Legislature(2025 - 2026)ADAMS 519
04/08/2025 01:30 PM House FINANCE
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 | |
| HB101 | |
| HB28 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 101 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 28 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 10 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 8, 2025
1:39 p.m.
1:39:43 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Foster called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 1:39 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Neal Foster, Co-Chair
Representative Andy Josephson, Co-Chair
Representative Calvin Schrage, Co-Chair
Representative Jamie Allard
Representative Jeremy Bynum
Representative Alyse Galvin
Representative Sara Hannan
Representative Nellie Unangiq Jimmie
Representative DeLena Johnson
Representative Will Stapp
Representative Frank Tomaszewski
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Representative Andrew Gray, Sponsor; Claire Bredar, Staff,
Representative Andrew Gray; Nancy Meade, General Counsel,
Alaska Court System; Brenda Stanfill, Director, Alaska
Network on Violence and Sexual Assault; Representative Andi
Story, Sponsor; Cherie Bowman, Staff, Representative Andi
Story; Ricardo Worl, Self, Juneau; Kerry Thomas, Acting
Executive Director, Alaska Commission of Postsecondary
Education, Department of Education and Early Development;
Representative Justin Ruffridge.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Keely Olson, Executive Director, Standing Together Against
Rape, Anchorage; Randi Breager, Executive Director, Abused
Women's Aid in Crisis, Anchorage; Eleanor Dolgonos, Self,
Anchorage; John Skidmore, Deputy Attorney General, Criminal
Division, Department of Law; James Stinson, Director,
Office of Public Advocacy, Department of Administration;
Ariel Toft, Deputy Public Defender, Alaska Public Defender
Agency, Department of Administration; Kevin Worley,
Administrative Services Director, Department of
Corrections; Diann Thornton, Administrative Services
Director, Department of Public Safety; David Flaten, Social
Services Program Officer, Division of Juvenile Justice,
Department of Family and Community Services.
SUMMARY
HB 10 ADD FACULTY MEMBER UNIV BOARD OF REGENTS
HB 10 was SCHEDULED but not HEARD.
HB 28 TEACHER/STATE EMPLOYEE STUDENT LOAN PRGRM
HB 28 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
HB 101 CRIMES AGAINST MINORS
HB 101 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
Co-Chair Foster reviewed the agenda for the meeting.
HOUSE BILL NO. 101
"An Act relating to civil claims by victims of sexual
abuse to a minor; relating to homicide; relating to
assault in the third degree; relating to stalking;
relating to sexual abuse of a minor; relating to
enticement of a minor; relating to endangering the
welfare of a child; relating to indecent exposure;
relating to sending an explicit image of a minor;
relating to solicitation or production of an indecent
picture of a minor; relating to distribution of
indecent material to minors; relating to the testimony
of children in criminal proceedings; relating to
sentencing; and providing for an effective date."
1:41:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ANDREW GRAY, SPONSOR, introduced the bill
with prepared remarks:
Thank you to the co-chairs and to the finance
committee for allowing me to present this important
piece of legislation today. For the record, my name is
Andrew Gray; I am the representative for house
district 20 the U-Med district in Anchorage.
Alaska has the highest rate of rape in the country,
which is over three times the national average. We
also have one of the highest rates of child sexual
assault in the country nearly six times the national
average according to the UAA Justice Center's Alaska
Victimization Survey. That 2020 survey found that over
35 percent of Alaskan women report being sexually
abused before the age of 18.
Advocates from Alaska's domestic violence and sexual
assault organizations have consistently identified
that Alaska's low age of sexual consent presents a
unique risk factor for minors who are 16 and 17 years
old. And that is the reason for this bill the goal
is to reduce the amount of rape and sexual assault
affecting Alaska's young people. Under current
statute, 16 and 17-year-old individuals can legally
consent to sex, meaning that in the case of a sexual
assault, these minors must prove that they did not
consent to sex in court. This makes prosecution of
cases of sexual assault and sex trafficking more
difficult.
An example: In late December 2023 in Soldotna, a 63-
year-old law enforcement officer by the name of Vince
Peronto was sentenced to 8 years in prison for
attempted sexual abuse of a minor in the second
degree. In 2018 He had pulled over a 16-year-old
female while driving, then started exchanging
flirtatious text messages with her. When her father
found out, he contacted law enforcement, and they set
up a "sting" operation to catch him attempting to meet
up with her for sex. The only reason this was
considered criminal is because he was an officer and
was thus in a position of authority (which is already
a crime). If he hadn't been with law enforcement if
he had just been a friend of her parents or anyone
else NOT in a position of authority, it would have
been perfectly legal for that 63-year-old to meet up
with that 16-year-old for sex.
You may ask why we don't hear more about these cases.
The reason why is that legal sexual relationships
don't get reported in the news. Sex between older
adults and 16- and 17-year-olds is NOT currently
against the law, except under very specific criteria,
and therefore we don't hear about it, but parents have
called crisis hotlines describing how their teens are
being manipulated and coerced by adults for sex but
there is no legal recourse for those parents. Our
statutes do not protect 16 and 17 years old from
predators in Alaska.
