04/08/2025 03:15 PM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB104 | |
| HB58 | |
| HB35 | |
| HB139 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 58 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 35 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 104 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 139 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
April 8, 2025
3:18 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Ashley Carrick, Chair
Representative Andi Story, Vice Chair
Representative Rebecca Himschoot
Representative Ky Holland
Representative Sarah Vance
Representative Kevin McCabe
Representative Elexie Moore
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Representative Zack Fields
Senator Robert Myers
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 104
"An Act creating and relating to the address confidentiality
program; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 58
"An Act relating to the office of public advocacy; and relating
to the public advocate."
- MOVED HB 58 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 35
"An Act relating to the use and possession of electronic devices
by prisoners."
- MOVED CSHB 35(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 139
"An Act relating to renting the governor's mansion; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 104
SHORT TITLE: ADDRESS CONFIDENTIALITY PROGRAM
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) MEARS
02/14/25 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/14/25 (H) STA, FIN
03/11/25 (H) STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/11/25 (H) Scheduled but Not Heard
03/25/25 (H) STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/25/25 (H) Scheduled but Not Heard
03/27/25 (H) STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/27/25 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
04/08/25 (H) STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: HB 58
SHORT TITLE: OPA: PUBLIC ADVOCATE APPOINTMENT
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) FIELDS
01/22/25 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/22/25 (H) CRA, STA
03/11/25 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
03/11/25 (H) Heard & Held
03/11/25 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
03/13/25 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
03/13/25 (H) Heard & Held
03/13/25 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
03/18/25 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
03/18/25 (H) Moved HB 58 Out of Committee
03/18/25 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
03/21/25 (H) CRA RPT 4DP 1NR
03/21/25 (H) DP: HOLLAND, HALL, HIMSCHOOT, MEARS
03/21/25 (H) NR: PRAX
03/27/25 (H) STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/27/25 (H) Heard & Held
03/27/25 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/29/25 (H) STA AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/29/25 (H) Heard & Held
03/29/25 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/08/25 (H) STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: HB 35
SHORT TITLE: PRISONERS: ELECTRONIC DEVICE ACCESS/USE
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) HIMSCHOOT
01/22/25 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/10/25
01/22/25 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/22/25 (H) CRA, STA
02/20/25 (H) CRA AT 9:00 AM BARNES 124
02/20/25 (H) Heard & Held
02/20/25 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
02/25/25 (H) CRA AT 9:00 AM BARNES 124
02/25/25 (H) Heard & Held
02/25/25 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
02/27/25 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
02/27/25 (H) Scheduled but Not Heard
03/13/25 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
03/13/25 (H) Moved CSHB 35(CRA) Out of Committee
03/13/25 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
03/14/25 (H) CRA RPT CS(CRA) 3DP 3AM
03/14/25 (H) DP: HALL, MEARS, HIMSCHOOT
03/14/25 (H) AM: HOLLAND, PRAX, RUFFRIDGE
03/27/25 (H) STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/27/25 (H) Heard & Held
03/27/25 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/29/25 (H) STA AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/29/25 (H) Heard & Held
03/29/25 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/08/25 (H) STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: HB 139
SHORT TITLE: RENT GOVERNORS MANSION
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) STAPP
03/17/25 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/17/25 (H) STA, FIN
04/08/25 (H) STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE DONNA MEARS
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, introduced HB 104.
TALIA EAMES, Staff
Representative Donna Mears
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: On behalf of the prime sponsor,
Representative Mears, provided a sectional analysis of HB 104.
KEELEY OLSON, Executive Director
Standing Together Against Rape
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 104.
RANDY MCLELLAN, President
Alaska Correctional Officers Association
Eagle River, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 104.
BRENDA STANFILL, Executive Director
Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
104.
APRIL WILKERSON, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Corrections
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
35.
Bob Ballinger, Staff
Representative Sarah Vance
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
35.
REPRESENTATIVE WILL STAPP
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, provided an introduction
to HB 139.
