Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
05/04/2017 03:00 PM House STATE AFFAIRS
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 | |
| HB184 | |
| HB173 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 184 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 54 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 173 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 184-DISCRIMINATION: GENDER ID.;SEXUAL ORIENT.
3:08:40 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the first order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 184, "An Act adding to the powers and
duties of the State Commission for Human Rights; and relating to
and prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation or
gender identity or expression."
3:08:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ANDY JOSEPHSON, Alaska State Legislature, as
prime sponsor of HB 184, stated that there have been various
attempts at advancing the proposed legislation - both during the
Twenty-Seventh Alaska State Legislature, 2011-2012, and the
Twenty-Eighth Alaska State Legislature, 2013-2014. He mentioned
key events in the civil rights movement in America: the Civil
War, the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the U.S.
Constitution, the Women's Suffrage Movement, Jim Crow laws, the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the
Fair Housing Act of 1968. He maintained that the "last
frontier" of civil rights is anti-discrimination legislation
nationwide. He referred to U.S. Supreme Court civil rights
decisions - Lawrence v. Texas [2003], Romer v. Evans [1996],
Bowers v. Hardwick [1986], and Obergefell v. Hodges [2015] - and
asserted that no one believes that civil rights are fully
implemented relative to race and gender or that the issue has
been resolved. He maintained that the issue mostly has been
resolved as a matter of law; what is "tricky" is the enforcement
of civil rights.
3:11:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON stated that the proposed legislation
would give the Alaska State Commission for Human Rights (ASCHR)
jurisdiction over discrimination in housing, lending,
employment, and public accommodations - specifically as the
discrimination relates to sexual orientation, gender identity,
and gender expression. It would give the ASCHR power to
investigate the discrimination and offer remedies. He said that
ASCHR has requested that it be given these powers. Currently
because of the lack of jurisdiction in these issues, ASCHR must
turn away these matters and absolve itself of these kinds of
discriminatory practices. He asserted that fundamentally there
are important personal, liberty, spiritual, and economic
interests at stake.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON explained that a religion exemption has
been added to HB 184, which was not in the previous bills
introduced. He maintained that such an exemption is compelled
by the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Hosanna-Tabor Church v.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and would offer
comfort to those concerned that they would be compelled to not
discriminate when their faith dictated otherwise. He relayed
that Alaska's largest city, the Municipality of Anchorage (MOA),
has implemented a similar law, but only after a long fight, as
has the capital city, Juneau. He maintained that "this is ...
the place where the world is headed, and so we might as well
nudge it along and help it get there."
3:15:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX relayed that she is curious about the
"religion" defense. She referred to a case in Washington or
Oregon: a woman who owned a cake shop refused to bake a wedding
cake for a same-sex couple; she was sued by the couple; she
alleged that her religious freedom was impacted; and she lost
the case. She asked if under HB 184, this could happen in
Alaska with the same results.
3:16:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON replied that Washington State Supreme
Court unanimously ruled that the baker did not have such a
right. He stated that even though HB 184 has a religious
exemption, there may not be such a right under the proposed
legislation either. He mentioned that he needs to spend more
time contemplating the proposed legislation and its nuances,
which includes the level of scrutiny that would be applied and
the question of fundamental right. He expressed his belief that
similar [religious belief] claims were made relative to race and
gender. He stated that it is his hope, notwithstanding the
religious exemption, that the Alaska Supreme Court may be
concerned about that sort of claim. He said, "To be clear, the
cake may not be baked in the church kitchen, but it would be
baked." He reiterated further research is needed on the
proposed legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked for a situation in which the issue
of "religious freedom" would apply, if not in a situation like
the one in Washington.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON referred to page 4, Section 5, of HB
184 and said that the proposed legislation would apply in a
church hierarchy in which a person was applying to be a member
of the clergy and wanted to assert a right to a lesbian, gay,
bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning (LGBTQ) lifestyle. He
said in that circumstance, the exemption would apply, and the
church could decline the person based on the person's sexual
preference, gender, or other orientation.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX suggested that if Section 5 presents the
only exemption, then the exemption only refers to hiring a
minister or a priest.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON responded, "I think that is correct."
