Legislature(2025 - 2026)GRUENBERG 120
03/05/2025 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB101 | |
| HB77|| HB97|| HB106 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 101 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 77 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 106 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 97 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 77-MAIL THEFT
HB 97-ORG. RETAIL THEFT/FUND;MKTPLACE SALES TAX
HB 106-THEFT: ORGANIZED; MED. RECORDS; MAIL
1:20:21 PM
CHAIR GRAY announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 77, "An Act making the theft of mail or an
article within mail theft in the second degree" and HOUSE BILL
NO. 97, "An Act relating to theft; relating to organized retail
theft; relating to property crimes; relating to aggravating
factors at sentencing; establishing a statewide marketplace
facilitator sales tax; and establishing the organized retail
theft fund in the general fund" and HOUSE BILL NO. 106, "An Act
relating to organized theft; relating to theft of medical
records and medical information; relating to mail theft; and
providing for an effective date." [Before the committee,
adopted as the working document on 2/21/25, was the proposed
committee substitute (CS) for HB 77, Version 34-LS0144\H, C.
Radford, 2/20/25 ("Version H").]
1:20:53 PM
JOHN SKIDMORE, Deputy Attorney General, Criminal Division,
Department of Law (DOL), offered a comparison of HB 77 and HB
106 from a document, titled "HB 77 HB 97 HB 106 Comparisons"
[included in the committee packet], which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
Comparison of HB 77 and HB 106
•Mail Theft:
O HB 77 expands theft in the second degree to
include all types of mail, making it a class C
felony regardless of value.
O HB 106 includes mail theft under theft in the
third degree, making it a class A misdemeanor.
•Medical Records:
O HB 106 establishes that theft in the second
degree includes the theft of medical records or
other medical information, making it a class C
felony.
O HB 77 does not address medical records.
•Organized Theft:
O HB 106 establishes the crime of organized
theft, where a person commits theft in
coordination with three or more individuals who
have committed or attempted multiple violations
of AS 11.46.120 or 11.46.130. Organized theft is
classified as a class A felony.
O HB 77 does not include provisions for organized
theft.
•Clarifications & Exemptions:
O HB 77 defines mail to include private mail
delivery services and exempts agencies acting in
their official duties.
O HB 106 does not provide similar exemptions. No
specific definition but common meaning of "mail"
likely excludes FedEx/UPS.
1:25:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA observed that private mail delivery services
like FedEx and United Parcel Service (UPS) aren't included in HB
106 and asked whether the decision not to define "mail" was an
oversight by the department.
MR. SKIDMORE responded that it was not an intentional omission.
He reminded the committee that under current law, the severity
of mail theft is determined by the contents of the stolen
package and its dollar value. He added that the decision to
define "mail" would be a policy call for the committee to make.
1:27:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COSTELLO referenced her personal experience with
mail theft and suggested that the committee may want to consider
that criminals are using people's homes as a delivery point for
merchandise that they stole using the homeowner's identity or
credit card.
1:28:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked about deed fraud or home title theft,
which is the illegal transfer of property. She asked whether
this issue could be included in the bill.
MR. SKIDMORE said the fraudulent conveyance of a deed is in a
different section of statute, AS 11.46.505, and considered
forgery in the second degree. He added that the transfer of a
deed is a separate issue.
1:32:38 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease 1:32 p.m.
1:33:33 PM
CHAIR GRAY explained that the purpose of today's hearing is to
offer a side-by-side comparison of HB 106, HB 97, and HB 77 to
give a clear understanding of three similar bills. He asked Mr.
Sheldon to explain why HB 77 would raise the penalty for mail
theft to a class C felony.
1:35:11 PM
RYAN SHELDON, Staff, Representative Julie Coulombe, said the
goal is to give Alaskans a "steppingstone tool" and
differentiate the designation between possession, mail theft,
and identity theft with an escalation in penalty from a class A
misdemeanor to a class C felony to a class B felony.
1:37:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE UNDERWOOD asked how the bill compares to federal
penalties.
