Legislature(2025 - 2026)BARNES 124
02/10/2025 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
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 | |
| Presentation(s): Housing in Alaska, Opportunities and Challenges | |
| HB80 | |
| HB34 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HB 80 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 34 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
HB 80-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING CODE
4:15:10 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that the next order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 80, "An Act relating to minimum standards for
residential buildings; relating to construction contractors and
residential contractor endorsements; establishing the Alaska
State Residential Building Safety Council; and providing for an
effective date."
4:16:00 PM
TRISTAN WALSH, Staff, Representative Carolyn Hall, Alaska State
Legislature, presented HB 80 on behalf of the bill sponsor,
House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee, on which
Representative Hall serves as co-chair. He began a PowerPoint
[hard copy included in the committee file], titled "HB 80:
State Residential Building Code." He stated that the State of
Alaska has local jurisdictions with building codes. He stated
that, outside of local jurisdictions, the International Code
Council (ICC) acts as the governing body for regulations. He
reported that the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC)
adopted ICC's International Building Code of 2018 and further
reported that AHFC is in the process of considering the adoption
of ICC's International Building Code of 2024. He stated the
[ICC] code is updated every three years.
MR. WALSH stated that building codes create minimum standards
with the primary goal being the safety of the occupants.
According to studies done by ICC and the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), 65 percent of counties, cities, and
towns across the United States have not adopted modern building
codes. He reported that 50 percent of construction done post-
2000 follows the standard set by the ICC. Additionally, he
reported that 30 percent of new construction occurs in
communities with no codes or codes that have not been updated in
at least 20 years. He stated that AHFC has adopted both the ICC
and the International Residential Code (IRC) with modifications
to accommodate for "local context."
MR. WALSH gave an overview of the benefits of the proposed
legislation. He reported that studies done by the [National]
Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) in 2019 found that the
adoption of IRC codes were cost-saving, with $11 saved for every
$1 invested. Additionally, these studies found that cost-
savings extended to retrofits and use of federal mitigation
grants. He stated that, as communities face challenges such as
flooding, hurricane surges, high wind events, earthquakes, and
fires related to climate change, the adoption of modern codes
increases the resiliency of structures and creates a more
durable housing stock for Alaska. Additionally, he asserted
that building to a higher code would save money in terms of
state/federal emergency appropriations in times of crisis. He
cited a graph on slide 6, displaying how much the State of
Alaska has invested in retrofits, and he noted that there is $4
saved for every $1 invested in retrofits. Finally, Mr. Walsh
cited a study conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy across
seven states that found the adoption of modern codes resulted in
"significant savings."
MR. WALSH, referencing slide 8, outlined consumer protections of
the proposed legislation, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Requires residential contractors to test and show
expertise in state building code for ongoing licensing
in residential contracting.
Exempts owner-builds and recreational cabins.
Creates protections for consumers by ensuring
compliance by residential constructors with a uniform
code outside of local jurisdictions.
MR. WALSH, in conclusion, talked about the relationship between
HB 80 and AHFC. He reiterated that AHFC has adopted the 2018
ICC Standards and is considering the adoption of the 2024 ICC
Standards. He noted that financiers typically look at building
codes in determination of loan applications. He stated that HB
80 would authorize AHFC to enforce regulations. Finally, he
stated that HB 80 would establish the Alaska State Residential
Building Safety Council with the purpose of advising AHFC on
regulations through public feedback on the proposed changes.
4:22:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER clarified that this is the first hearing
on HB 80 and the committee had previously heard invited
testimony on housing, but not on building codes.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS stated that proposed legislation was the result
of a request from the Alaska State Homebuilding Association
(ASHBA).
4:22:57 PM
JEFF TWAIT, Builder, Cornerstone Custom Homes & Design, gave
invited testimony and answered questions during the hearing on
HB 80. He stated that he is a builder in Kenai, Alaska, and a
member of the Alaska State Home Building Association. He stated
that ASHBA has been attempting to involve the State of Alaska in
residential building codes for about two decades. Initially, he
explained, the system was voluntary, with paid inspections.
After that, the statewide building code was constructed to
include everyone, homeowners and builders, and was intended to
serve as the code for every residential home in Alaska.
Finally, the scope of the building code was narrowed, to target
just residential contractors with continuing education
requirements such that they would be required to meet minimum
standards.
MR. TWAIT asserted that residential codes exist for life,
safety, health, and sustainability. He provided an anecdote on
smoke detectors and egress windows, emphasizing that there is
potential for death due to not building to a minimum code.