He added that he believes that the reason the MOA ordinance was
able to pass was because of its sensitivities to the need for a
religious exemption.
3:20:18 PM
MEGAN HOLLAND, Staff, Representative Andy Josephson, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Josephson, prime
sponsor of HB 184, paraphrased from the sectional analysis
included in the committee packet, which read as follows
[original punctuation included]:
Section 1: Amends AS 18.80.060 the powers and duties
of the Human Rights Commission. The section adds
"sexual orientation, gender identity or expression" to
the list of protected categories that include race,
religion, color, national ancestry, physical or mental
disability, age, sex, marital status, changes in
marital status, pregnancy, or parenthood.
Section 2: Amends AS 18.80.200 to add "sexual
orientation, gender identity or expression" to the
list of discriminations which are cause for public
concern, and asserts the need for the state to prevent
such discrimination in employment, credit and
financing practices, public accommodations and sale,
lease or rental of real property.
Section 3: Amends AS 18.80.210 to add "sexual
orientation, gender identity or expression" to the
categories of protected civil rights.
Section 4: Amends AS 18.80.220 to add "sexual
orientation, gender identity or expression" to the
prohibitions against unlawful employment practices.
Section 5: Creates a new section under AS 18.80.220
which provides a religious exemption for the
prohibitions against discrimination under the area of
employment, stating that section 4 does not apply to
an employment relationship between a religious
organization and a minister employed by the religious
organization.
3:22:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked if the exemption in Section 5 could
apply to the protected categories in Section 1 [on page 1 of HB
184] - race, religion, color, national ancestry, physical or
mental disability, age, sex, marital status, changes in marital
status, pregnancy, or parenthood.
MS. HOLLAND answered, "Yes, that exemption does apply to those
other categories." She stated that a church would be exempt
from discriminating based on the protected categories when
hiring someone for a "minister" type position
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL offered that there are certain human rights
protections and asked if it would be totally within the law to
state that someone was not being hired due to age or race, for
example.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON relayed that his wife is a practicing
Lutheran. There are three main Lutheran Church synods - the
Wisconsin Synod, the Missouri Synod, and the Evangelical
Lutheran Synod. The Missouri Synod does not allow for a woman
to be a pastor; the Evangelical Lutheran Church synod does allow
a woman to be a pastor. He said he is confident that an
exemption due to gender is allowed in that situation. He opined
that an exemption due to race in a religious setting is
concerning and offensive.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked about a religious school using the
exemption to not hire staff, such as teachers or janitors,
because they are "x, y, or z."
3:26:34 PM
MS. HOLLAND replied that she believes that the U.S. Supreme
Court case [Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC], which created the exemption,
addressed a specific type of employment that could compromise
the internal governance of the institution. She maintained that
the employment of a janitor may not compromise that governance,
but the employment of a teacher might. She stated that it is a
very specific exemption; she offered to research that question
and provide a more definite answer.
3:27:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX offered that Section 5 of the proposed
legislation only appears to exempt a minister, and a minister is
clearly prescribed. She asked if under HB 184, a Jewish school
would have to hire maybe a practicing Muslim who on his/her free
time advocates for the end of Israel.
MS. HOLLAND replied that it would depend on the position for
which that person was hired. She expressed her belief that if
it were a ministerial type position, the exemption would apply,
and if not, it would not apply. She agreed that it is a very
narrow, specific exemption, and its purpose is to protect the
internal governance of religious institutions.
3:29:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON mentioned that his wife attended a
Lutheran college; for tax purposes, she is considered a
"Minister of the Gospel." He maintained that the term
"minister" may be broadly interpreted. He relayed that the
language in the proposed legislation copies the language in the
MOA ordinance; it may not be perfect, and it may not be language
that the committee wants to adopt.
3:30:21 PM
MS. HOLLAND continued to paraphrase from the sectional analysis
included in the committee packet, which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
Section 6: Amends AS 18.80.230 to add "sexual
orientation, gender identity or expression" to the
prohibitions against unlawful practices in public
accommodations.
Section 7: Amends AS 18.80.240 to add "sexual
orientation, gender identity or expression" to the
prohibitions against unlawful practices in the sale or
rental of real property.
