Legislature(2025 - 2026)GRUENBERG 120
04/23/2025 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 | |
| HB159 | |
| HB51 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 159 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 51 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 159-PROPERTY POSSESSION AND PROPERTY CRIMES
1:02:29 PM
CHAIR GRAY announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 159, "An Act relating to the removal of unlawful
occupants from residential real property; relating to the crimes
of trespass, forgery, and deceptive business practices; and
amending Rules 82 and 85(a), Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure."
1:02:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE RAUSCHER, Alaska State Legislature, as
prime sponsor, presented HB 159. He paraphrased the sponsor
statement [included in the committee packet], which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
House Bill 159 gives Alaska homeowners a faster and
safer way to reclaim their residential property from
individuals unlawfully occupying it. These cases,
commonly called squatting, are growing more frequent
and complex, often forcing owners into costly and
time-consuming court battles.
HB 159 creates a streamlined civil remedy allowing a
property owner or agent to request law enforcement
assistance in removing an unauthorized occupant under
clearly defined conditions. The owner must certify,
under penalty of perjury, that the occupant has no
lease, ownership interest, or family relationship, and
law enforcement must verify eligibility before acting.
To prevent abuse, the bill holds owners liable for
wrongful removals and provides strong remedies for
occupants who are improperly evicted, including
damages and full attorney's fees.
HB 159 also strengthens penalties for criminal
trespass, forgery, and deceptive business practices
and updates Alaska's civil rules to accelerate
eviction proceedings while maintaining fairness for
all parties.
Alaskans who lawfully own property should not have to
wait months or pay thousands to remove someone with no
legal right to be there. HB 159 offers a common-sense
solution to protect property rights and public safety.
I urge your support for this important legislation.
1:06:04 PM
CRAIG VALDEZ, Staff, Representative George Rauscher, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Rauscher, prime
sponsor, presented the sponsor statement for HB 159 [included in
the committee packet], which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Section 1: Section 1 lets property owners or their
agents request law enforcement to immediately remove
unlawful occupants from residential property without a
court eviction, if no rental agreement ever existed.
The process requires a sworn affidavit and
verification by a peace officer. Wrongfully removed
occupants can sue for damages. This does not affect
criminal trespass laws.
Section 2: Adds a new subsection to AS 11.46.320 (b)
defining criminal trespass in the first degree as a
class B felony
Section 3: Adds rental agreements to AS 11.46.505(a)
as a crime of forgery in the second degree
Section 4: Adds a new subsection making the sell,
lease, or advertise of a dwelling by an unauthorized
person a crime of deceptive business practices
Section 5: Clarifies that deceptive business practices
remain a class A misdemeanor, except in cases outlined
in the new subsection (e).
Section 6: Provides additional definitions of a class
C felony for deceptive business practices
Section 7: Adds a new subsection to AS 11.46.710
defining deceptive business practices as a class C
felony if the person violates (a)(6) of this section
Section 8: Directly amends Rule 85(a) of the Alaska
Rules of Civil Procedure to expedite eviction
proceedings. It shortens the eviction hearing timeline
from 15 to 7 days after filing, clarifies service and
dismissal procedures, and allows clerks to dismiss
inactive eviction cases without additional notice,
provided the complaint includes standardized notice
language.
Section 9: Adds a new section to the uncodified law of
the State of Alaska allowing for the recovery of full
reasonable attorney fees to an occupant who has been
wrongfully removed from a dwelling unit under
AS.09.45.950 enacted by sec. 1 of this act
Section 10: Sets a conditional effect requiring two-
thirds vote of each house to implement section 9.
CHAIR GRAY sought questions from members of the committee.
1:09:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE shared concerns expressed by her
constituents. She referred to page 5, section 6, and asked why
"dwelling" was selected over "real property.
MR. VALDEZ offered to follow up with the requested information.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked about criminal trespass in the first
degree and asked why $1,000 in damages was chosen for a class B
felony.