BERNARD AOTO, Staff
Representative Will Stapp
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the sectional analysis of HB 139
on behalf of Representative Stapp, prime sponsor.
STUART RELAY, Staff
Representative Ashley Carrick
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an overview of the fiscal note for
HB 139.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:18:18 PM
CHAIR ASHLEY CARRICK called the House State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:18 p.m. Representatives Moore,
Vance, Holland, Himschoot, and Carrick were present at the call
to order. Representatives McCabe and Story arrived as the
meeting was in progress.
HB 104-ADDRESS CONFIDENTIALITY PROGRAM
3:18:54 PM
CHAIR CARRICK announced that the first order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 104, "An Act creating and relating to the
address confidentiality program; and providing for an effective
date."
3:19:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DONNA MEARS, as prime sponsor, introduced HB 104.
There is a small but important group of people that have reasons
to keep their addresses confidential including peace officers
and victims of domestic violence, stalking, and those with
protection orders. This bill allows people to participate in
life without further endangering their families. This bill
creates an address protection program where people can receive
anonymous mail that is forwarded to their confidential address.
3:21:15 PM
TALIA EAMES, Staff, Representative Donna Mears, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Mears, prime sponsor,
provided a sectional analysis of HB 104 [included in the
committee file], which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Sec. 1: Adds the program to the duties of the
Department of Administration.
Sec. 2: Creates the program.
(b)requires a Post Office Box as a substitute mailing
address for enrollees and instructs the department to
forward mail to participants. It charges the
department with protecting confidentiality and
requires regulations to govern enrollment and
withdrawal.
(c)describes eligible participants as people sheltered
by a protective order and their parents, guardians,
children, and household members. It also admits peace
officers and correctional officers.
(d)prevents registered sex offenders from enrolling in
the program.
(e)requires state and municipal agencies to accept the
P.O. Box.
(f)describes the eligibility period.
(g)prevents the department from charging a fee.
(h)allows access to confidential addresses subject to
a search warrant.
(i)establishes penalties for unlawfully revealing a
protected individual's address.
(j)defines certain terms.
Sec. 3: Establishes a transition period for the
department to adopt regulations to implement the
program.
Sec. 4: Lets the department begin promulgating
regulations immediately.
Sec. 5: Sets an effective date of Jan. 1, 2026 for the
rest of the bill
3:23:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MEARS said that this is in addition to other
protections put in place for victims. She said that a post
office box in a small town could be risky.
3:24:19 PM
KEELEY OLSON, Executive Director, Standing Together Against Rape
(STAR), testified in support of HB 104. She has been the
Executive Director for the last 10 years. She stated this is a
critical piece of legislation and STAR would welcome an address
protection program. She highlighted her experiences in Alaska
and Montana as a victim advocate. She said most states, at
least 40, have these programs and have had them for decades.
She described someone trying to escape a stalker and how they
can make a safe move and keep their address confidential. She
learned from Montana's program administrator that the state's
program has cost a minimal amount per year to operate. Montana
had 56 participants in the program. The costs were a portion of
personnel costs. She talked about making the program available
to law enforcement. She thanked the committee for the
opportunity to testify in support of HB 104.
3:29:03 PM
RANDY MCLELLAN, President, Alaska Correctional Officers
Association, testified in support of HB 104. He described his
work history of 28 years. He said threats and attacks on
correctional officers are commonplace and officers are targets.
Correctional officers are trained and encouraged to ensure their
privacy. Their greatest fear is an offender who has made
threats against them, particularly against their family. He
shared when his own information was compromised and a violent
inmate was making threats against him. He said that one day
passing by his cell, the inmate slid him a printout of his
personal information including his home address. This incident
made him extremely fearful and overly cautious with his family.
Alaska is one of a handful of states with no address protections
in place for law enforcement. This bill would be a powerful
tool to provide protection for law enforcement.
3:32:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLLAND asked what happens when people still need
to provide a physical address; he asked how this would work for
someone enrolled in this program.