House Bill 101 increases the age of consent in to 18,
closing the loophole that has left 16 and 17-year-old
children unprotected. A four-year close-in-age
exemption is retained in this bill as you see it in
front of you, but we have heard from some stakeholders
that they would like to increase that range. I'd like
this committee to know that I am open to an amendment
or a committee substitute that increases the close in
age exemption and am happy to talk about that. This
Romeo and Juliet clause, as it is often called, allows
for a 16- or 17-year-old to legally consent to sex
with their peers which should be allowed. The intent
of this bill is not to criminalize consensual sex
among teenagers; the goal is to make it more difficult
for 16 and 17 years old to be victims of sexual
assault and sex trafficking.
If we pass this House Bill 101 Alaska would have the
same age of consent as Florida, Kentucky, Idaho, Utah,
and Arizona, to name a few.
1:45:28 PM
Representative Gray continued to explain the bill with
prepared remarks:
HB 101 also makes changes for consistency in several
other areas of criminal statute that treat 16 and 17-
year-olds differently than other minors, such as
criminalizing the sending of explicit images of 16 and
17-year-olds currently sending photos of nude 16-
and 17-year-olds is not a crime, but it should be.
What these additional changes do and this is why
this bill is so long is make our statutes consistent
a minor would truly be anyone under the age of 18;
we would get rid of this carve out where 16- and 17-
year-olds are treated as adults with regards to sex.
CLAIRE BREDAR, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE ANDREW GRAY, provided
a review of the sectional analysis (copy on file). She
introduced it with prepared remarks:
Sections 1-6
These sections amend multiple statutes to update the
definition of a minor, raising the age from 16 to 18
years old in cases related to specific criminal
offenses.
Section 1: AS 09.55.650(a) Claims based on sexual
abuse of a minor
Section 7
Amends AS 11.41.434(a)(3) to specify that an offender
18 years of age or older commits sexual abuse of a
minor in the first degree if they engage in sexual
penetration with a person under 18 years of age.
Section 8
Amends AS 11.41.436(a) to expand the definition of
sexual abuse of a minor in the second degree to
include 16- and 17-year-olds, in addition to the
existing provisions for 13-, 14-, and 15-year-olds.
Section 9
Amends AS 11.41.438(a) to expand the definition of
sexual abuse of a minor in the third degree to include
16- and 17-year-olds, in addition to the existing
provisions for 13-, 14-, and 15-year-olds.
Sections 10-27
These sections modify various statutes to update the
legal definition of a minor, changing the age
threshold from 16 to 18 years old for crimes related
to child endangerment, indecent exposure,
solicitation, and sentencing guidelines.
Section 30
Repeals AS 11.41.436(a)(6), 11.41.440(a)(2); and AS
12.63.100(7)(C)(ii).
Section 31
Clarifies the applicability of the amended statutes.
Section 32
Provides for an effective date.
Co-Chair Foster moved to invited testimony. He recognized
Representative Justin Ruffridge in the room.
1:48:11 PM
KEELY OLSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, STANDING TOGETHER AGAINST
RAPE, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), spoke in support of
the legislation with prepared remarks:
My name is Keeley Olson, and I am testifying in
support of HB 101, which among other things raises the
age of consent to sexual acts for teens from the age
of sixteen to eighteen.
When I first met Representative Gray, he asked me what
the legislature might accomplish that would have the
greatest impact on the high rates of sexual violence
in Alaska. I told him protecting minors from sexual
assault would be the most impactful thing that could
be done. Vulnerable minors are often left without
access to sufficient aid and resources after a sexual
assault because of the age of consent, and so often
predatory offenders are not held accountable for their
actions.
I gave Representative Gray several examples of the law
failing teens, but the clearest one I can provide to
you today is that of a former legislative aide,
Benjamin Anderson-Agimuk who in 2020 at the age of 27,
was charged in Bethel with two counts of furnishing
alcohol to a person under 21, and one count of sexual
assault of a minor under the age of 13. The details
leading up to the sexual assault of an 11 year old
girl are disturbing yet clearly illustrate the way
current law fails teens and jeopardizes our state's
most vulnerable residents.
His charges resulted from an incident that was the
second time in a month that police had responded to
claims the suspect had sex with a minor after
furnishing them alcohol. The first incident: According
to court documents, police responded to a call on
March 5 of a juvenile girl who passed out on the
street. When officers arrived, the 16-year-old girl's
mother said the suspect gave her daughter alcohol and
then had sex with her.
According to the police affidavit, Anderson-Agimuk
responded to questioning by police that "even if he
did have sex with her, she was 16 so it was legal."
While he was detained, police applied for a warrant to
collect DNA evidence. While waiting for that warrant,
the suspect's attorney demanded his release and police
complied. They were unable to locate him after the
warrant came through.
The second incident: Less than a month later, on April
2, the charges say that police responded to a 911 call
reporting a 14-year-old girl and an 11-year-old girl
lying on the ground in front of the Kuskokwim
Consortium Library. According to the charging
document, the 11-year-old told police she had been
raped by the suspect. The girl said he had gotten her
and the 14-year-old drunk and high on cannabis. The
11-year-old told police that she had been able to
protect the 14-year-old from being raped as well.