MR. SHELDON said federally, [mail theft] is a class C felony
without the escalation, which includes a $250,000 fine and up to
5 years in prison. In contrast, Alaska levies a fine of $50,000
and up to 5 years in prison.
CHAIR GRAY asked whether stealing Door Dash would be considered
a felony under HB 77.
MR. SHELDON answered no, a food order would not constitute a
mail delivery.
CHAIR GRAY sought to confirm that federal statutes contain the
definition of mail that's used in HB 106, which does not include
UPS and FedEx.
MR. SHELDON responded yes.
1:40:41 PM
MR. SKIDMORE offered a comparison of HB 97 and HB 106 from a
document, titled "HB 77 HB 97 HB 106 Comparisons" [included in
the committee packet], which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Comparison of HB 97 and HB 106
•Organized Theft:
O HB 97 establishes "organized retail theft,"
which applies to retail theft conducted as part
of a coordinated plan over two or more occasions.
O HB 106 establishes "organized theft," where a
person commits felony level theft in coordination
with three or more people.
•Number of People Required in "organized theft":
O HB 97 requires two or more people to coordinate
for organized retail theft.
O HB 106 requires three or more people for
organized theft.
•Scope:
O HB 97 focuses specifically on retail theft,
including acts such as concealing merchandise,
altering price tags, or transferring merchandise
between containers.
O HB 106 applies more broadly to felony theft
committed for the benefit of or in association
with a group, beyond just retail settings.
•Theft in the First Degree:
O HB 97 lowers the threshold for theft in the
first degree from $25,000 to $20,000.
O HB 106 does not change the monetary thresholds
for theft in the first degree.
•Theft in the Second Degree:
O HB 97 lowers the threshold for theft in the
second degree from $750 to $500 on the low end
and from $25,000 to $20,000 on the high end.
O HB 106 expands theft in the second degree to
include medical records but does not change the
monetary thresholds.
•Theft in the Third Degree:
O HB 97 lowers the threshold from $250 to $200 on
the low end and from $750 to $500 on the high
end.
O HB 106 includes mail theft under theft in the
third degree but does not change monetary
thresholds.
•Theft in the Fourth Degree:
O HB 97 lowers the threshold for theft in the
fourth degree from under $250 to under $200.
O HB 106 does not change theft in the fourth
degree.
•Other Changes in HB 97:
O HB 97 changes the threshold for the crime of
concealment of merchandise in various degrees.
O HB 97 modifies the threshold for criminal
simulation.
O HB 97 establishes a marketplace facilitator
tax.
O HB 106 does not address these issues.
1:47:00 PM
CHAIR GRAY asked when the price thresholds in HB 97 were last
modified.
MR. SKIDMORE estimated 6 years ago.
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP shared his understanding that HB 97 would
establish a Retail Theft Fund, similar to the Restorative
Justice Fund, that would fund law enforcement.
1:48:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked how changes to the price threshold
would impact the legal system.
MR. SKIDMORE said the change in dollar values would only affect
the classification or level of punishment.
1:50:11 PM
[Due to technical difficulties, sound was lost briefly.]
1:54:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE questioned the purpose behind HB 97.
1:54:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ZACK FIELDS, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor, explained that the rise in retail crime coincides with
the rise in high volume digital marketplaces, like Facebook
Marketplace and Amazon. He said the user fee proposed in HB 97
is designed to ensure that there are resources in local law
enforcement to combat theft driven by the shift to online
marketplaces. He added that understaffed police departments
only have the capacity to react to crime and lack the ability to
break up criminal networks.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked who would collect the tax and how it
would be returned to municipal public safety.
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS reiterated that the bill would implement
be a user fee to address public safety issues, not a broad-based
tax. From the designated fund, the money would be appropriated
proportional to the respective jurisdictions.
1:57:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COSTELLO asked why HB 97 was introduced.
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS said he had been disturbed by the closing
of small or medium sized businesses in Anchorage and the
inability for them to prevent excessive levels of theft, even
with a more robust law enforcement presence. Overall, he said
the bill was primarily driven by observations in the Anchorage
business community.