Section 8: Amends AS 18.80.250 to add "sexual
orientation, gender identity, or expression" to the
prohibitions against unlawful practices in financing
and extending credit.
Section 9: Amends AS 18.80.255 to add "sexual
orientation, gender identity, or expression" to the
prohibitions against unlawful practices by the state
or its political subdivisions.
Section 10: Defines blockbusting, and amends AS
18.80.300 to add "sexual orientation, gender identity,
or expression" to the prohibitions against unlawful
practices in blockbusting, or practices by a real
estate agents [sic] to close a transaction.
Section 11: Amends AS 18.80.300 to add definitions of
"gender identity or expression," and "sexual
orientation" to Alaska statute.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked for a definition of "blockbusting."
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON suggested that blockbusting is an
unlawful practice whereby a real estate agent, for example,
tries to undermine the right of someone to live in a certain
neighborhood by suggesting to the neighbors that there is reason
to leave.
MS. HOLLAND stated that blockbusting is a practice of trying to
keep certain people out of certain [residential] areas - a real
estate version of segregation. She gave an example: raising
the price for someone based on their ethnicity, religion, or
sexual orientation. She added that there are various methods to
do that, which include convincing people in the neighborhood
that there will be certain consequences of that person moving
into the neighborhood.
3:33:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK summarized by saying, "It's basically
segregating neighborhoods."
3:34:45 PM
ALIZA KAZMI, Policy Specialist, Alaska Network on Domestic
Violence & Sexual Assault (ANDVSA), began her testimony by
saying that she and the membership of ANDSVA will need to
further examine Section 5 regarding religious exemption. She
said that of particular concern to the providers under ANDVSA's
19 member programs, which consist of the domestic violence
shelters and victim services throughout the state, is the
vulnerability of transgender ("trans") people to sexual and
other types of violence.
MS. KAZMI paraphrased from her written testimony, which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
The Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual
Assault strongly supports HB 184 ('Discrimination:
Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation'). We urge you
to also support it and ensure that it passes. This
important legislation needs to be a priority - it
cannot wait.
Even with important policy gains, and gradual socio-
cultural shifts towards understanding and tolerance,
the LGBTQ community continuously faces very real
discrimination and inequality. This discrimination and
inequality perpetuates high levels of violence against
people who are LGBTQ. Responding to and preventing
such discrimination and violence is a civil rights and
human rights issue.
The transgender community in particular, and
specifically trans youth and trans women of color,
face the threat of violence on a daily basis and need
laws in place to protect them from discrimination.
This vulnerability can be related to a lack of
resources due to deeply imbedded disenfranchisement
and discrimination--in school, housing, employment,
and access to health care.
To highlight just a few statistics
· Statistics documenting transgender people's experience
of sexual violence indicate horrific levels of sexual
abuse and assault. One in two transgender individuals
are sexually abused or assaulted at some point in
their lives. More than half experienced some form of
intimate partner violence. (2010 report by National
Center for Victims of Crime and the National Coalition
of Anti-Violence Programs, 2015 US Transgender Survey)
· Some reports estimate that transgender survivors may
experience rates of sexual assault up to 66 percent,
often coupled with physical assaults or abuse. This
indicates that the majority of transgender individuals
are living with the aftermath of trauma and the fear
of possible repeat victimization (2010 report by
National Center for Victims of Crime and the National
Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs)
· 12 percent of transgender youth report being sexually
assaulted in K-12 settings by peers or educational
staff; 13 percent of African-American transgender
people surveyed were sexually assaulted in the
workplace; and 22 percent of homeless transgender
individuals were assaulted while staying in shelters.
(2011 Injustice at Every Turn: A Report of the
National Transgender Discrimination Survey)
· There was an 11% increase in anti-LGBTQ homicides in
2014. Looking at broad category of homicide victims,
50% were trans women of color (2014 National Report on
Hate Violence Against LGBTQ and HIV-Affected
Communities, National Coalition of Anti-Violence
Programs)
As service providers, we encourage any legislative
frameworks to support us as we continuously expand our
LGBTQ cultural competence.
Discrimination compounds economic, health, and other
disparities and is a root cause of violence that
perpetuates the culture of violence against people who
are LGBTQ; and the social acceptance of this violence.