Police located the suspect and arrested him the same
day. His bail was set at $50,000. In 2023, he pled
guilty and was sentenced to 36 years in prison. Note
that he was never held accountable for the alleged
rape of the sixteen year old a few weeks earlier, and
in fact the only charge he faced for that incident was
furnishing alcohol to a minor.
I believe this case clearly illustrates the difference
in the way a case involving a sixteen year old is
swept under the rug while the offender goes free to
brazenly escalate his predatory nature toward
children.
It also illustrates that while the age of consent may
not be a matter of substantial importance to many
adults, there is a specific population that pays a
great deal of attention to this law?predators.
Sixteen and Seventeen year olds are minors. They are
children, and I'm not saying this in a dismissive way.
They cannot legally enter into a contract on their
own, they cannot rent a motel room, or a car, they
cannot enter a bar, they cannot get a credit card or
even open a bank account without an adult signer on
the account.
Juvenile offenders under the age of eighteen are
treated in ways significantly different from adult
offenders. There is an entirely separate justice
system set up to deal with them, and they have certain
rights that must be upheld, because as a society we
recognize children should not be treated as adults.
Except for rare instances where a minor is charged as
an adult for exceptionally heinous crimes, the State
must take certain actions to attain that exception.
Why then, are victims of sexual assault in the State
of Alaska treated as though they are adults with the
full rights and responsibilities of adults?
STAR often receives heartbreaking calls on its crisis
line from parents desperate to help their teen
children who have been manipulated into sexual
relationships with predatory adults. It is
heartbreaking, because there is little help STAR can
offer in such circumstances. The parent of a sixteen
or seventeen year old is unable to obtain a protective
order on behalf of their child. While the law may
allow it, Judges and Magistrates are reluctant to do
so without the minor being present and requesting it
themselves. Minors over sixteen must petition the
court directly and provide sworn affidavits of their
need for protection, detailing the situations in
documents open to the public and testifying before an
open court.
Teens manipulated by predatory adults into sexual
relationships are vulnerable to trafficking. For all
the work the State has done in amplifying trafficking
statistics and the need for interventions, protecting
all minors is a helpful way to start making a
difference for trafficked youth.
1:54:30 PM
Ms. Olson continued to read from prepared remarks:
For those teens who later realize the negative
ramifications of having been manipulated into a sexual
relationship and controlled by a predatory adult, they
may feel reluctant to contact their parents or friends
for help. They may feel estranged and unable or
unwilling to admit they need help. A teen is unable to
stay at a domestic violence shelter without an
accompanying adult. They may not have access to any
funds and safety planning with them is challenging.
All we can do at STAR is attempt to help them reunify
with their family and seek their own protective order.
Often, crimes of sexual assault against teens are
reported to law enforcement and investigated at
length, but the burden of proof to overcome the issue
of consent is so high that these cases go uncharged
and unprosecuted.
In 2023, the Anchorage Police Department investigated
sex crimes involving 68 teens aged sixteen and
seventeen. Eleven of the cases involved either
indecent exposure or the creation or possession of
child sexual abuse material. The remainder were
investigations of sexual assault or abuse.
The Alaska 2023 Felony Level Sex Offenses Report
showed more than half of all victims of sex crimes are
under the age of eighteen. [518 victims statewide were
over eighteen, while 732 were under eighteen]. The
suspects were overwhelmingly over the age of 18 [77
percent, not accounting for those whose ages were
unknown]. The vast majority of those causing harm
tended to be adults and the majority of those being
harmed by sexual violence were children.
Unfortunately, the State report does not break down
ages beyond the range of 11 17 years of age.
It is a miscalculation to look at this bill as
addressing only statutory rape. This bill would
greatly benefit older teens who are victims of
forcible rape and alcohol- and drug- facilitated rape
as well. Overcoming the burden of consent is a tough
proposition for adults, it should not be so for
children.
This bill aligns with Alaska's age of marriage law. A
sixteen or seventeen year old cannot marry someone
outside the same age range included in this bill, even
with their parents' consent.
Adverse childhood experiences (ACES) and their
repercussions are more and more on the forefront of
Alaskan's minds. High ACES scores underly many
challenging and chronic health conditions for adults.
Intervention and resilience-building is critical to
dampening the long-term consequences of harm.
1:57:12 PM
Ms. Olson continued to provide prepared remarks:
Youth who are sexually assaulted are much more
vulnerable to ongoing harm. Years of research has
shown that nearly half (49 percent) of all female
survivors experienced some form of revictimization
over the course of two years. Unwanted sexual contact
was the most common form of revictimization followed
by coercion, attempted or completed forcible assault,
and attempted or completed substance-facilitated
assault.
Without appropriate response and crisis intervention,
youth are at higher risk to experience repeat
victimizations. This can be avoided by making sexual
assaults against minors a priority and making sure
they are able to access the healing resources they
need. This is impossible if they feel they are not
protected, aren't taken seriously, or that they are
somehow to blame for their own victimization.