1:59:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA in trying to better understand the scope of
retail theft and how it impacts closure of small businesses,
asked whether local businesses had been surveyed on their
reasons for closing.
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS stated that Nordstrom's midtown branch in
Anchorage reported a loss to theft that's 10 times higher than
the national average. He shared further anecdotal examples from
local businesses that have experienced organized retail theft
(ORT) and deferred to his staff, Evan Anderson, to elaborate.
2:01:07 PM
EVAN ANDERSON, Staff, Representative Zack Fields, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Fields, prime sponsor,
th
spoke to the issue at the Anchorage 5 Avenue Mall where
Nordstrom had closed and reported that JCPenney experienced a 50
percent shrink rate until they decided to permanently close the
th
public entrance on 5 Avenue.
2:02:50 PM
CHAIR GRAY opened public testimony on HB 77.
2:03:42 PM
ROBERT MACKEY, representing self, testified in support of HB 77.
Shared a personal anecdote involving a stolen paycheck. He said
society is just learning the value of their digital self, and
that "taking the next step" would help defend citizens who are
not fully prepared and look to the legislature to provide
guardrails. He opined that the bill would be a step towards
helping law enforcement protect citizens from these types of
crimes.
CHAIR GRAY closed public testimony on HB 77 and opened public
testimony on HB 97.
2:05:56 PM
MARIAH MENDOZA, retail Security Director, Anchorage 5th Avenue
Mall, testified in support of HB 97. She said theft groups are
far more experienced compared to past years and are emboldened
with the knowledge of the crime's threshold limits. Because
they know what they can get away with and that they will be
cited and released, thieves are coming in multiple times per day
to steal targeted items like designer sunglasses. She stated
her belief that the bill would be beneficial because it would
make criminals aware that there would be consequences for their
actions.
2:09:44 PM
ROSE FELICIANO, Executive Director of Washington/Northwest,
TechNet, testified in opposition to HB 97. She opined that the
tax proposed in the bill would be discriminatory to the online
marketplaces that she represents. In addition, she expressed
concern that the fund would not be dedicated to ORT. Instead,
she suggested that a task force on organized retail crime would
be an effective tool that a number of other states had
implemented. She reiterated her belief that a tax on
marketplace dollars would be discriminatory and urged the
committee to oppose the bill.
2:11:46 PM
NATHAN WERNER, Captain, Fairbanks Police Department, testified
in support of HB 97. Overall he had observed an inability to
hold people accountable for these crimes and assumed that by
reducing the thresholds, the bill intends to increase
accountability. He shared statistics on the increasing theft
levels and shared his experience combatting ORT. He opined that
if passed, the bill would be impactful.
2:15:57 PM
DAVE CAVITT, Owner, Furniture Enterprises of Alaska, testified
in support of HB 97. He shared his personal experience with an
employee that stole $250,000 in inventory for a resale furniture
store and was not charged with a crime. He expressed his hope
that the bill would help prevent something similar from
happening to another Alaska business.
2:19:03 PM
CHAIR GRAY closed public testimony on HB 97. He opened public
testimony on HB 106. After ascertaining that no one wished to
testify, he closed public testimony.
[HB 77, HB 97, and HB 106 were held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 77 HB 97 HB 106 Comparisons.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 77 HB 97 HB 106 |
| HB 77 HB 97 HB 106 Comparisons.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 77 |
| HB 77 HB 97 HB 106 Comparisons.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 97 |
| HB 101 Amendment 1.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 101 |
| HB 101 FN Court System.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 101 |
| HB 101 FN Family and Community Services.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 101 |
| HB 101 FN DPS Integrated Victim Assistance.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 101 |
| HB 101 FN Law Criminal Division.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 101 |
| HB 101 FN Department of Correctins.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 101 |
| HB 101 FN Admin Office of Public Advocacy.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 101 |
| HB 101 FN Troopers.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 101 |
| HB 101 FN Admin Public Defender Agency.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 101 |