We join our colleagues who are victim advocates all
around the country in saying: to create a social,
political, and economic environment in which violence
against women no longer exists, we must support
equality and safety for all.
Let's make sure that Alaska is on the right side of
this issue. Please take a stand and show that Alaskans
do not support discrimination and violence, and do
support tolerance and peace. Support HB 184. Thank
you.
3:39:38 PM
MELISSA GREEN, Principle Investigator, Anchorage LGBT
Discrimination Survey, made reference to two previous studies
she has been involved with that are relevant to the proposed
legislation: "One in Ten: A Profile of Alaska's Lesbian and Gay
Community," 1986, is a statewide survey of 734 gay, lesbian, and
bisexual respondents on a wide variety of questions including
experiencing discrimination, violence, and harassment; and
"Identity Reports: Sexual Orientation Bias in Alaska," 1989, a
report looking at housing discrimination in Anchorage and actual
case studies of violence, harassment, and discrimination
statewide. She stated that in 2009, when Anchorage began to
consider its ordinance, the research she just mentioned was two
decades old. After the 2009 attempt to pass the ordinance
failed, it was decided that the research should be made current
and that gender identity and expression should be included along
with sexual orientation in the examination of discrimination.
The result of that effort was the "Anchorage LGBT Discrimination
Survey," which was conducted from January through March 2011.
MS. GREEN relayed that the key findings of the survey were
disseminated in a preliminary report in November 2011, entitled
"Anchorage LGBT Discrimination Survey: Preliminary Report,"
included in the committee packet. The final report, completed
March 2012, presents the key findings in the executive summary
along with detailed methodology and data, extended discussion of
the findings of the two prior reports, comparisons with other
types of discrimination in Alaska such as racial discrimination,
examination of several years of case filings of both ASCHR and
the Anchorage Equal Rights Commission (AERC) to date, and a
comparison of the anti-LGBT discrimination findings in the 2011
survey with national LGBT data on anti-LGBT discrimination.
3:43:53 PM
MS. GREEN stated that the sample size for the survey was 268
LGBT men and women out of an estimated 11,000 LGBT residents in
MOA - an estimate based on the Williams Institute national
estimates of 3.5 percent of Americans identifying as lesbian,
gay, or bisexual and about [.3] percent identifying as
transgender. She added that the Williams Institute estimates
that statewide there are about 19,200 LGBT adults, of whom
13,100 are in the Alaska workforce. She relayed that she will
focus on employment discrimination data in her testimony because
it is the most common type of discrimination brought before
ASCHR and AERC. The 2011 survey found that 44 percent of the
268 respondents were harassed by their employers or reported
that they were harassed by their employers or coworkers because
of their sexual orientation or gender identity; 16 percent
reported they were forced to leave their jobs due to harassment;
21 percent reported that they were turned down for a job because
of gender identity or sexual orientation; 18 percent were denied
promotions; and 15 percent said they were fired because of their
sexual orientation or gender identity.
MS. GREEN relayed that when comparing the four groups of people,
transgender people reported higher levels of discrimination and
violent harassment than was reported by lesbian, gay, and
bisexual people, but the figures were high among all groups.
She said that the findings on sexual orientation and gender
identity discrimination were comparable to rates of racial
discrimination reported in the 2009 Anchorage Community Survey
(ACS) conducted by the University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA)
Justice Center. She maintained that the rates for anti-LGBT
discrimination in the 2011 Anchorage survey were like those
reported in national studies.
MS. GREEN referred to the 1989 report and stated that one
component of this "prima facie" report is the 84 documented
actual instances of anti-gay bias, discrimination, harassment,
or violence, including three murders. She claimed that most
importantly, the narrative stories compiled in the report were
evaluated by a former intake investigator of ASCHR, who found
that 42 percent of the instances would have been jurisdictional
under AS 18.80, if AS 18.80 had included sexual orientation as a
protected class at that time. She added that the 1989 report
did not look at gender identity. She maintained that she was
not aware of any current efforts to compile similar narratives
of discrimination. She questioned why studies on the issue must
be done by the population that is trying to get protection from
discrimination, while at the same time, ASCHR has had to refrain
from investigating the cases, because it is not jurisdictional.