Along with the highest rates of sexual assault and
child sexual abuse in the nation, Alaska has the
highest rates of suicide. The rates of suicide
mortality continue to trend upward. In 2019, the rate
in Alaska was 27 percent higher than in 2010. (Alaska
Death by Suicide Rates and Figures 2010-2019) During
this same period, the rate among Native peoples in the
US increased by 68 percent.
Sexual assault has long been reliably linked to an
increased risk for suicide. Recent research found that
people who were sexually assaulted reported an 18
percent higher prevalence in suicidality than
unassaulted people.
We cannot simply turn our backs on vulnerable minors
and believe they have the capacity when they are
harmed to seek out appropriate resources, develop
positive coping mechanisms, and access necessary
support without taking the crimes committed against
them seriously.
Ms. Olson thanked the committee for its time, service to
the state, and for helping to protect children.
1:59:14 PM
Co-Chair Foster moved to the second testifier.
RANDI BREAGER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ABUSED WOMEN'S AID IN
CRISIS, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), testified in
support of the legislation with prepared remarks:
My name is Randi Breager, and I serve as the Executive
Director of AWAIC. AWAIC is a nonprofit based in
Anchorage, dedicated to supporting domestic violence
victims and other victims of violent crime, advocating
for policy change, and strengthening systems that
protect survivors. I am here today to voice my support
for House Bill 101. This bill is a critical step
toward ensuring that our legal system adequately
protects minors from sexual abuse and related offenses
while holding perpetrators accountable.
With over 18 years of leadership experience in
nonprofit, advocacy, and government sectors, I have
seen firsthand the profound impact of domestic
violence and sexual abuse on individuals, families,
and communities across Alaska. Working for the
Department of Public Safety for nearly a decade, also
gave me a unique perspective of the immense challenges
our state has in providing justice for victims of
these crimes.
You all are aware Alaska consistently reports some of
the highest rates of sexual violence in the country.
This crisis is exacerbated by systemic gaps in
protection for minors, who often lack the legal
safeguards necessary to prevent abuse and ensure
justice. The way our laws are currently written, we
have drawn an arbitrary line not supported by what we
know scientifically about teens' cognitive, emotional,
physical, and social development. We have determined
that 15-year-old child is not developmentally equipped
to enter into a sexual relationship with a middle-aged
man. And yes, I understand the perpetrator could be a
middle-aged woman, I am just illustrating this using
the statistically predominant example. This
legislation is proposing that something profound or
magical does not in fact occur a day later when this
child turns 16.
While working at Covenant House in my previous role,
we witnessed day in and day out, vulnerable teenagers
who can legally consent, be picked up by older men.
Men they identified as their boyfriends. Men, we knew
were preying on vulnerable children who were
experiencing homelessness and often trauma from
previous assaults and abuse, mental health issues, and
vulnerabilities caused by substance use. This common
sense bill tells us, that these adults, do not in fact
believe they are engaging in a meaningful relationship
with someone they consider a peer or an equal- they
are simply being predatory and taking advantage of
children. While few of these cases cross the paths of
law enforcement, I can tell you it is not happening
infrequently. These vulnerable teens are seeking
support from agencies such as CHA due to the stigma
and because previous experience tells them law
enforcement cannot assist them.
By increasing the age definition of a minor from 16 to
18 years across remaining relevant statutes, this bill
aligns Alaska laws with federal standards and many
other states that recognizes the ongoing vulnerability
of older teenagers. The bill additionally broadens the
scope of offenses against minors, including homicide,
third-degree assault, stalking, and enticement,
ensuring that perpetrators face appropriate
consequences.
2:03:19 PM
Ms. Breager continued to provide prepared remarks:
This bill also reduces the burden on law enforcement
and prosecutors to hold these perpetrators
accountable. Currently, they must expend significant
investigative resources in proving sexual acts against
16 and 17 year olds were non-consensual- or rape.
Unfortunately, what we see in many of these situations
are adults feeding alcohol and drugs to minors and
then having sex with them. It is then very difficult
to prove the teens did not consent even though they
are usually so incapacitated they could not have done
so. We all already know proving incapacitation is very
difficult and often not successful in sexual assault
investigations and trials. This bill will remove that
barrier for minors altogether.
Passing HB 101 sends a clear message that Alaska
prioritizes the safety of its children and will not
tolerate behaviors that devastate lives.
Thank you for your time today.
Ms. Breager thanked the committee for its time.
2:04:17 PM
Co-Chair Foster moved to the third testifier.
ELEANOR DOLGONOS, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
shared that she is 19 years old. She supported the passage
of the bill. She read from prepared remarks.
2:09:36 PM
Co-Chair Foster noted there were eight fiscal notes. He
asked for a review.
NANCY MEADE, GENERAL COUNSEL, ALASKA COURT SYSTEM, reviewed
the zero fiscal note from the Alaska Court System with
control code WpOkJ.
Representative Johnson noted there were five states, and
asked if there was data from the other states when they
changed their laws.
Ms. Mead did not have the data.
Representative Allard stated that at 16 years of age a
person could consent to terminating a pregnancy and it
could be paid for by the state.
2:14:07 PM
Representative Gray deferred the question to Ms. Olson. He
stated his understanding of the question.
Representative Allard stated they had to be 18 to consent.
