Senate Labor & Commerce, 5/15/26, 1:30pm

Good afternoon. I'd like to call this meeting of the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee to order. The time is 1:38 PM. We are in Belts Room 105 of the Thomas Stewart Building in the nation's most beautiful capital city of Juneau, Alaska. Today is Friday.

May 15th. It is opening day of walleye season in Upper Michigan and my sister Jana Nordman's wedding anniversary. Members present are Senator Gray Jackson, Senator Dunbar, Senator Yunt, and myself, Chair Bjorkman. Let the record reflect that we have a quorum to conduct business. Welcome everyone to Senate Labor and Commerce.

Please turn off or silence your cell phones. I would like to recognize and welcome our recording secretary, Carrie Tupo, and our LAL moderator, Doug Bridges. Our agenda for today is Senate Bill 268, Sick Leave Exemption Fish Processors; Senate Bill 283, Minimum Nursing Staff Levels in Hospitals; House Bill 363, Alcohol Patriotic Organizations and Club Licenses; HB 50, Snow Classics; and HB 25, Disposal Food Service Ware has been added to our agenda. First, I would like to take up Senate Bill 268. This is the second hearing for the bill.

During our first hearing, we had a presentation of the bill and we took invited testimony. I would like to invite staff to the bill sponsor, Gary Stevens, Tim Lampkin, to the table to provide a brief recap of the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. For the record, my name is Tim Lampkin, staff to Senator Stevens. Before you is a bill brought to you at the request of the seafood processing sector in response to the 2024 Ballot Measure 1 that included some provisions for, uh, paid sick leave.

This bill would help recognize and to gingerly respond and try to adjust that ballot measure to recognize that certain industries operate under particularly unique seasonal, operational, and economic conditions. And so with that, I— we're not here really to do anything but to shepherd the bill through our process. And I invite our star witnesses, uh, Ms. Julie Decker and Nicole Kimball, to proceed. Very good. Are there any questions for Ms. Decker or Ms. Kimball?

Hearing and seeing none, we will now open public testimony for Senate Bill 268. Is there anyone in the room or online wishing to testify?

Seeing and hearing none, we will close public testimony on Senate Bill 268. Mr. Lampkin, do you have any closing remarks? He says no. Thank you. Any further discussion or committee questions before we look to the will of the committee?

Seeing and hearing none, what are the wishes of the committee? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to report Senate Bill 268, version 34, Lima Sierra 1527, testa— testa mena, from committee with individual recommendations and 2 attached fiscal notes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Is there any objection?

Seeing and hearing no objection, Senate Bill 268, version 34-LS1527/T, is reported from committee with individual recommendations and 2 attached fiscal notes. We'll take a brief at ease while we sign the paperwork and set up for the next bill.

Back on the record is 1:43 PM. Next up we'll take up Senate Bill 283 sponsored by the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee. This is our first hearing on the bill. To present the bill we have my staff, Laura Asche. Who looks a lot like Conrad Jackson.

Thank you for joining us. I'm sorry, I just read the page. Please begin your presentation of the bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the record, Conrad Jackson, staff to Senator Bjorkman and the Labor and Commerce Committee.

Senate Bill 283 before the members at this time deals with staffing standards for registered nurses. When we or our loved ones go into a hospital in Alaska, We deserve to have quality healthcare. We should be able to have confidence that our needs will be met and not overlooked by well-meaning, competent nurses who just have to care for too many patients at one time. Having too few nurses on shift for the number of patients receiving care in healthcare facilities is associated with higher rates of medical errors, infections, falls, longer hospital stays, and avoidable deaths. Establishing minimum nurse-to-staff ratios— I'm sorry, nurse-to-patient ratios— would better ensure Alaska patients have access to quality healthcare.

