - Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HJUD 3/6/2023 1:30:00 PM HJUD 3/8/2023 1:00:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB 82 - v.A.PDF |
HJUD 3/6/2023 1:30:00 PM HJUD 3/8/2023 1:00:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB 82 - Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HJUD 3/6/2023 1:30:00 PM HJUD 3/8/2023 1:00:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB 82 - PROPOSED CS v.B.pdf |
HJUD 3/6/2023 1:30:00 PM HJUD 3/8/2023 1:00:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB 28 - Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HJUD 3/8/2023 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2023 1:00:00 PM SFIN 4/23/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HB 28 |
| HB 28 - v.A.PDF |
HJUD 3/1/2023 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/8/2023 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2023 1:00:00 PM |
HB 28 |
| HB 28 - Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HJUD 3/1/2023 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/8/2023 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2023 1:00:00 PM |
HB 28 |
| HB 28 - Support Letter.pdf |
HJUD 3/1/2023 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/8/2023 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2023 1:00:00 PM SFIN 4/23/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HB 28 |
| HB 28 - AMIA Support for HB 28 - 2.9.23.pdf |
HJUD 3/1/2023 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/8/2023 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2023 1:00:00 PM |
HB 28 |