Representative Gray asked Ms. Olson to explain the way a 16
year old or 17 year old could consent and how evidence was
gathered.
Ms. Olson relayed that if an 18 year old was sexually
assaulted and became pregnant it was possible to collect
evidence that could link to the predator to a sexual
assault within a certain timeframe.
2:15:56 PM
Representative Allard clarified she was asking about a
minor who could not consent. She asked if the DNA would be
tested.
Ms. Olson responded that a person who was able to consent
it would be similar, but deferred to Mr. Skidmore.
JOHN SKIDMORE, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL, CRIMINAL DIVISION,
DEPARTMENT OF LAW (via teleconference), replied that when
the crime was alleged, the state could get a search warrant
but could not test every aborted fetus if it was not
associated with a crime. He stated that it would be
possible to test individuals within four years of age the
sexual activity would not be a crime unless there was
force.
2:18:36 PM
Representative Allard asked for verification that it was
not required for a 16 year old.
Mr. Skidmore did not know.
Representative Allard stated that if a parent had suspicion
that an individual was outside the four year bracket, and
if the parent said no to the abortion, and the individual
was older, and they wanted the DNA tested, could it pass a
legal check.
Mr. Skidmore answered that if a parent came forward and
said their daughter aged 16 or 17 was having sex with an
older individual, it would be difficult to test the fetus
if the minor had agreed to the abortion.
2:21:10 PM
Co-Chair Foster asked for a review of the fiscal note from
the Office of Public Advocacy.
JAMES STINSON, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PUBLIC ADVOCACY,
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION (via teleconference), reviewed
zero fiscal note control code mKIQn.
2:22:09 PM
ARIEL TOFT, DEPUTY PUBLIC DEFENDER, ALASKA PUBLIC DEFENDER
AGENCY, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION (via teleconference),
reviewed the zero fiscal note with control code CgQYd.
Co-Chair Foster moved to the Department of Corrections
fiscal note.
KEVIN WORLEY, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT
OF CORRECTIONS (via teleconference), reviewed the fiscal
note from the Department of Corrections, control code
CdakL. The note had zero impact.
2:25:04 PM
Co-Chair Foster moved to the note from the Department of
Law.
Mr. Skidmore reviewed the zero fiscal note from the
Department of Law, control code JFKTX.
2:28:09 PM
Co-Chair Foster moved to the fiscal note from Department of
Family and Community Services, Division of Juvenile
Justice. [the individual was not presently available]
2:28:52 PM
DIANN THORNTON, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR,
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY (via teleconference), reviewed
the zero fiscal note from DPS, control code dPGFI.
Ms. Thornton reviewed the second fiscal note from DPS,
control code koGpe. The department did not anticipate a
cost at present.
2:30:18 PM
DAVID FLATEN, SOCIAL SERVICES PROGRAM OFFICER, DIVISION OF
JUVENILE JUSTICE, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY
SERVICES (via teleconference), reviewed the zero fiscal
note from the Division of Juvenile Justice, control code
jUlbN.
2:31:14 PM
Co-Chair Foster
Representative Stapp thought it was a good bill. He thought
there seemed to be a disconnect between the testimony and
the information the committee heard related to the fiscal
notes.
Mr. Worley replied that based on the current count, there
was capacity. The department did not know what the change
in capacity would be as a result of the bill.
Representative Stapp asked about the DOC current bed
capacity and how many new prisoners it would expect if the
bill passed.
Mr. Worley responded that he could not give an estimate
that would result from the bill. Currently they were at
about 85 percent capacity.
2:36:12 PM
Representative Gray spoke to the fiscal notes in general.
He shared that the Judiciary Committee had heard from a
testifier that was not available in the current meeting.
Representative Stapp supported the bill. He wondered
whether there was an expected increase in prosecutions.
Co-Chair Foster asked if there was someone Representative
Gray would recommend to answer the question.
Ms. Thornton replied that they were not necessarily
expecting an increase in prosecutions but they did not have
an estimate.
2:40:21 PM
Representative Stapp read from DPS's fiscal note. He
thought the second part of the sentence did not make any
sense, and asked for clarity.
Ms. Thornton responded that DPS had already investigated
the crime, the understanding was that it would be a new law
the department would enforce. She did not know the number
of potential cases and could not estimate the cost.
Representative Gray stated it was currently a crime to rape
16 and 17 year olds.
Representative Stapp agreed with the situation, but he
wanted to know how many more criminals would result from
the bill.
2:43:18 PM
Representative Gray apologized because there was not
invited testimony from law enforcement during the current
hearing. He recommended listening to the law enforcement
testimony in the House Judiciary Committee.
Representative Stapp asked about a ballpark number of cases
impacting the Department of Law.
Mr. Skidmore thought the numbers would be more than 1 or 2
and anticipated there would be a number of more cases, but
it was challenging to estimate the number.
2:46:13 PM
Representative Stapp liked the concept and thought
deterrence worked. He asked the Alaska Court System the
same question.
Ms. Meade responded affirmatively. The court system had no
way of estimating the number of cases that would result
from the bill.
