HB 97-ORG. RETAIL THEFT/FUND;MKTPLACE SALES TAX  5:28:56 PM CHAIR GRAY announced that the next order of business would be 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." [Before the committee, adopted as the working document on 3/26/25, was the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 97, Version 34- LS0109\T, C. Radford, 3/25/25 ("Version T").] 5:29:18 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE moved Amendment 1 to Version T, labeled 34- LS0109\T.3, C. Radford, 4/3/25, which read: Page 4, line 11: Delete "knowingly" Insert "intentionally" CHAIR GRAY objected. 5:29:56 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said Amendment 1 would change the word "knowingly" to "intentionally" to be more specific on the mens rea. CHAIR GRAY asked Mr. Skidmore to speak to the difference between knowingly and intentionally in terms of the payment of wages. 5:31:22 PM MR. SKIDMORE said the difference is being aware of the conduct versus having a conscious objective of the conduct. He added that both terms are defined in Alaska statutes. In response to a follow up question from Chair gray, he said if Amendment 1 were to pass, the state would have to prove that it was the employer's conscious objective not to pay the employee, as opposed to being aware and disregarding. 5:33:53 PM REPRESENTATIVE KOPP opined that wage theft doesn't seem to address legal justification. He shared examples and suggested adding language to make it clear that there could be a valid reason [to not pay one's employees the agreed upon wage]. CHAIR GRAY restated Representative Kopp's question, asking whether there is legal justification not to pay the employee's agreed upon wage. 5:36:36 PM MR. SKIDMORE did not know how the scenario posed by Representative Kopp would fit into the requirements under Title 23 or what the legal justification would be. He referred to page 4, explaining that wage theft would be committed if the employer fails to pay an employee or independent contractor their wage, salary, or agreed upon compensation. 5:41:06 PM REPRESENTATIVE EISCHEID asked Mr. Skidmore to restate the standard of proof for both knowingly and intentionally. MR. SKIDMORE said the burden of proof does not change because the prosecutor must prove the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Elements fall between two categories: mens rea and actus rea. He shared an example. He added that Amendment 1 would increase the mens rea to a conscious objective, which when including felony penalties, is beneficial to prosecutors. 5:44:46 PM REPRESENTATIVE UNDERWOOD asked whether both knowingly and intentionally could be included. MR. SKIDMORE said using both terms would be problematic. CHAIR GRAY maintained his objection. 5:47:19 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE, in wrap up, stated that "intentionally" is justified because this section of law pertains to felonies and would provide the according distinction. 5:48:27 PM A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Underwood, Mina, Eischeid, Vance, and Kopp voted in favor of Amendment 1. Representative Gray voted against it. Therefore, Amendment 1 was adopted by a vote of 5-1. 5:49:03 PM The committee took a brief at-ease at 5:49 p.m. 5:50:05 PM CHAIR GRAY announced that HB 97 was held over.