SB 9-SURRENDER OF INFANTS; INF. SAFETY DEVICE  3:32:33 PM CHAIR DUNBAR announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 9 "An Act relating to the surrender of infants; and providing for an effective date." 3:32:46 PM SENATOR ROBERT MYERS, District Q, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, sponsor of SB 9 paraphrased the following statement: [Original punctuation provided.] SB 9 - Sponsor Statement SURRENDER OF INFANTS; INF. SAFETY DEVICE "An Act relating to the surrender of infants; and providing for an effective date." In 2008 Alaska enacted its safe surrender law to ensure that surrendered infants receive immediate care for their safety and provide protections for the relinquishing parent, thereby reduce potential infant death due to illegal abandonment. While nine infants have been surrendered since the safe surrender statute was enacted, the state of Alaska has recently had several instances of infants being illegally abandoned, sometimes leading to death. Traditional safe surrender laws require a parent to directly relinquish an infant to another individual. Yet shame, fear, and potential recognition may pose potential barriers for a parent in crisis to utilize the safe surrender law as it still requires the surrender to be made in person. Infant safety devices offer a possible solution to protect both relinquishing parents and infants. Infant safety devices allow a parent to surrender an infant anonymously through a climate-controlled device at a designated facility. Currently, twenty-two states authorize infant safety devices. Senate Bill Nine would authorize the use of infant safety devices as an additional method of infant relinquishment under the safe surrender laws. These devices would safely hold an infant with an automatic lock and constant video surveillance while immediately alerting appropriate personnel of the surrender. Infant safety devices would be placed in conspicuous areas with appropriate signage as determined by the Department of Family and Community Services (DFCS). An infant safety device may be located at hospital, emergency department, freestanding birth center, office of a private physician, rural health clinic, municipal police department, state trooper post, fire department, or other facility designated by the DFCS commissioner. The ability to relinquish an infant to a safe location rather than an individual allows additional anonymity for the relinquishing parent while still ensuring that surrendered infants receive immediate medical care. Thus, SB 9 preserve the protection of surrendered infants while also addressing the potential barriers of shame, fear, and potential recognition of a relinquishing parent during a time of crisis. SENATOR MYER stated facility consent is required for installation and payment for the devices is through private funding. He stated his office did not work with any particular group in the drafting of SB 9. It mirrors Maryland legislation that was unanimously passed last year. 3:35:46 PM SENATOR CLAMAN asked for the names of a few other states that have passed similar legislation. 3:35:59 PM SENATOR MYERS replied that the list of states with similar legislation is in the bill packet. CHAIR DUNBAR stated Alabama, Idaho, and Indiana are among the states listed. SENATOR MYERS offered to provide the direct research from the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). CHAIR DUNBAR expressed approval of the shortened summary. SENATOR CLAMAN stated he would like to see the NCSL analysis. SENATOR MYERS said he would provide it. 3:36:49 PM SENATOR GIESSEL expressed appreciation for the immediate emergency medical services (EMS) response when a child is placed in the device. She asked whether there is a provision in place for situations where the child is already deceased and there is evidence of child abuse. 3:37:20 PM SENATOR MYERS stated that current law permits safe surrender only when there are no indications of abuse, and SB 9 does not change that standard. He clarified that the basic provisions of the safe surrender law remain intact. SB 9 simply introduces an additional method for safe surrender. He added that if there is evidence of abuse, it could still lead to criminal charges against the parent. 3:37:45 PM SENATOR GIESSEL asked whether video surveillance could be used as a tool to identify the perpetrator. 3:37:58 PM SENATOR MYERS stated that the video surveillance is limited to the inside of the box and does not capture the person approaching it. He explained that the intent is to preserve the anonymity of the surrendering parent, which is a key factor in encouraging safe surrenders. 3:38:25 PM SENATOR TOBIN asked how authorities can confirm that the person surrendering the infant is actually the parent. SENATOR MYERS stated that under the current safe surrender law, no proof is required to verify that the person surrendering the child is the parent, and SB 9 does not change that provision. He suggested the Department of Family and Community Services address the question. 