2:47:30 PM
Representative Galvin thanked Representative Gray for
bringing the bill forward. She thought the deterrence made
it the most difficult part to think through fiscally. She
stated that how predators paid attention to the law was
very important. She referred to Ms. Dolgonos testimony that
she had to push hard to be heard.
Co-Chair Foster noted that a representative from the Alaska
State Troopers was now available online.
Representative Gray responded to Representative Galvin's
question.
2:51:55 PM
Representative Bynum thanked Representative Gray for
bringing the bill forward. He noted that he had co-
sponsored the bill. He noted that the bill specified it
would become effective immediately. He asked if there was
any indication about individuals in current relationships
that would be impacted by the bill.
Representative Gray answered that the relationship would be
illegal if a 16 year old was dating a 30 year old.
Representative Bynum wondered whether there should be broad
communication in the change in law.
2:55:35 PM
Representative Gray replied that there had not been
discussion of a public service announcement, and he
believed it would be covered extensively by the media.
Representative Hannan expressed confusion about the reason
for the zero fiscal notes. She thought it made more sense
for indeterminate fiscal notes. She remarked there were
seven zero notes, she wondered why the bill came to
finance.
Representative Gray answered that there had been a
committee substitute in Judiciary, and if an 18 year old
physically assaulted a 17 year old in school there had been
a close in age exemption added a potential cost.
2:58:10 PM
Mr. Skidmore stated his understanding of the question. He
had to say it was zero until he saw otherwise.
3:00:04 PM
Co-Chair Foster noted that the sponsor had asked about the
idea of waiving the bill from committee. There had been an
informal poll and some members had wanted the bill to come
to the committee.
Representative Hannan supported the bill.
Co-Chair Josephson referenced the term statutory rape. He
was curious about how the crimes would be indicted.
Mr. Skidmore replied that if there was a victim aged 16 or
17 with contact with a perpetrator with greater than a four
year age difference, the court would have to work out how
to deal with sexual abuse and sexual assault.
Co-Chair Josephson stated that section 1 and 2 were about
withholding. He was trying to make a demarcation in his
mind.
3:05:17 PM
Mr. Skidmore answered that the statute allowed to indict
when there was a lack of intent, because the victim was not
able to consent due to their age.
Co-Chair Josephson stated there were many important parts
of the bill. He wondered if they bumped up 16 or 17 year
olds under the theory that 17 year olds were more mature
than 14 year olds. He asked if the age should be moved to
five or 6 years.
3:08:50 PM
Representative Gray asked to hear from Brenda Stanfill with
ANDVSA. He was not interested in criminalizing sex between
individuals within a reasonable age gap. He was interested
in going after crime.
BRENDA STANFILL, DIRECTOR, ALASKA NETWORK ON VIOLENCE AND
SEXUAL ASSAULT, responded that there had not been agreement
on the four year difference. She noted that someone had
been in the room who shared that when she was 17 her future
husband was 24 and remarked that it was possible to look at
a six year difference versus four. She felt that ten years
was too much of a difference.
Representative Gray agreed. He heard what Ms. Stanfill was
saying, but he was not comfortable with 10 years. He
thought six years may be a reasonable accommodation.
Co-Chair Foster thanked the bill sponsor.
HB 101 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
HOUSE BILL NO. 28
"An Act establishing a student loan repayment pilot
program; and providing for an effective date."
3:14:53 PM
Co-Chair Foster asked the sponsor to join the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE ANDI STORY, SPONSOR, introduced the bill
with prepared remarks:
Thank you for hearing HB 28, Student Loan Repayment
Program. This bill seeks to help address Alaska's
outmigration problem and our high employee vacancy
rates for teachers and state employees. According to
the Depart of Labor data, Alaska has had 12
consecutive years with more residents leaving our
great state than arriving. The data says we have about
the same number of people leaving the state as before,
BUT a significant number of people are not moving into
the state as they once did. This is a problem as we
are short on having certified teachers (600 teachers
short this year). In addition, Alaska continues to
have high vacancy rates in state employment. The state
employee vacancy rates are hindering citizens from
receiving timely essential state services such as
public assistance, ferry transportation, professional
licensing, retirement benefits, payroll and more.
Also, it is important to know that only 35 percent of
residents who leave Alaska for postsecondary education
outside of our state, return.
House Bill 28 seeks to incentivize in - migration
through a postsecondary education loan repayment
program and urges former Alaskan residents to "Come
Back Home." That is what I have nicknamed this bill,
"Come Back Home," to fill these essential state
employee positions or teacher positions for our
children.
Why it focuses on prior Alaskan residents is they
already have established roots here. They have family
and friends, a connection to this place and land, they
are more likely to remain after receiving incentives
like an employersponsored loan repayment program that
this bill establishes. House Bill 28 sets up a pilot
loan repayment program for up to 120 individuals that
makes a payment to the person's student loan lending
institution after they complete a year of work. The
payment is $8,000 per year, for three years for a
total of $24,000. The Student Loan Debt by State, from
the U.S. Department of Education says Alaskans have a
total of $32,000 student loan debt on average. This
bill reaches out to former residents who have traveled
south for their higher education degrees or technical
certificates or have completed their degree programs
or certifications through the University of Alaska
system and have moved and been out of the state for a
year or more. I believe this is a positive pilot
program to get 120 former Alaskans back living and
working in our state.