MR. TWAIT further stated that it is difficult to totally
quantify the increased cost of building to code as it is highly
dependent on how far one deviates from the building code. He
maintained that, although it may be cheaper up front not to
build to code, in the long-term, the payback is insurmountable
with regard to sustainability, maintenance, heating costs, life
safety issues, et cetera. He asserted that ASHBA should do more
consumer outreach and education to aid in raising the standard
for building. He stated that he is in support of HB 80.
4:27:59 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS stated that home insurance markets are changing
rapidly and there are insurers refusing to insure homes not
built to minimum standards. He noted that some weather events
in Alaska include wildfires and high wind events. He further
asked Mr. Twait how building to minimum standards might help
with insurance coverage.
MR. TWAIT commented that licensed residential builders are not
building to code due to affordability, as consumers are not able
to afford it. To address the issue of affordability, he
suggested an inclusion of a disclosure statement with detailed
code deficiencies as a possible amendment to the legislation.
4:29:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COULOMBE reiterated that one of the biggest
barriers to construction is red tape. She offered her belief
that HB 80 would increase red tape and cost for [licensed]
builders. She asked whether the extension of a bond could fix
the problem of "bad actors" in the building industry. She
queried whether HB 80 would help increase available housing and
pondered on the impacts of the proposed legislation in rural
Alaska.
MR. TWAIT responded that the proposed legislation would not
require additional permits; rather, all licensed contractors
with continuing education credits would be required to build to
a certain minimum standard. He provided an anecdote, stating
that, currently, a licensed builder could legally build outside
of city limits without a minimum standard. Further, he
continued that, were an earthquake to destroy a house built
outside of local jurisdictions, the homeowners would have no
legal standing against the licensed contractor. He stated that
extending a bond could help; however, he opined that may be
harder to implement than a residential statewide building code.
4:32:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BURKE commented that a statewide residential code
would provide necessary structure. She noted that there is a
lack of resources and emergency services in rural Alaska. She
asserted that fewer codes put more residential units and more
residents at risk. She offered her appreciation for HB 80.
4:33:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COULOMBE asked why local governments do not
create their own building standards, and offered her belief that
adopting standards would raise the costs. She noted that there
are municipalities with existing building codes.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS offered his belief that the codes proposed by HB
80 are not as strict as those of the Municipality of Anchorage
(MOA).
4:34:32 PM
MR. WALSH stated that HB 80, as currently drafted, would not
preclude local jurisdictions from adopting another standard.
4:34:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COULOMBE clarified that, were HB 80 to be
implemented in a community that doesn't have a local code, not
in a community that already has one, that particular community
would not have a lot of flexibility in the adoption of local
codes.
4:35:22 PM
MR. TWAIT responded that a community could adopt a stricter
code. If the Kenai Peninsula Borough decided to adopt the 2021
ICC Standards, it could amend certain stipulations out of the
code; however, once the standard is set, licensed builders could
not build to less than the adopted standards.
MR. TWAIT further stated that typically ASHBA is a right-leaning
organization and prefers limited government, which underscores
the gravity of the issue. He emphasized that the State of
Idaho, a state that is more conservative leaning, recently
adopted a statewide building code. He reiterated that only
licensed builders would be subject to the proposed legislation
under HB 80, not owner builders.
4:37:51 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS asked Mr. Twait to speak to specific examples of
extreme weather in Alaska and that houses built to a standard
are less likely to need repair or "fall apart" during extreme
weather events.
MR. TWAIT responded that, from the foundation up, there is a
pathway of connections built into a residence. He stated that
there is a vast array of climates and conditions in Alaska
identified in the codebook, such as seismic events, extreme cold
and darkness, and high wind events. Further, he stated that the
codebook has outlined methodologies for addressing region-
specific weather events.
4:39:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK asked if all construction projects, new
and existing, would be subject to the proposed legislation.
4:39:44 PM
MR. WALSH offered his belief that HB 80 would apply to all new
construction going forward. He repeated that AHFC had already
implemented the ICC's International Building Code of 2018 and is
considering the implementation of the ICC's 2024 code.
4:40:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK echoed Representative Burke's comments
about the importance of a building code in rural areas for the
protection of the residents. Further, she asked about the
barriers to the adoption of local codes.
4:41:00 PM
MR. TWAIT reported that Kenai, Soldotna, and Homer have adopted
local building codes, which represent approximately two-thirds
of the population on the Kenai Peninsula Borough. He
highlighted the importance of education in the adoption of local
codes, as there are residents that view the adoption of a code
as intrusive governance, not as a measure of ensuring safety.