3:39:32 PM SENATOR TOBIN explained that she asked the question because she was raised by her grandparents and understands that there are situations where an infant may be surrendered by a family member who is not the parent but also cannot provide care. She said gaining clarity on how the process works would help her better understand the implications. 3:39:51 PM CHAIR DUNBAR called on Ms. Erikson to address the question and for Senator Tobin to repeat the question. 3:40:07 PM SENATOR TOBIN asked whether, under the current bill draft and related statutes, there is any process through which the department or another system confirms that the individual surrendering the child is the parent or legal guardian. 3:40:31 PM CARLA ERICKSON, Chief Assistant, Child Protection, Civil Division, Department of Law, Anchorage, Alaska, answered that confirmation of who surrendered the child is only possible if the individual's identity is known. In cases of complete anonymity and without external surveillance, the Department of Family and Community Services would treat the situation as an abandoned child and proceed with efforts to establish permanency. She stated her understanding of the process is there would likely be attempts to identify and contact other family members and that would be the extent of the current process. 3:41:16 PM SENATOR TOBIN stated that she did not want to focus on worst- case scenarios but explained that she often considers situations involving separated parents or caregivers who can no longer provide care. She expressed concern that if the surrender process remains fully anonymous with no way to confirm the identity of the person surrendering the child, there is a real risk that a loving family willing to care for the child might never be contacted. She said this is a personal consideration she takes into account when reviewing the legislation. 3:42:09 PM SENATOR HUGHES stated that the 2008 law granted immunity from prosecution to a parent who surrendered a child to another person. Regarding the nine cases where infants were surrendered, she asked whether information about the parent was provided to the Department of Family and Community Services (DFCS). She expressed concern that under the current proposal, that information may no longer be available. 3:42:57 PM SENATOR MYERS deferred the question. 3:43:25 PM MS. ERICKSON stated that in her experience with the Department of Law, the agency has been aware of the identity of the parent in safe surrender cases. She clarified that she was not aware of any case involving a fully anonymous or "clean, safe surrender" where the parent left the child and walked away without providing any information. She emphasized her understanding that the department had identifying information. 3:43:50 PM SENATOR HUGHES sought to address Senator Tobin's concern by stating that the intent behind safe surrender options is to account for factors like fear and embarrassment that a parent may experience. She questioned whether requiring a parent to fill out and sign a form affirming their identity and placing it with the baby in the device would discourage use. She noted that although the act remains private, adding a signed document might still feel intrusive. 3:44:41 PM SENATOR MYERS stated that SB 9 aims to provide an opportunity for parents to voluntarily include identifying and medical information when surrendering a child, which is the ideal outcome. He emphasized, however, that the priority remains preserving the child's life. He acknowledged that while additional information is valuable, the first and most critical step is ensuring the child survives. He concluded that this focus guided the direction of the SB 9. 3:45:36 PM THERESA WOLSTAD, Staff, Senator Robert Myers, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, provided the sectional analysis for SB 9: [Original punctuation provided.] SB 9 ver. I Sectional Analysis SURRENDER OF INFANTS; INF. SAFETY DEVICE "An Act relating to the surrender of infants; and  providing for an effective date."  Section 1: AS 47.10.013 (c) Page 1, Lines 3-15 Page 2,  Lines 1-18.  This section authorizes an infant safety device as a location a parent may safely surrender an infant. Establishes appropriate locations for infant safety devices and authorizes the Commissioner of Family and Community Services to designate other appropriate facilities and locations. Section 2: AS 47.10.013(d) Page 2, Line 19-31, Page 3,  Lines 1-2.  Amends AS 47.10.013(d) with conforming statutory references as made in section one. Section 3: AS 47.10.013(e) Page 3, Line 3-6. Amends AS 47.10.013(e) with conforming language which adds "designated" to authorized facilities. Section 4: AS 47.10.013 Page 3, Lines 7-31, Page 4,  Lines 1. This section requires a designated facility to notify the nearest office of the Department of Family and Community Services that the infant has been surrendered. The Department may provide training to employees of a designated facility regarding implementation and compliance with Alaska safe surrender laws. This section further establishes requirements for infant safety devices including: 1. Located within a conspicuous location that is visible to designated facility employees. 