The funding for this pilot program would come from the
Alaska Higher Education Investment Fund (AHEIF). Kerry
Thomas, Acting Executive Director from the Alaska
Commission on Postsecondary Education (ACPE) is here
to provide information about the loan repayment
program vs. a loan forgiveness program that the state
used to have, and to talk about the HEIF. ACPE would
oversee this program.
Representative Story asked her staff to review the fiscal
note [sectional analysis].
CHERIE BOWMAN, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE ANDI STORY, reviewed
the sectional analysis (copy on file):
Section 1: Adds a new section to the uncodified law
creating a student loan repayment pilot program:
a) The program will be developed and administered by
the Alaska Commission on Postsecondary Education.
Subject to appropriation, the commission may award a
grant to a person who:
1) applies not later than October 31, 2025;
2) is a full-time state employee or public school
teacher;
3) has a degree or certificate from a higher education
institution from outside Alaska;
4) was an Alaska resident for at least a year before
attending the out-of-state institution;
5) or has completed a degree or certificate through
the University of Alaska system and has resided
outside of the state for 12 months or more prior to
returning to Alaska to work as a full-time state
employee or public school teacher;
6) owes payment on a student loan taken to obtain
their degree or certificate.
b) The Commission will establish an application
process, along with policies to determine the
efficiency and success of the program in recruiting
and retaining grant recipient employees with the state
and school districts. The commission will report to
the legislature yearly.
c) To participate, applicants may be required to
refinance their existing student loans through the
commission.
d) Grants awarded are only for full-time teachers or
state employees, and payable only at the completion of
a year of work.
e) Participants may receive a grant each year for a
maximum of three years in an amount not to exceed
$8,000 per year. If the balance of the participant's
outstanding loan is less than $24,000, the grant will
be equal to one-third of the balance in each year of
participation in the program.
f) Up to 125 grants will be awarded each fiscal year.
The total dollar amount awarded may not exceed
$1,000,000 in a fiscal year. If the amount
appropriated in a fiscal year is insufficient to meet
the amounts awarded, the commission will reduce the
amounts awarded.
Section 2: Adds a new section to the uncodified law
requiring the commission to submit a report on
December 21 of 2025, 2026, and 2027 that describes the
effects of the pilot program on recruitment and
retention of teachers and state employees. The last
report will include an analysis of the overall success
rate and effectiveness of the program.
Section 3: This bill sunsets on December 31, 2027.
Section 4: This Act takes effect immediately.
Co-Chair Foster wanted to move to invited testimony. He
asked about the fiscal note.
Representative Story replied that Kerry Thomas would review
the fiscal note.
RICARDO WORL, SELF, JUNEAU, introduced himself and read
from prepared remarks:
I grew up in Juneau, graduated from West Anchorage HS
in 1980 and earned my bachelor's degree from a small
private school on the east coast in 1984. To cover
tuition, room and board payments, my parents had to
scrape up the cash every month. I applied for
scholarships which were fewer 40 years ago, and
ultimately took on student loans like many college
students. It wasn't until I graduated that I learned
my parents liquidated assets and sold several
significant art pieces from our home to ensure we
could cover tuition.
When I finished college, I had about $30,000 in
student loans from the AK Commission on Postsecondary
Education (ACPE). Many of my classmates from West HS
also took advantage of the State's student loan
program. I can confidently say that the forgiveness
clause absolutely swayed our decision to move back
home. I came back to Alaska to pursue a profession in
publishing and ultimately ended up with a career in
non-profits, public service and serving our rural
communities.
In two months I will be attending my 45 year high
school reunion in Anchorage where I will catch up with
other life-long Alaskans who chose to move back home
and who were incentivized by the generous student loan
forgiveness program.
I moved back home to Juneau 30 years ago and am aware
of how significant the State of Alaska has been for
employment opportunities in our state. I remain
mindful of the challenges our state agencies face in
recent years of trying to recruit and fill essential
positions in education, public safety and marine
transportation. I encourage this committee to support
House Bill 28. This is a proven and effective
recruitment tool to attract our young people back to
Alaska and an incentive for them to seek a career
within state government.
- Alaska students entering college in recent years
were in our schools during a period where they were
directly impacted by funding reductions the loss of
programs, teachers, and overcrowded classrooms
- Now that they are in college they have to hear
more bad news as our country's ideology questions the
validity of higher education, is holding funding for
colleges (and now school districts) hostage if they
don't eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion, and
the worst is having to see classmates being
investigated or taken from the street because of their
opinions. All on top of everything costing more.
- Just this week, our families are adjusting to
economic uncertainty as retirement accounts and
investments lose value.
Let's give our students a little bit of good news. Let
them know we are thinking about their futures and
their economic wellbeing. HB 28 and the student loan
repayment program is a bright light and a clear
message that we want to invest in their future.
Mr. Worl thanked the committee and expressed appreciation
for their service to the state.
3:27:22 PM
Co-Chair Foster asked to hear from ACPE.