It would also allow Alaska to better attract and retain healthcare workers, improving both patient safety and workforce stability. Senate Bill 283 would establish minimum registered nurse staffing standards for hospitals. Will require hospitals to create a staffing committee comprised of registered nurses and other staff providing direct patient care to develop and oversee annual staffing plans tailored to their specific facility. It will provide for exceptions to the ratio standards, including an unforeseen emergency situation, unforeseen weather conditions, and hospitals located in rural communities or a community that declare temporary staffing emergency. The bill will also protect nurses from retaliation when they report staffing violations or refuse assignments that would violate the safety standards.

And online, Mr. Chairman, we have 3, 3 folks who can speak to the particulars of the situation in the industry and the importance of this legislation. First, Ms. Shannon Davenport, also Jolene Corliss. And Paige Spence. Very good. Thank you very much, Mr. Jackson.

Are there any questions from committee members? Seeing and hearing none, we'll go now to invited testifiers. First up, Ms. Shannon Davenport. Ms. Davenport, could you please state your name and affiliation for the record and begin your testimony, please?

Yes, sir. Um, can everyone hear me okay? Yes, ma'am.

All right, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, first of all, I want to thank you for allowing me to speak with you today. My name is Shannon Davenport. I am the current president of the Alaska Nurses Association and a registered nurse at Providence Alaska Medical Center. I have been in healthcare for the past 30 years, beginning my career as a certified nursing assistant and working my way up to a doctorate in nursing.

I am here to express not only the Alaska Nurses Association, but my own personal strong support of Senate Bill 283. My goal today is to give you a snapshot of the daily reality for Alaska's bedside nurses and the patients we serve. I am a psychiatric and hospice nurse who cares for some of the most vulnerable members of our communities. I am the keeper of the forgotten, those whom society has turned away from and deemed unworthy. I became a nurse to help people in their darkest hours and to give them hope.

Yet today's nursing standards and staffing ratios make that nearly impossible. What became a feasible ratio of 4 to 1 patients per nurse on any given day has now become an unsafe working condition of up to 8 patients who come directly from the streets into the hospital at their highest state of acuity. I am expected to provide the utmost care and empathy while also enduring being yelled at, spit upon, and even physically assaulted. We are being asked to care for too many patients under impossible time constraints with increasingly complex medical and psychiatric needs while hospitals continue to pressure us to do more with less. Consistently, we are told that there is a nursing shortage, but the truth is there's an overabundance of nurses in our state.

There are in fact 22,324 active registered nurses here according to the National Council of State Boards of Nursing and the U.S. Department of Health Resources and Services Administration workforce data. It shows that 146% supply adequacy of nurses in Alaska, while the national average is significantly lower at 92%.

You may, you may wonder then why many say there's a nurse shortage in the state. Well, it's undeniably clear many of my colleagues have simply chosen to leave the bedside due to moral injury, emotional exhaustion, chronic understaffing, and unmanageable workloads. As an expert economist at Johns Hopkins School of Nursing has asserted, what we have now is not a shortage of nurses, but there is a shortage of job openings nurses are willing to fill. These unsafe staffing ratios are causing devastating consequences. As spoken earlier, from increased infection rates, medication errors, patient falls, and even death.

Nurses should never have to choose between administering pain medication to one patient or comforting a family that has just lost a loved one.

We need healthcare solutions that make sense. We need a voice at the table. Establishing safe nurse staffing ratios is a critical first step towards reducing moral injury Improving job satisfaction and retaining experienced nurses so future generations can continue this work.

We are nurses who fight for the forgotten. We advocate for patients who deserve dignity, compassion, and the right to not face their fear alone. And today I stand united in saying enough is enough. The time for change is now. We cannot be silent anymore.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for allowing me the opportunity to speak with you today. I respectfully urge you to pass Senate Bill 283 so that we can become catalysts for meaningful change in healthcare, for nurses, for patients, and for the future of our communities. I am available to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Thank you very much, Ms. Davenport.

Are there any questions from committee members?

Hearing and seeing none, we'll go next to Ms. Paige Spence.