2. Climate-controlled. 3. Clearly marked with appropriate signage. 4. Equipped with an automatic 911 emergency system dispatch request for emergency medical response to the device location, a 24-hour video surveillance system, and automatic security lock after deposit. Section 5: Page 4, Line 2. This section establishes an effective date for the bill of July 1 st, 2026. 3:47:48 PM CHAIR DUNBAR announced invited testimony on SB 9. 3:48:03 PM DOUGLAS SCHRAGE, Chief, Anchorage Fire Department, Anchorage, Alaska, testified by invitation on SB 9 expressing strong support for the bill. He noted that Alaska's current safe haven law, like those in all 50 states, provides immunity from prosecution for a parent who surrenders a newborn to a designated professional. He explained that while the Anchorage Fire Department has received infants under this law, there have also been tragic cases of unsafe abandonment. He identified the face-to-face handoff requirement as a significant barrier due to stigma and fear, and stated that safe haven baby boxes offer a safer, anonymous alternative. MR. SCHRAGE clarified that there is no legal requirement to collect identifying information during a live handoff, though officials use a voluntary questionnaire to request medical or background information. He stated that the same voluntary approach would apply to baby boxes, with signage encouraging completion of the form but no obligation to do so. He explained that baby boxes are typically installed in fire stations due to their 24-hour staffing, and are funded by donations. MR. SCHRAGE emphasized that SB 9 is necessary to amend AS 47.10.013, which currently requires a live handoff and does not account for the use of anonymous baby boxes. He concluded that the bill would allow for safe, anonymous surrender and provide legal immunity, which he believes is a positive and necessary development. 3:53:45 PM SENATOR CLAMAN congratulated Mr. Schrage on the birth of his granddaughter and becoming "Grandpa Schrage." 3:54:01 PM SENATOR HUGHES asked about the cost of an infant safe surrender device. She also inquired how public awareness would be handled if one or more of these devices were installed in a community. 3:54:29 PM MR. SCRAGE stated that he did not know the exact cost of the infant safe surrender boxes but estimated them to be in the tens of thousands of dollars. He explained that installation requires building modifications for alarms, lighting, electrical systems, and environmental controls to meet safety standards. MR. SCHRAGE said boxes would be placed in strategic, accessible locations near main transportation routes. He described how signage, public education campaigns, and media coverage, such as news stories and social media, would inform the public. He added that flyers could be distributed at shelters, high-density housing, and other locations where individuals needing the service might be reached. 3:56:09 PM SENATOR HUGHES asked whether the cost of the infant surrender boxes would be covered by the municipality or if nonprofits would be expected to raise funds. She inquired if any consideration had been given to how the funding would be handled. MR. SCHRAGE stated that fundraising efforts have been significant, and he believed enough money had been raised to install at least one safe surrender box in Anchorage, though he was not certain. He clarified that there is no current plan for the municipality to fund the boxes directly. However, he noted that if a fire station were to be newly built or remodeled, it would be reasonable to include the cost of a surrender box as part of the construction project. 3:57:29 PM JULIE CONDELL, Lead Dispatcher, Anchorage Fire Department, Anchorage, Alaska, testified by invitation on SB 9. She said she has 18 years of experience handling 911 emergencies. She spoke in strong support of SB 9 stating the bill adds another surrender option without removing existing legal avenues and highlighted the value of anonymity, which confidentiality alone does not provide. She stressed that many child abandonment cases stem from fear of being identified and described infant abandonment as a preventable form of trauma. She shared multiple real incidents, including a 2013 case in Eagle River where a baby was abandoned in a park and later found deceased, and a 2021 case in Fairbanks where a baby was left in a box in one- degree weather. She also cited a 2024 case in Anchorage where a baby was found deceased just one block from a fire station. She concluded that the ability to offer anonymity through safe surrender boxes could prevent such tragedies and save lives, reinforcing that protecting life should remain the top priority. 