She said, "The whole point is - let's make it jurisdictional."
MS. GREEN concluded by saying that in 2015, the Williams
Institute report, entitled "Employment Discrimination Based on
Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in Alaska," estimated
that about six cases per year would likely be reported to ASCHR
if sexual orientation and gender identity and expression were
made jurisdictional.
3:49:48 PM
MATTHEW SCHULTZ, Minister, Christians for Equality; Alaska
Christian Conference, testified that he believes that sexual
orientation and gender identity should be added to the anti-
discrimination statute so that all Alaska citizens may have
equal protection. He lamented that much of the discrimination
that occurs is done under the guise of spiritual leadership and
under the false impression that the Christian faith requires it.
He stated that he wishes to correct that error and encourage
Alaska to protect LGBTQ people from discrimination and
persecution. He maintained that the ministerial exemption is
complete and sufficient; and freedom of religion would not be in
jeopardy under the proposed legislation. He said that he has
studied and taught extensively on the topic of morality and
ethics; and he can say without hesitation that any system that
allows for discrimination against even one person is immoral.
He said that protected categories exist because people within
those categories are in physical and emotional jeopardy; their
jobs are in jeopardy; they are discriminated against; and it is
Alaska's ethical responsibility to stand up for them, to stand
with them, and to address and prevent discrimination of the
LGBTQ community. He stated that it is not illegal to be gay,
yet a person can be fired simply for placing a photo of his/her
legal spouse on his/her desk. He maintained that people can
lose their homes because they are gay. He emphasized that
Alaska can and must be better. He asked that HB 184 be moved
out of committee.
3:52:22 PM
BILLY FARRELL, Executive Director, Identity Inc., relayed that
the mission of Identity Inc. is to advance Alaska's LGBTQ
community; its members envision a world in which all Alaskans
can be their authentic selves in their communities and still
feel safe, supported, and welcomed. He stated that the LGBTQ
community has experienced much progress in recent years, but the
fear of discrimination is still very real for many Alaskans
today. He maintained that due to the hard work of passionate
residents and lawmakers, LGBTQ people living in Anchorage and
Juneau and city employees in Bethel have basic nondiscrimination
protection. He asserted that most Alaska residents still live
in communities without equal protection from discrimination due
to sexual orientation and/or gender identity and expression;
therefore, every day many must decide between being "out" or
"open" and keeping their jobs, staying in their homes, or
(indisc.) in public.
MR. FARRELL reported that it is not acceptable that members of
the LGBTQ community must face this injustice with little to no
recourse. He stated that because Alaska's nondiscrimination
protections currently do not include sexual orientation and
gender identity, ASCHR is barred from investigating these claims
of discrimination. He asserted that HB 184 is needed so someone
facing discrimination can report it; it can be investigated; and
the person can seek justice for the wrongdoing.
MR. FARRELL relayed that the state's lack of inclusive
nondiscrimination protection hampers its economic growth;
equality is good for business; 89 percent of Fortune 500
companies prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation,
and nearly six in ten prohibit discrimination based on gender
identity. He maintained that changing Alaska's laws to reflect
public values will help Alaska attract and retain the best and
the brightest to the workforce. All of Alaska's workers,
including those who are gay and transgender, should be treated
fairly and equally by the laws of the state. All Alaskans
should have the opportunity to earn a living and provide for
themselves and their families. He said that updating the
statutes will ensure that all Alaskans will be judged on their
job performances and qualifications - nothing more and nothing
less. No one should have to live in fear of being legally fired
for reasons that have nothing to do with his/her job
performance.
MR. FARRELL stated that there has been a great deal of
discussion in the current legislative session about the future
of Alaska; he has had the privilege of working with many young
LGBTQ Alaskans from across the state. He relayed that these
young people are not considering staying in Alaska for college
or employment, because they do not feel welcomed or safe. He
conceded that HB 184 alone cannot change that culture and
climate of hate, but it could be a foundation for all Alaskans
feeling safe, welcome, and (indisc.) in their communities. He
concluded by saying, "Discrimination is not an Alaskan value,
and it's time to make those values law."