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK queried whether a statewide standard
would actually be easier than local codes in every community.
She noted that most [licensed] contractors work in multiple
communities.
MR. TWAIT explained that the State Fire Marshal has adopted a
statewide building code for commercial buildings. He offered
his belief that it would not be a "big stretch" to adopt a
statewide building code for residential buildings.
Additionally, he noted that local communities could adopt a
stricter code than HB 80.
4:42:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER clarified that if a small town or village
had to follow a statewide building code but wanted to adopt a
local building code, the code could not be "less strict" than
the statewide building code. Further, he asked whether there
were exemptions to adherence to the proposed statewide building
code.
MR. TWAIT deferred to AHFC.
4:43:38 PM
JIMMY ORD, Director of Research & Rural Development, Alaska
Housing Finance Corporation, as an invited testifier, answered
questions during the hearing on HB 80. He responded that AHFC
has adopted a statewide building code [ICC's International
Building Code of 2018] with some "Alaska-specific" amendments.
He offered his understanding that, under Section 9 of HB 80, the
statewide building code would be the ICC's International
Building Code of 2018 that AHFC has already adopted.
4:44:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER clarified that a village or town could
have its own code, but it must still adhere to the statewide
code.
MR. TWAIT confirmed that was his understanding.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER, looking at slide 7 of the PowerPoint,
titled "HB 80: State Residential Building Code," queried the
commensurate estimate of costs of implementing new technology or
standards. He quoted the bullet point, stating that there is an
estimated "5-7 percent efficiency gained by the adoption of new
technology or standards."
MR. WALSH stated that he would follow-up with Representative
Saddler.
4:45:35 PM
MINDY O'NEALL, Executive Director, Cold Climate Housing Research
Center (CCHRC), gave invited testimony during the hearing on HB
80. She began by stating, in [2018], a 7.0 magnitude earthquake
struck Anchorage, Alaska. She reported that, within the MOA, 40
buildings suffered significant structural failure due to the
earthquake. She stated that of the 40 buildings that suffered
structural failure, 95 percent (38 of the 40 buildings) were
located in areas without [residential] code enforcement.
MS. O'NEALL stated that CCHRC is in support of the enactment of
a statewide building code with "sensible, compliant
alternatives" to "account for regional differences." She stated
that weatherization programs have saved an average of 28 percent
on energy bills for residents in Alaska. With the stunted
projections of natural gas availability in Cook Inlet, Ms.
O'Neall asserted, prioritizing energy efficiency reduces heating
loss. She noted that in Fairbanks, heating loss leads to poor
air quality and poor health conditions. In rural Alaska, where
diesel is barged into communities, communities are paying a
"premium price" to stay warm.
MS. O'NEALL asserted that the adoption of a statewide
residential code would increase safety standards and protect
homeowners. She maintained that a statewide code would
establish a standard, so that, regardless of region, town, or
village, the "basics are the same." She stated that local
jurisdictions without statewide standards create a patchwork of
codes, such as the State of Missouri, which is currently
instituting a statewide building code to simplify and reduce
barriers of different codes per jurisdiction.
MS. O'NEALL stated there are proven techniques readily available
to apply region-specific codes to avoid increasing costs and
burden of construction. She offered a few examples, such as
optional exemptions for communities with small populations,
using performance-based codes over prescriptive-based codes, and
allowing a longer timeframe for compliance from local
jurisdictions. She reported that CCHRC is a good resource for
best practices that meet environmental conditions and climates
that vary widely across Alaska. She stated the existing AHFC
"Alaska-specific" amendments were written with the goal of
ensuring sustainable and durable homes. She argued that a
statewide building code would not create barriers to residential
construction, rural or urban. She echoed other speakers, saying
that HB 80 would not affect anyone who is not a licensed
contractor. She concluded that swift and certain action is
necessary to meet the [housing] needs of Alaska residents.
4:49:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER commented that HB 80 would be a far-
reaching change to housing and construction in Alaska. He
stated his desire to hear more testimony regarding the proposed
legislation.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS stated his intention to hear from more
homebuilders.
4:51:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COULOMBE stressed the importance of weighing
public safety issues against increased housing costs and
regulatory burden. She maintained that Anchorage is a perfect
example [of the increased regulatory burden]. She cautioned
that the proposed legislation could increase both housing costs
and regulatory burden.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS stated the committee would like additional
follow-up on the cost gap between meeting a minimum standard as
proposed under HB 80 and current costs for building throughout
Alaska.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that HB 80 was held over.