MR. VALDEZ said $1,000 was chosen as a benchmark for damages
caused to ensure that some damage was committed in the
commencement of the crime.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE expressed interest in revisiting the dollar
amount with the Department of Law (DOL).
1:12:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE UNDERWOOD shared that in her experience in real
estate, this is a large issue in her district. She said
something needs to be done for squatting rights and protecting
private property.
1:12:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked how creating a statewide civil system
would interact with local governments and their policies on
squatters.
MR. VALDEZ explained that the bill would give local law
enforcement the option to quickly remedy the issue as long as
there's no lease and the other stipulations outlined in the
affidavit are complied with.
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked how this would change existing
practices pertaining the removal of a person from a property.
MR. VALDEZ offered to follow up with the requested information.
1:15:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COSTELLO asked what would happen if someone's
remote, undeveloped property is sold by a perpetrator who lives
out of state.
MR. VALDEZ said it would be considered a deceptive business
practice and classified as a felony crime.
CHAIR GRAY referred to paragraph (5) on page 2, line 4, which
states that the occupant is not an immediate family member of
the property owner, and asked where the language came from.
MR. VALDEZ explained that in working with Legislative Legal
Services, the intention was to remain focused on squatters, as
opposed to domestic disputes.
CHAIR GRAY asked whether an adult child is considered an
immediate family member.
MR. VALDEZ answered yes. In response to a follow up comment, he
referred to page 4, line 29, which defines "immediate family
member" as a spouse, child, sibling, parent, grandparent,
grandchild, stepparent, stepchild, or stepsibling.
CHAIR GRAY said the definition creates even more concern.
1:18:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE sought clarity on page 5, lines 25-26,
which states that the section does not limit the rights of
property owners or prohibit a peace officer from arresting an
occupant for criminal trespass or another legal cause.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER said he would have no problem with
addressing this language. He shared that even in his small town
of Sutton with a population of 900 people, these crimes are
occurring.
1:20:46 PM
CHAIR GRAY invited Ms. Meade to speak to the changes to the
Alaska Rules of Court ("court rules").
1:20:56 PM
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Alaska Court System (ACS),
explained that the bill has one direct court rule amendment and
one indirect court rule amendment. She voiced her concern about
the change to the eviction procedure in Section 8, which changes
the timeframe for an eviction hearing from 15 to 7 days. She
opined that changing it to 7 days would be difficult to
accomplish and detrimental to the landlords and tenants. She
explained that during the 15 days between filing and hearing, a
lot of things take place, such as hiring an attorney, potential
mediation, or acquiring the rent, for example. She reiterated
her belief that this change would be counterproductive to most
evictions. The second court rule amendment is in Section 9,
which would indirectly amend Civil Rule 82, the attorney's fees
rule where the prevailing party gets a percentage of their
reasonable attorney's fees. The bill states that an individual
could recover 100 percent of the reasonable attorney's fees if
wrongfully ousted. This, she said, would be an indirect change
and a policy call for the legislature to make, as it would
require a two-thirds vote.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE inquired as to the percentage of attorney's
fees that are currently recoverable.
MS. MEADE said sometimes its 20 percent and sometimes it's 50
percent. The court exercises discretion based on the complexity
of the case.
1:25:06 PM
CHAIR GRAY asked why Section 8 is included in the bill, as it
applies to people under lease.
MR. VALDEZ described it as an attempt to speed up proceedings
and a "hanging chad" to the process. He added that the sponsor
is amenable to removing this section.
1:26:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER confirmed that he is amenable to
changing the bill and addressing these concerns and thanked the
committee for hearing the bill and being willing to correct
errors that may have been overlooked while drafting the
legislation.
CHAIR GRAY announced that that HB 159 was held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 159 Version A.pdf |
HJUD 4/23/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 159 |
| HB 159 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HJUD 4/23/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 159 |
| HB 159 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HJUD 4/23/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 159 |