01/28/2026 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB24 | |
| HB20 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 24 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 20 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
January 28, 2026
1:02 p.m.
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Andrew Gray, Chair
Representative Chuck Kopp, Vice Chair
Representative Ted Eischeid
Representative Genevieve Mina
Representative Mia Costello
Representative Jubilee Underwood
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Sarah Vance
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 24
"An Act relating to aggravating factors considered at
sentencing."
- MOVED HB 24 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 20
"An Act relating to fees for paper documents; and relating to
unfair trade practices."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 24
SHORT TITLE: AGGRAVATING FACTORS AT SENTENCING
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) JOSEPHSON
01/22/25 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/10/25
01/22/25 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/22/25 (H) STA, JUD
05/01/25 (H) STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/01/25 (H) Heard & Held
05/01/25 (H) MINUTE(STA)
05/06/25 (H) STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/06/25 (H) Heard & Held
05/06/25 (H) MINUTE(STA)
05/10/25 (H) STA AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/10/25 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
05/12/25 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/12/25 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
05/13/25 (H) STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/13/25 (H) Moved HB 24 Out of Committee
05/13/25 (H) MINUTE(STA)
05/14/25 (H) STA RPT 4DP 2DNP 1AM
05/14/25 (H) DP: HOLLAND, HIMSCHOOT, STORY, CARRICK
05/14/25 (H) DNP: VANCE, MCCABE
05/14/25 (H) AM: MOORE
05/15/25 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/15/25 (H) Heard & Held
05/15/25 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
05/16/25 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
05/16/25 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
01/28/26 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: HB 20
SHORT TITLE: PROHIBIT FEES FOR PAPER DOCUMENTS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) SADDLER
01/22/25 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/10/25
01/22/25 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/22/25 (H) L&C, JUD
02/14/25 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
02/14/25 (H) Heard & Held
02/14/25 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
02/19/25 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
02/19/25 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
05/12/25 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
05/12/25 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
05/14/25 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
05/14/25 (H) Scheduled but Not Heard
05/15/25 (H) L&C AT 9:00 AM BARNES 124
05/15/25 (H) Heard & Held
05/15/25 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
05/16/25 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
05/16/25 (H) Moved HB 20 Out of Committee
05/16/25 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
05/18/25 (H) L&C RPT 3DP 3NR
05/18/25 (H) DP: BURKE, SADDLER, FIELDS
05/18/25 (H) NR: COULOMBE, CARRICK, NELSON
01/28/26 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE ANDY JOSEPHSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, presented HB 24.
REPRESENTATIVE DAN SADDLER
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, presented HB 20.
KAI ELKINS, Staff
Representative Dan Saddler
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the sectional analysis for HB 20,
on behalf of Representative Saddler, prime sponsor.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:02:16 PM
CHAIR GRAY called the House Judiciary Standing Committee meeting
to order at 1:02 p.m. Representatives Eischeid, Mina, Costello,
Underwood, and Gray were present at the call to order.
Representative Kopp arrived as the meeting was in progress.
HB 24-AGGRAVATING FACTORS AT SENTENCING
1:03:12 PM
CHAIR GRAY announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 24, "An Act relating to aggravating factors
considered at sentencing."
1:03:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ANDY JOSEPHSON, Alaska State Legislature, as
prime sponsor, presented HB 24. He paraphrased the sponsor
statement [included in the committee file], which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
In Alaska today, prosecutors may seek additional
sentencing for crimes motivated by bias, if the
perpetrator's action was targeted because of the
victim's race, sex, color, creed, physical or mental
disability, ancestry, or national origin. These crimes
are typically known as 'hate crimes,' as they would
likely not occur if it were not for the hatred of the
perpetrator towards members of a specific group or
class of people. HB 24 would add 'sexual orientation
or gender identity' to this list.
Before an act is deemed a hate crime, the defendant
must first be tried and convicted of a crime. It is
only during the sentencing phase of the criminal
process that these aggravating factors may come into
play, and only if the crime can be shown to be
motivated by bias against a particular class or group.
Currently, 47 states plus the District of Columbia
allow for sentence enhancement when the defendant has
been convicted of a hate crime. Of these statutes, 34
include sexual orientation as an aggravating factor,
and 24 include gender identity.
Tammie Willis is a vocal LGBTQ+ activist from
Sterling. In November 2019, while organizing an annual
Pride event, she found a threatening note containing
homophobic slurs on her car. Roughly a week later, a
large rock was thrown at her car while she drove to
work. On December 9, she was attacked in her home by
an knife-wielding assailant. She received dozens of
stitches, bruising on her arms, legs, and stomach, and
a concussion. These attacks occurred within days of
announcements touting Pride in the Park planning
meetings. It is clear that Mrs. Willis was targeted
because of her LGBTQ identity and advocacy.
Amending AS 12.55.155(c) to include 'sexual
orientation or gender identity' would not reverse the
attack Ms. Willis suffered. However, it would send a
powerful message that Alaska rejects crime motivated
by hate, and that we as a state are willing to punish
it accordingly. As Alaskans and Americans, we have a
constitutional right to be and express ourselves. We
must support crime victims who are targeted for
exercising these rights, and I urge you to join me in
supporting HB 24 to do just that.
1:07:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COSTELLO asked how aggravating factors are
addressed in the criminal system and whether multiple can be
selected.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON said the prosecutor can choose as many
aggravators as they feel merit consideration by the jury.