REPRESENTATIVE MEARS replied this is just one of several
protections; there are privacy protections built into other
systems.
MS. EAMES said that Section 2, [subsection] (e) makes it so
state and municipal agencies would have to accept post office
box use. She said there is a box that can be checked on voter
registration that would keep things confidential.
3:34:16 PM
CHAIR CARRICK asked how many states have something like this.
MS. EAMES answered that the last thing she recalled was that
there were five states that didn't have something along these
lines. She said most of these states don't include this for
peace officers.
CHAIR CARRICK asked who is included typically under these
programs.
MS. EAMES answered that usually domestic violence victims, but
deferred to another testifier to answer this better.
3:35:49 PM
BRENDA STANFILL, Executive Director, Alaska Network on Domestic
Violence and Sexual Assault (ANDVSA), proffered that most of the
address confidentially protection programs don't cover peace
officers - only victims of domestic violence.
3:36:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked about property owners in tax rolls.
He gave an example of home ownership, but information can still
be requested from the borough. He asked if someone would be
able to be taken off tax rolls.
MS. EAMES answered that this would not stop this situation.
This program is more for people who are fleeing violence. She
said that there would be a possibility of establishing a trust
to register a home and certain municipalities do have programs
established.
3:38:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked how many troopers, police
officers, et cetera are in the state and how many are served by
victim services. She said this sounds like a lifetime program
and the state would be paying annually. She inquired about the
maximum number of participants.
REPRESENTATIVE MEARS replied that there are many different
circumstances regarding this program. Some of the cases are
shorter term and this wouldn't be a lifetime program.
MS. EAMES said that those numbers were generated from other
programs. Ms. Olson may be better able to answer this question.
3:41:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked whether, after six years, the
program would cap out at 300 participants. She said she wants
to understand the number relative to total number of peace
officers and commented that it seems like the number would be
higher. She asked whether it would be a lifetime program or
whether there would be variability.
MS. OLSON answered that after 17 years, Montana had only 68
people using the service. Generally, it was for specific
purposes where there is a risk of an address becoming public.
She believes it is probably time-sensitive, and many people may
not use it due to the delay of the mail and convenience.
3:44:44 PM
MS. EAMES clarified that the mail forwarding would be for pieces
of mail that create an official record, such as enrolling kids
in school.
3:46:09 PM
CHAIR CARRICK announced that HB 104 was held over.
HB 58-OPA: PUBLIC ADVOCATE APPOINTMENT
3:46:23 PM
CHAIR CARRICK announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 58, "An Act relating to the office of public
advocacy; and relating to the public advocate."
3:46:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY moved to report HB 58 out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no objection, HB 58 was reported out of the House
State Affairs Standing Committee.
The committee took an at-ease from 3:47 p.m. to 3:51 p.m.
HB 35-PRISONERS: ELECTRONIC DEVICE ACCESS/USE
3:51:21 PM
CHAIR CARRICK announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 35, "An Act relating to the use and possession of
electronic devices by prisoners." [Before the committee was
CSHB 35(CRA).]
3:51:58 PM
CHAIR CARRICK moved to adopt Amendment 1 to CSHB 35(CRA),
labeled 34-LS0355\G.2, C. Radford, 3/31/25, which read as
follows:
Page 3, line 17:
Delete "[AND MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER
PURPOSE]"
Insert "and may not be used for any other purpose
or as a substitution for in-person visitation,
receiving mail, receiving medical services, or other
in-person communication"
Page 3, lines 21 - 23:
Delete all material.
Renumber the following bill section accordingly.
CHAIR CARRICK objected for the purpose of discussion. She said
HB 35 pertains to new opportunities for inmates in Alaska's
correctional system by receiving certain services on tablets.
She talked about touring the Lemon Creek Facility; it is
noteworthy that in aging facilities there are portions of the
facility being built but not utilized for various reasons. She
said one of her concerns with the current legislation is that
devices could be substituted for in-person services. The
amendment specifies that tablets cannot be used as a substitute
for in-person visitation, receiving mail, receiving medical
services, or other in-person communication.