KERRY THOMAS, ACTING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA COMMISSION
OF POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND
EARLY DEVELOPMENT, shared that she was present to provide
information about the bill and student loan repayment. She
read from prepared remarks (copy on file):
I'm here to provide information about student loan
repayment and House Bill 28, as well as the higher
education investment fund as the funding source. Thank
you for having me here today.
What is student loan repayment?
To provide background, student loan repayment is:
An employer-sponsored benefit
It's an agreement in which employer agrees to pay
down an employee's student loan for fulfilling a set
of terms established by of the employer.
The employer determines the service requirement,
frequency and loan repayment amount
Any employer, private or public sector, can offer
loan repayment.
Why is loan repayment better than loan forgiveness?
Loan repayment is vastly different from loan
forgiveness. Loan forgiveness is when the state or
federal government provides a student loan to attend a
certain program of study and the student agrees to
work in their field of study after graduation in
return for the loan being forgiven. In Alaska, the
WWAMI program is a well-known loan forgiveness
program. Some of the benefits of loan repayment vs.
loan forgiveness are:
Loan repayment guarantees a return on the state's
investment
With loan repayment, public funds are going to
degree holders contributing to the state's economic
and social well being
The cost of administering loan repayment programs
are significantly lower than loan forgiveness programs
o Loan repayment does not involve costly loan
servicing, collections or litigation activities when
the recipients do not return to Alaska and work or do
not repay their loans
Why is loan repayment good for employers and
employees?
Student Loan Repayment Programs are growing as an
employer tool to recruit and retain talented workers.
Student loan repayment benefits both employers and
employees:
It reduces employee's financial stress by
reducing or eliminating student loan debt while
working
It helps employers remain competitive in a tight
labor market
Research shows student loan repayment programs:
Enhances recruitment efforts - employers offering
student loan repayment benefits are able to hire
faster
o Employers offering student loan repayment hire 13
percent faster.
Retain existing employees longer American
Student Assistance found employers offering repayment
retain employees 36 percent longer.1
Loan Repayment and HB 28
The benefits of student loan repayment programs are
well documented. Many state governments have shifted
to offering student loan repayment in place of loan
forgiveness programs to attract and retain talent in
workforce shortage areas. (Texas, Mississippi,
Pennsylvania are a few examples among many others).
Alaskan postsecondary graduates carry an average
of $35,346 in student loan debt.
According to recent surveys, 57 percent of
employees say student loans are a major problem.
86 percent of employees say they will commit to
work 5 years for a company helping to pay their loans.
Funding:
Funding for the student loan repayment pilot program
created in HB 28 is from the Alaska Higher Education
Investment Fund (AHEIF or HEIF) and totals
approximately $3M over three years.
In regards to the HEIF,
The Department of Revenue is the investment
manager for the AHEIF.
ACPE administers three programs currently funded
by the AHEIF:
o WWAMI Medical Education Program
o Alaska Performance Scholarship (APS)
o Alaska Education Grant (AEG)
In addition to its role as administrator, ACPE
also provides higher education policy information to
the State of Alaska.
Due to recent changes in the ACPE programs funded
by the AHEIF, an additional $1 million draw over the
next three years for a total $3 million draw from the
AHEIF, will increase the likelihood that fund earnings
cannot keep pace with spending from the fund.
o WWAMI is directly appropriated from the AHEIF,
while the APS and AEG programs are subject to a
maximum appropriation rate of 7 percent of the fund's
beginning balance for the following fiscal year
o Recent program changes impacting AHEIF funding:
.notdef The WWAMI program funding increased by 50 percent
starting in FY25 to $5.1 million per year to
accommodate 30 participants instead of 20.
.notdef Legislative changes to the APS program in FY24
resulted in expected APS and AEG program costs of
$25.5 million for FY26, which is 20 percent higher
than was originally expected. AEG funding is tied to
APS funding in statute, therefore expected program
costs for FY26 increased. Since the changes to APS
recently took place, it is unknown what the long-term
impact to spending for this program will be.
.notdef Combined, expected expenditures from the AHEIF
for WWAMI, APS and AEG have increased by approximately
30 percent between FY24 and FY26.
Increasing AHEIF spending by $1 million per year
over three years to fund HB 28 would raise projected
annual expenditures by 3 percent, further reducing
fund value but not significantly altering long-term
sustainability.
Summary:
Student loan repayment programs are increasing in
popularity and employers not offering these benefits
may struggle to compete in the job market
In 2021, 17 percent of employers offered student
loan repayment. As of 2023, that number increased to
34 percent of employers.
42-55 percent of high school graduates attending
college leave Alaska for postsecondary education and
approximately 35 percent return; approximately 1200 to
1500 Alaskans leave each year and only 420 to 525
return. HB 28 provides an incentive to bring these
Alaskans back to our state.
3:34:57 PM
Co-Chair Foster asked for a review of the fiscal note.
Ms. Thomas reviewed the fiscal note control code Ciavl with
prepared remarks.
Co-Chair Foster thanked Ms. Thomas for her review.
HB 28 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair Foster reviewed the schedule for the following
day. He did not anticipate having the 9:00 a.m. meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
3:38:53 PM
The meeting was adjourned at 3:38 p.m.