CHAIR GRAY interpreted Representative Costello's question to ask
whether multiple aggravating factors could be added to account
for a person's religion, race, sexual orientation, for example,
if more than one applies.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON answered yes, but it would be a "very
strange fact pattern," because the prosecutor would have to show
that each of these things applied. He shared an example in
reference to Wisconsin v. Mitchell.
1:10:23 PM
CHAIR GRAY opened public testimony on HB 24. After ascertaining
that no one wished to testify, he closed public testimony.
1:11:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON said the bill stuck with him because
the crime was obviously motivated by hate based on the victim's
sexual orientation. He added that most people could not be
targeted in this way because they don't share that orientation.
He explained that the bill would be a tool that is used by 31
other states.
1:12:23 PM
CHAIR GRAY expressed his appreciation for the bill and said he
understands the need for it. He shared a personal anecdote and
opined an aggravating factor is appropriate for such crimes.
1:13:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP stated that Alaska is making strides towards
protecting people who are attacked for being part of an
identifiable group. He said he intends to support HB 24.
1:14:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP moved to report HB 24 out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no objection, HB 24 was reported out of the House
Judiciary Standing Committee.
1:14:43 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 1:14 p.m. to 1:17 p.m.
HB 20-PROHIBIT FEES FOR PAPER DOCUMENTS
1:17:56 PM
CHAIR GRAY announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 20, "An Act relating to fees for paper documents;
and relating to unfair trade practices."
1:18:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DAN SADDLER, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor, presented HB 20. He paraphrased the sponsor statement
[included in the committee file], which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
House Bill 20 would prevent businesses from charging
customers an extra fee or a different typically
higher rate for services when they choose to receive
paper copies of statements, invoices and other
documents, instead of going "paperless."
Not all Alaskans have consistent internet access in
their homes. Unfairly being charged a higher rate for
the same service punishes them for something that may
be out of their control.
Additionally, not all members of Alaska's elderly
population are computer savvy and can easily access
online documents. This same population may be on a
fixed income and disproportionately feel the impact of
an additional service charge each month.
HB 20 seeks to end the system of charging different
fees or rates for customers depending on whether they
choose to go "paperless," and by doing so would
protect Alaskans from this unfair business practice.
1:20:31 PM
KAI ELKINS, Staff, Representative Dan Saddler, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Saddler, prime sponsor,
presented the sectional analysis for HB 20 [included in the
committee file], which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Section 1: Page 1, lines 3-11 Section 1 amends AS
21.36 by adding a new section, AS 21.36.525, which
prohibits insurers from charging an additional fee or
different rate for individuals who prefer to receive
paper copies of invoices, statements and other
documents. This section does not, however, prevent an
insurer from charging a fee for providing duplicate
copies of any documents previously provided.
Section 2: Page 1, lines 12-15, & page 2, lines 1-4
Section 2 amends AS 45.45 by adding a new section, AS
45.45.940, which prohibits businesses from charging an
additional fee or a different rate for individuals who
prefer to receive paper copies of invoices, statements
and other documents. This section does not, however,
prevent a business from charging a fee for providing
duplicate copies of any documents previously provided.
Section 2 defines "business" by the meaning given in
AS 43.70.110, which states a business is "a for profit
or nonprofit entity engaging or offering to engage in
a trade, a service, a profession, or an activity with
the goal of receiving a financial benefit in exchange
for the provision of services, or goods or other
property."
Section 3: Page 2, lines 5-6 Section 3 adds to the
list of unlawful business acts and practices in Title
45 to include violations of AS 45.45.940, established
in Section 2 of this bill.
1:22:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked how the prohibition of paper fees has
impacted business fees or premiums in other states that have
enacted a similar policy.
MR. ELKINS shared his understanding that New York enacted a
similar law and has not run into any issues.
1:23:02 PM
CHAIR GRAY asked whether the bill would ban discounts for
customers who choose to go paperless.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER answered yes. He explained that there
would be no cap on fees, but they cannot be differential.
CHAIR GRAY pointed out that there are expenses associated with
sending out paper bills, such as ink and postage, so going
paperless is a cost savings to the business.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER contended that doing business through
paper is the status quo and changes to that need to be
addressed. If businesses are saving money by using electronic
billing and offering a discount to customers, that would be
great, he opined, but to changing the status quo and charge an
extra cost for that does not seem fair. He added that
businesses still print out paper and do not proportionally
apportion those costs to the client. He asserted that these
customers are already paying a cost for service, and certain
expenses should just be part of the cost of doing business.
1:25:29 PM
CHAIR GRAY shared a scenario that further challenged the idea of
eliminating discounts for paperless documents, which he
characterized as government overreach.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER stated that this is not intended to
persist into the future forever, and those who prefer paper
would "move onto other things" with time. He said this is
intended to protect against digital costs. He added that small
charges add up and every little bit hurts.
CHAIR GRAY suggested amending the bill to only apply to places
where sending online statements is not feasible or unreliable.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER stated that there's no formal metric for
reliable or unreliable internet service. He acknowledged that
we live in a time where more people are availing themselves to
internet services, but there are people who prefer not to
operate that way and should not be penalized for doing so.
1:29:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA commented on digital equity issues in her
district and opined that the bill is a good step towards making
[paper billing] available for everyone.
1:30:16 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease at 1:30 p.m.
1:30:21 PM
CHAIR GRAY opened public testimony on HB 20. After ascertaining
that no one wished to testify, he closed public testimony.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER added that HB 20 would not apply to state
or government agencies.
1:31:55 PM
CHAIR GRAY announced that HB 20 would be held over.
1:32:13 PM
CHAIR GRAY offered closing comments on the committee's upcoming
agenda.
1:33:22 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 1:33 p.m.