3:54:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that she understands the intent, but
she had questions regarding the wording. She asked if Amendment
1 would prohibit someone from having visitation from across the
state via the tablet.
CHAIR CARRICK replied no, it would not. She said if service is
not available, then it's possible to use the tablet. She
explained options and selected preferred form of visitation.
Currently, the Department of Corrections (DOC) cannot fly out
individuals for visitation, so this doesn't open the door.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that she appreciates putting this on
the record and wanted to make sure that the intent is clear that
it would allow options. She asked whether the commissioner
would still have the flexibility for security reasons to allow
visitation only via tablet, like during the COVID-19 pandemic.
She thinks DOC extended it longer than needed. She asked, "Does
the way it is written allow the Commissioner flexibility?"
3:58:56 PM
APRIL WILKERSON, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Corrections,
stated that the intent is to not prohibit and eliminate in-
person visitation. The understanding is if in-person visitation
was not available for various reasons, then the tablets would be
a viable option. These tablets would be a substitution on a
case-by-case basis.
CHAIR CARRICK said that is her understanding of the language and
intent.
4:00:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT stated this amendment was discussed
with DOC. These tablets are to supplement not supplant
services.
4:01:15 PM
CHAIR CARRICK removed her objection to Amendment 1 to CSHB
35(CRA). There being no further objection, Amendment 1 was
adopted.
4:01:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE moved to adopt Amendment 2 to CSHB 35(CRA),
as amended, labeled 34-LS0355\G.3, C. Radford, 4/7/25, which
read as follows:
Page 1, line 1, following "prisoners":
Insert "; and relating to service of sentence by
electronic monitoring"
Page 3, following line 23:
Insert new bill sections to read:
"* Sec. 3. AS 33.30.065(d) is amended to read:
(d) Other than a prisoner for whom payment is
required under (e) of this section, the [THE]
commissioner may require a prisoner designated to
serve a term of imprisonment or a period of temporary
confinement by electronic monitoring to pay all or a
portion of the costs of the electronic monitoring. The
commissioner may require payment under this subsection
[, BUT] only if the prisoner has sufficient financial
resources to pay the costs or a portion of the costs.
* Sec. 4. AS 33.30.065 is amended by adding a new
subsection to read:
(e) The commissioner shall designate a prisoner
to serve the prisoner's term of imprisonment or period
of temporary commitment, or a part of the term or
period, by electronic monitoring provided by a private
contractor if
(1) the prisoner resides outside of an area
where electronic monitoring is provided by the
department;
(2) after considering the criteria listed
in (b) of this section, the commissioner determines
the prisoner is eligible for electronic monitoring;
and
(3) the prisoner pays all costs associated
with the electronic monitoring."
Renumber the following bill section accordingly.
4:01:41 PM
CHAIR CARRICK objected for purpose of discussion.
4:01:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said this is about addressing a gap. She
talked about this issue in her district with a constituent in
rehabilitation. He was well on the path to becoming a success
story. The department told him that he must move up to Kenai to
be in a service zone. Amendment 2 just clarifies that this
constituent would still be able to live in area and would not
need to uproot to a Department of Corrections service area.
This situation is impacting more than one individual, and she is
looking for a solution. She noted that the constituent appeared
in front of a judge to settle this situation, but the department
maintained that he needs to be in the service area. He must get
a new job, new place to live, and not be in his support network.
She said the proposed language would provide a solution for
people doing all the right things to become rehabilitated.
4:05:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE indicated that serving on a finance
subcommittee has shown him that electronic monitoring is a huge
cost for the Department of Corrections. He asked Ms. Wilkerson
why ankle monitoring is allowed in Kenai but not in Homer. He
added that he wondered if this decision pertains to the ability
to monitor or addresses the ability to enforce.