4:01:18 PM LONNY MARLEY, Council Member, City of Fairbanks, Fairbanks, Alaska, testified by invitation on SB 9. He stated that he has been an advocate for infant safe surrender options since December 31, 2021, when a baby was found in a cardboard box on the side of the road on Chena Pump Road. He said SB 9 is a clear and necessary step. He shared that, based on his research through a firm in Florida, the cost of a baby box is approximately $22,000, with an additional annual fee for maintenance and certification. He mentioned that the Knights of Columbus, although not present in Fairbanks, have funded boxes. He identified three possible locations for installation in Fairbanks. He expressed concern that the fire station may be unstaffed at times due to emergency calls and emphasized the importance of choosing a staffed, accessible location. He concluded by referencing recent child abuse cases, including the bludgeoning deaths of two toddlers, and questioned whether those tragedies could have been prevented if baby boxes had been available as an early intervention option. 4:03:48 PM CHAIR DUNBAR concluded invited testimony on SB 9. 4:03:55 PM CHAIR DUNBAR opened public testimony on SB 9. 4:04:11 PM PAMELA SAMASH, representing self, Nenana, Alaska, testified in support of SB 9. She stated that she and others have waited years for the passage of SB 9 and expressed strong support on behalf of Right to Life Interior Alaska. She described the bill as an answer to prayer and shared that a fire official in Nenana also supports the bill and wants a baby box in that community. She emphasized the urgency of safe surrender options in Alaska due to extreme cold, noting that other, warmer states already have baby boxes in place. She shared a confidential account of a mother who, due to lifelong trauma, would not have surrendered her baby face to facehighlighting the importance of anonymous options. She said funding is not a barrier, as Interior Right to Life is ready to organize fundraisers in Fairbanks, and representatives from the Knights of Columbus have participated in past events and could help as well. She concluded by urging the committee to move forward so the community can act. 4:06:43 PM SENATOR GIESSEL clarified that the Knights of Columbus is a very active organization within the Catholic Church and has a presence anywhere a Catholic Church exists in Alaska. 4:07:19 PM KEN SPIERS, representing self, Fairbanks, Alaska, testified in support of SB 9 by stating he agrees with others who have testified in support of the bill. He also noted his affiliation with Interior Right to Life. 4:08:05 PM CHAIR DUNBAR closed public testimony on SB 9. 4:08:15 PM SENATOR TOBIN stated that she had questions about the bill's language but began by raising concerns she encountered online regarding opposition from tribal communities in other states. She noted that some tribal groups strongly oppose anonymous infant surrender due to concerns about maintaining tribal connections for surrendered children. She asked whether any conversations had taken place with tribal communities in Alaska to address these concerns. 4:08:49 PM SENATOR MYERS stated that no direct conversations had taken place with tribal communities regarding SB 9. However, he confirmed discussions with the Department of Law and the Office of Children's Services (OCS), recognizing that tribal connection is a significant concern. He explained that under the existing safe surrender law, OCS has policies to contact tribes when a child appears to be a tribal member. He acknowledged the challenge of confirming identity without a name and noted that one of the departments could provide more detail on those procedures. 4:09:48 PM MS. ERICKSON stated that the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) applies to any child who enters state custody under AS 47.10, including through the proposed statutory change under AS 47.10.011. She explained that a child surrendered anonymously would trigger a child-in-need-of-aid proceeding, which requires efforts to identify the child's parents. She noted that, in her experience, OCS has never begun a case without at least some information about the child or one parent. She acknowledged she could not speak to the exact procedures OCS would follow in a case with no identifying information but confirmed that existing policies and laws already require notification and involvement of tribes in accordance with ICWA. 4:10:51 PM CHAIR DUNBAR asked whether the list of authorized safe surrender locations in SB 9, page 2, line 8 should be expanded to include additional tribal facilities. He pointed out that AS 47.32.900 defines "rural health clinic," but some tribal and community health centers in urban areas, such as Anchorage, may not fall under that definition. He noted that while hospitals would likely include facilities like the Alaska Native Medical Center (ANMC), there may be other tribal health centers that are not classified as rural clinics or hospitals and asked whether those should be explicitly included in the legislation. 