3:56:30 PM
MARTY BUSCAGLIA, Executive Director, Alaska State Commission for
Human Rights (ASCHR), testified that the religious exemption
protection currently exists under current Alaska law. She cited
the Alaska Administrative Code (ACC), 6 AAC 30.985, which read
as follows:
Any organization operated for charitable or
educational purposes and supervised or controlled by
or in connection with a religious organization is not
prohibited from limiting admission to or giving
preference to persons of the same religion or
denomination or otherwise making a hiring decision
that will promote the religious principles for which
it is established or maintained.
MS. BUSCAGLIA relayed that in November 2016, ASCHR passed a
resolution which called on the legislature to expressly prohibit
discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity
and expression. She stated that ASCHR authorized staff to draft
proposed regulations addressing the inclusion of prohibitions
against discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender
identity and expression under the existing law prohibiting sex
discrimination. She maintained that the language for the
regulation has been drafted and is now in the Department of Law
(DOL) for a legal opinion. She said that there are many steps
to follow, including public comment, review by the governor and
the legislature, and review by Legislative Legal and Research
Services. She maintained that the resolution could be halted at
any point.
MS. BUSCAGLIA stated the position of ASCHR on the proposed
statute change: it would constitute a much stronger statement
of the state's position on anti-discrimination; it would have
greater force; and it would be a more robust interpretation of
the law. She maintained that ASCHR's mission is to seek out and
eradicate discrimination throughout the State of Alaska. The
ASCHR has a long history of supporting equal rights for all
Alaskans; since 1990, it has supported greater protections from
discrimination based on sexual orientation. She relayed that
Alaska's laws against discrimination are based on the principle
that people should not be denied employment, a place to live,
public accommodations, and government services for arbitrary
reasons that are not connected to their abilities or
qualifications. She maintained that making sure people are not
discriminated against because of their sexual orientation or
gender identity and expression is consistent with this
principle. She offered that Alaska has been a leader in
adopting strong, simple civil rights protections: the Alaska
Human Rights Act [1963] was adopted a year before the federal
Civil Rights Act of 1964; Alaska added protections to its law
for persons with disabilities three years before the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA) was passed in 1990; strengthening
its statute now to protect people in the LGBT community would be
consistent with the strong advocacy of civil rights in the
state.
3:59:53 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that HB 184 would be held over.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON referred to the testimony suggesting
that someone could be terminated from his/her job because of
displaying a picture of his/her lawful spouse, and he offered
that committee members should find this very disturbing.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 184 4.4.17.PDF |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Sponsor Statement 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Sectional Analysis 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - Letter Planned Parenthood 4.27.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - Letter HRC 4.28.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - Letter LWVA 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - Letter SAGE 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - Letter ATFE 5.1.2017.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - Letter Fbx PFLAG 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - Letter AAARP 5.4.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - Letter EGJ 5.4.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - Public Letters 5.8.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - Court Decisions 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - 2017 Survey(2) 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - 2017 Survery(1) 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB184 Supporting Document - 2010 Census 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - Anch LGBT Discrimination Preliminary Report 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - ASHRC Resolution 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - Legal Memo 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - HRC State Laws 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - Williams Institute 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - Ministerial Exemption 5.9.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - 18.80.300 5.9.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Supporting Document - Memorandum, Religious Exemptions 5.9.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Opposing Document - Letter AFC 5.5.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM HSTA 3/6/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 173 Sponsor Statement 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 5/9/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 173 |
| HB 173 ver U 5.3.17.PDF |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 173 |
| HB 173 Additional Document - Article ADN 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 5/9/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 173 |
| HB 173 Additional Document - Overview EPA 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 5/9/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 173 |
| HB 173 Additional Document - Paper PNAS 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 5/9/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 173 |
| HB 173 Additional Document - Report CPI 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 5/9/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 173 |
| HB 173 Additional Document - Chapter NCA 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 5/9/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 173 |
| HB 173 HSTA CS ver R 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 5/9/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 173 |
| HB 173 Summary of Changes ver U to CS HSTA ver R 5.3.17.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 5/9/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 173 |
| HB 184 Sponsor Statement 1.19.18.pdf |
HSTA 5/4/2017 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/27/2018 3:15:00 PM |
HB 184 |