MS. WILKERSON responded that monitoring used to be available in
Homer but was eliminated because of a lack of resources to
respond timely and efficiently. The department is reevaluating
the electronic monitoring program with private monitoring and is
re-evaluating the situation and considering how to account for
time served on a private program.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked about a private contractor, such as
Life Alert, and whether this is what was being talked about with
private monitoring.
MS. WILKERSON replied that that is her understanding.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE answered yes.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE commented on payment responsibility and
asked if there is a contractor in place.
MS. WILKERSON replied there were a few private providers that
offer this service.
4:09:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLLAND pointed to language regarding a "private
contractor" in [subsection (e)] on line 16 [as numbered in
Amendment 2], and he said that it sounds like there are already
private contractors in place. He questioned what Amendment 2
would add. He then asked whether there are existing controls in
place for who can be a private contractor.
4:11:04 PM
BOB BALLINGER, Staff, Representative Sarah Vance, Alaska State
Legislature, confirmed that [private contracting] is already an
option. Amendment 2 would require the commissioner to do this
if certain requirements are met. To a follow-up question, he
confirmed the criteria is in place for approval by DOC.
4:13:09 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT said this is straying away from what
the bill does. She questioned, if all of this is possible right
now, what would happen if someone were not where they are
supposed to be.
MR. BALLINGER replied that currently the constituent is being
monitored. He said he wanted to attend church. If they see him
somewhere he isn't supposed to be, it may be a parole violation.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked whether the local police
department will get involved if he gets picked up for violating
geographical restriction.
MR. BALLINGER replied it depends on the kind of violation. He
offered his understanding that a report would go to the parole
officer.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT said that different places have
different levels of concern. Just reporting might not be
adequate. She said she wants to see this as an actual bill but
not an amendment. She said although this is conceptually good,
she cannot support Amendment 2.
4:16:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked how current law addresses a
monitored person who steps outside allowed boundaries.
MS. WILKERSON said that depending on the violation, there would
be coordination with local law enforcement. In response to a
follow-up question, she confirmed that whether in Kenai or
Homer, if there were a private contractor, there would still be
police involvement for someone out of bounds.
4:17:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY said she understands this is to help with
re-entry, but she was confused regarding the language. She
asked what would happen if prisoners don't have the resources to
pay for it.
MR. BALLINGER, in response to Representative Story, said the
cost [of private monitoring] would be covered if someone were
not able to pay for it.
MS. WILKERSON added that currently DOC does waive some of fees
for electronic monitoring. It is limited to only the area with
resources that have been budgeted.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked what the cost might be. She said it
doesn't seem right that DOC would not try to provide this
service.
MS. WILKERSON replied that the current cost is about $66-$70 per
day per offender. He said he does not know the cost for private
contractors.
4:21:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLLAND said that he understands that electronic
monitoring is already allowed, this just says it shall be done.
Second, the prisoner will pay the costs, but without financial
resources they would not have to. Amendment 2 would allow
prisoners to live anywhere they want and the commissioner would
be required to provide them with a private monitoring service
wherever they reside. He said the required payment makes him
uncomfortable because it takes away the ability of the
commissioner to make decisions.
MR. BALLINGER said that under the amendment, when monitoring is
required, then the individual would pay for it themselves. He
said this is outlined in "the code section."
4:24:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked what the Department of Corrections
thinks of Amendment 2.
MS. WILKERSON said that the Department of Corrections is neutral
on Amendment 2. The department understands the circumstances,
but commissioner is adamant that partnerships are needed. In
response to a follow-up question, she went over the different
types of monitoring, including global positioning system (GPS)
and breathalyzers.
4:26:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MOORE asked how many offenders are on electronic
monitoring (EM).
MS. WILKERSON replied that currently there are about 400
offenders. There are six locations for electronic monitoring.
To a follow-up question, she said currently there is one vendor
that rents equipment and provides monitoring services.
4:27:59 PM
CHAIR CARRICK asked if there was additional discussion. She
maintained her objection and said she would like to see the
subject of Amendment 2 addressed as a standalone bill.