4:12:09 PM SENATOR MYERS responded by referencing the Chief Andrew Isaac Health Center (CAIHC) in Fairbanks as an example of a tribal facility that is not a full hospital but located near one. He acknowledged that it is not currently covered under the listed definitions and agreed that the question was valid, although the issue had not been specifically addressed during bill drafting. He stated that, based on national patterns, most communities in Alaska, except Anchorage, would likely only install one baby box, making it unlikely for both Fairbanks Memorial Hospital and CAIHC to each have one. He clarified that the term "rural health clinic" is defined under AS 47.32.900 and includes certain health care facilities in rural areas but excludes rehabilitation and mental health treatment centers. He expressed openness to the idea of including more facility types but noted uncertainty about how often such an addition would be used. He suggested that the bill already grants the commissioner authority to designate additional approved sites, which could include the kinds of tribal health centers in question. He added that the current list is modeled after Maryland's law and was meant to serve as a general framework, not a limit. 4:14:00 PM CHAIR DUNBAR emphasized the significant role tribal entities play in Alaska's healthcare system, public safety, and other areas. He expressed a preference for explicitly including tribal health facilities in the list of authorized locations for safe surrender devices. He noted that some clinics in Anchorage are neither hospitals nor classified as rural health clinics and may be unnecessarily excluded under the current language. He acknowledged the bill's provision allowing the commissioner to approve additional sites but stated that tribal facilities should not have to seek special permission to be included. He suggested further discussion with the Department of Law on the matter. 4:14:57 PM SENATOR HUGHES stated that many urban and rural clinics are not open 24 hours, making it necessary to have an on-call health care provider if a clinic were to have a device. She asked why an optional form for a parent to fill out was not included on page 3, line 11 of SB 9. 4:16:42 PM SENATOR MYERS replied that the DFCS has a form that is distributed to police and fire departments so that a parent surrendering an infant can choose whether to provide the information. He said he has no objection to including language in SB 9 stating that forms are placed inside the safe surrender devices. 4:17:52 PM SENATOR CLAMAN asked how often the identity of a surrendering parent remains unknown. 4:19:12 PM MS. ERICKSON replied that, in her experience, the identity of at least one parent is known. She said that when someone surrenders a child, it is to the state, which begins the child-in-need-of- aid proceeding. There is nothing in the language of AS 47.13 that relieves the state of the obligation to initiate the proceeding, which by definition means the state needs to try to identify the parent and offer services or another path, such as relinquishment, where tribes are notified. The statute shields a parent from criminal prosecution but not necessarily from other processes that could make the parent's identity known. 4:20:26 PM SENATOR CLAMAN contrasted the child-in-need-of-aid process to the anonymity offered when providing rape test kits, stating that even though a person may attempt to deliver a child anonymously, as a practical matter, their name is brought into the child-in-need-of-aid proceeding, where they provide their perspective before the court rules on adoption. 4:21:16 PM MS. ERICKSON replied that is correct. 4:21:26 PM SENATOR CLAMAN commented that the process has a lot of merit. 4:21:38 PM SENATOR TOBIN said many countries have phased out the use of the device due to the United Nations' stance that a child has a right to know their identity. The United Nations fears there was misuse of the devices, such as surrendering larger children. She asked if there is a definition for "infant" in statute and whether there are restrictions on the size of the device. 4:22:35 PM SENATOR MYERS replied that current statute defines an infant as 21 days old or younger, which is not altered in SB 9. The definition of "infant" in other states ranges from 7 days to 60 days. He said that while he is not averse to a change in definition, his understanding is that if a child is significantly larger than the defined age, the provision for safe surrender no longer applies, making criminal prosecution possible. 4:23:51 PM SENATOR TOBIN responded that her frustration with SB 9 and anonymous surrender is the inability to identify a parent in the event an older child is surrendered. She asked whether the device is large enough to hold an older child and if there are constraints on the device that would prevent a larger child from being placed in it. SENATOR MYERS said his office found three companies that make the devices and obtained the specifications for one of them. He said that while a 45-day-old infant might fit, there is not enough space for a larger child, such as a three-year-old. 4:25:59 PM SENATOR TOBIN requested that future dialog on SB 9 include size restrictions to deter negative actions. CHAIR DUNBAR asked if people put pets in the devices. 4:26:45 PM SENATOR MYERS replied that he has heard of that happening, as the devices are in public locations. As with many things, there is the possibility for abuse. 4:27:19 PM CHAIR DUNBAR held SB 9 in committee.