4:28:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said she appreciates the conversation. The
scope of bill is helping those after incarceration to have
successful re-entry. Amendment 2 would help expand outside the
Railbelt. She wants to help people who live outside the main
communities succeed. The commissioner has discretion. She said
making this consideration now is in scope of the bill.
4:33:08 PM
The committee took an at-ease at 4:33 p.m.
4:34:04 PM
CHAIR CARRICK said she appreciated the intent of the amendment
and hopes to explore the concept further. She maintained her
objection.
4:34:26 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Moore, Vance, and
McCabe voted in favor of Amendment 2. Representatives Holland,
Himschoot, Story, and Carrick voted against it. Therefore,
Amendment 2 failed by a vote of 3-4.
4:35:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY moved to report CSHB 35(CRA), as amended,
out of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes and to authorizes Legislative Legal
Services to make any necessary or conforming changes.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE objected.
4:36:08 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Story, Holland,
Himschoot, and Carrick voted in favor of the motion to report
CSHB 35(CRA), as amended, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes and to
authorizes Legislative Legal Services to make any necessary or
conforming changes. Representatives Moore, McCabe and Vance
voted against it. Therefore, CSHB 35(STA) was reported out of
the House State Affairs Standing Committee by a vote of 4-3.
04:36:59 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 4:36 p.m. to 4:42 p.m.
HB 139-RENT GOVERNORS MANSION
4:42:35 PM
CHAIR CARRICK announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 139, "An Act relating to renting the
governor's mansion; and providing for an effective date."
4:43:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WILL STAPP, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor, introduced HB 139. He said the purpose of the bill is
to start looking at different programs the state utilizes for
cost savings. He said the governor's mansion is an asset that
the state funds.
4:44:45 PM
BERNARD AOTO, Staff, Representative Will Stapp, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Stapp, prime sponsor,
presented the sectional analysis for HB 139 [included in the
committee file], which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Section 1: Amends AS 44.19 (Office of the Governor)
and adds a new section (AS 44.19.032) directing that
the governor's mansion shall be rented on a short term
basis when the legislature is not in session.
Section 2: Sets an immediate effective date
4:45:38 PM
CHAIR CARRICK asked Mr. Relay to do a quick overview of the
fiscal note.
4:45:54 PM
STUART RELAY, Staff, Representative Ashley Carrick, Alaska State
Legislature, provided an overview of the fiscal note. This bill
has an indeterminate fiscal note but provides an analysis
[included in the committee file], which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
This bill requires the Office of the Governor to rent
the governor's mansion on a short-term basis when the
legislature is not in session, and the governor has
not reserved the mansion in advance. The Office of the
Governor would be required to adopt regulations and
establish a system for making the governor's mansion
available for a person or an entity to rent and to
collect the fee charged for renting the mansion.
The fiscal impact of this legislation cannot be
determined because occupancy by the Governor cannot
reliably be determined in advance and the mansion must
be available for the governor's use on short notice,
both during and outside of the legislative session.
Added costs associated with unsupervised occupancy
would include staff time to communicate with the
renter, to manage the bookings and to manage access to
the building, increased insurance and maintenance cost
that includes wear and tear on the facility and its
furnishings, potential modifications to the historic
building to ensure the privacy and security of the
residents and staff, and to complete security sweeps
after an event or occupancy of the building.
4:47:25 PM
CHAIR CARRICK questioned limiting the legislation knowing that
it must be available, and she asked why it would be rentable
only on non-session days.
REPRESENTATIVE STAPP replied the intent was to make it as least
prescriptive as possible. He wanted it to be the least
disruptive. He said, for example, that the governor's mansion
could host weddings to generate revenue. He said he has no
issue with amendments to monetize this asset.
CHAIR CARRICK asked whether it is known how many days have been
spent in Juneau at the mansion by governors while in office.
REPRESENTATIVE STAPP said it varies by governor. He said that
no governor in his lifetime has spent an entire year in Juneau.
4:49:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY pondered what the governor may think of the
idea.
REPRESENTATIVE STAPP said he mentioned it for a few years, and
he indicated the response was, "We will see how it goes."
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked the bill sponsor to confirm that the
response to the idea was to see how it goes.
REPRESENTATIVE STAPP replied that he cannot remember the exact
terminology that was used, but that was his interpretation.
4:51:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE said that when looking at the legislative
assembly building the same discussion was had. At the end of
day, the settlement was that if a legislator wants to store
stuff there, then the legislator will pay a fee. He asked if
the bill would require the removal of the governor's property.
He asked, "How would this be done?"
REPRESENTATIVE STAPP said that he left regulations up to the
Office of Governor. It would be the least disruptive and
prescriptive as possible.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE said that it is an interesting idea. He
offered his understanding that all but four or five states have
a governor's mansion. He asked whether this would be managed by
the legislature or the governor.
MR. AOTA confirmed that all but five states have a governor's
mansion. Alabama, Michigan, New Jersey, and North Carolina have
two state-owned residences for their executives. The language
in bill would allow the Office of the Governor to manage the
regulations.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked if any other states do this.
MR. AOTA replied that in his research he did not find any other
states. He said several states allow the executive residence to
be used for special events with a rental fee.
4:55:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked if the vague fiscal note has been
explored and why it wasn't done well.
REPRESENTATIVE STAPP said that in his experience with fiscal
notes, sometimes the Office of Management & Budget (OMB) writes
fiscal notes like they don't like the idea. He hasn't had a
chance to talk with the OMB. He said that he will explore it
further.
4:56:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that she is feeling cranky about the
fiscal notes; over time there is an inconsistency with fiscal
notes. She looked at another historic house; Jorgenson house is
rented $600-800 a night in the summertime. Also, they rent the
place for events. If OMB needed assistance, it could calculate
based off other rental portfolios. She talked about rental
mechanics and asked whether there is full-time staff on property
right now.
MR. AOTA confirmed that is correct, there are now people on site
that work in the governor's mansion. In fiscal year 2026 (FY
26), the budget for the mansion is $531,100 allocated for
personal services for a resident manager, a chef, and two
housekeepers.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that this fiscal note would increase
insurance and maintenance costs. She asked if they have
insurance for public events now and whether this insurance would
cover rentals.
REPRESENTATIVE STAPP said it depends on how they would craft
regulations. The building does have insurance. He questioned
what the chef does in a full-time position during the summer.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that she is a traditionalist and
doesn't want to rent out the mansion. She raised concerns about
fiscal notes and reiterated the desire for better crafted ones.
Noting that this is key to whether legislation gets forward
motion.
5:00:52 PM
CHAIR CARRICK said that while the House State Affairs Standing
Committee doesn't usually review fiscal notes closely, she
agreed that the fiscal note was inadequate.
5:01:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY commented that as a representative in
Juneau, she is proud of the capital building complex. The
governor's mansion is historic; she wants to see it treated as a
historic residence. It would be very important to protect the
investment the state has in this piece of history. She stated
that Juneau wants the governor, no matter what year, to feel
welcome in the city. She is hesitant to support the bill.
[HB 139 was held over.]
5:03:23 PM
CHAIR CARRICK discussed upcoming committee scheduling and
agenda.
5:03:45 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 5:03
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 139 Sponsor Statement version A.pdf |
HSTA 4/8/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 139 |
| HB 139 Ver A.pdf |
HSTA 4/8/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 139 |
| HB 139 Sectional Analysis version A.pdf |
HSTA 4/8/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 139 |
| HB 139 Fiscal Note OOG-HSE-4-03-25.pdf |
HSTA 4/8/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 139 |
| HB 139 Research FY 26 OMB Governor's House.pdf |
HSTA 4/8/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 139 |
| HB 35 HSTA Amendments 4-8-25.pdf |
HSTA 4/8/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 35 |