Ms. Spence, could you please state your name and affiliation for the record and begin your testimony? Good afternoon, Chair and committee members. For the record, my name is Paige Spence. I am the Chief of Staff of the Oregon Nurses Association. And really appreciate the opportunity to provide comments in support of this bill.

Um, I was formerly the government relations director of my organization in 2023, uh, when we passed House Bill 2697, which, uh, has a lot in common with the bill that you're hearing today. So I wanted to provide the Oregon perspective and share with you how implementation is going so far. Um, we pursued in Oregon, uh, safe staffing levels in the form of nurse-to-patient ratios 2023 for the same reasons that proponents have already spoken to before you today. Coming out of the pandemic, our hospitals were dangerously short-staffed. And like you've heard, there was not a shortage of nurses in Oregon, but a shortage of nurses who were willing and able to work under unsafe, morally injurious conditions.

So like I said, we passed HB 2697 in 2023. Oregon had a staffing law on the books for years, but it's this particular bill that brought nurse-to-patient ratios and enforceable staffing standards and accountability mechanisms. And just wanted to share that from our experience, and we did phased-in implementation, um, so the last milestone will be that in July 1st of this year, so just in about 6 weeks, the medical-surgical ratios will ratchet down, um, from their initial starting point. We also gave hospitals about a year as sort of an on-ramp of when the financial penalties would take effect so that everyone had an opportunity to learn together. So I appreciate that this bill before you would not go into effect until 2027 to kind of give everyone on the same page.

By most accounts, our bill here in Oregon has really fundamentally changed how hospital staffing oversight works, and it has been pretty phenomenal for both our clinicians and for their nurses. Our state health authority has built a formal complaint and enforcement system with very public-facing reports and including levying a couple of penalties for noncompliance. Before House Bill 2697, the staffing laws that we'd had really lacked meaningful enforcement. And now our patients— excuse me, our nurses and their patients are saying that the enforceable minimum staffing ratios are being followed and enforced. Bedside nurses have greater authority of working with their managers through creating staffing plans through their staffing committees.

We're seeing a huge reduction in unsafe assignments and missed breaks, and we're also seeing improvements in retention and recruitment. We are only the second state with mandatory nurse staffing ratios, and so I know you are feeling like you're in a bit of uncharted territory, but I wanted to let you know that, you know, here in Oregon it is working. Hospitals will say that There have been administrative burdens, too many penalties, and staffing inflexibility. But I wanted to share with you that we have not seen one of the perceived threats from hospitals, which is service availability in rural or financially strained hospitals. We have not seen a reduction in service lines that are directly due to the staffing law.

We did pass a technical fix bill to the staffing law in 2023. 2025, Because as with any complex program, um, not everything gets perfect the first time. But on behalf of the 25,000 nurses that I represent in Oregon, I wanted to encourage you to pass this law, um, which can help Alaska join Oregon in helping its nurses and patients benefit from staffing plans that are more formalized. Complaints are investigated, disputes are more transparent, um, hospitals face consequences, but overall, um, patients receive safe and valuable care. So thank you so much for your time, and I'm happy to take any questions.

Thank you very much, Ms. Spence. Any questions from committee members?

Seeing and hearing none, we'll go next to Ms. Jolene Corliss, healthcare representative with Laborers Local 341. Ms. Corliss.

Thank you, Senator Birkman, for providing nurses an opportunity to share their voices related to the nurse staffing safe staffing legislation. My name is Jolene Corliss, and I've been a registered nurse for 18 years. I'm currently the healthcare representative for Labor's Local 341. We represent healthcare workers at Alaska Regional Hospital. Prior to this role, I spent 12 years as a nurse at Alaska Regional Hospital.

Thank you for introducing this monumental legislation. The goal of this legislation is to provide nurses— is for nurses to provide high-quality patient care to Alaskans. The level of care nurses are able to provide has diminished over the last decade in our state. I'm testifying today on behalf of the represented nurses at Alaska Regional Hospital. I may not have all the statistics you are seeking, but I do know that nurses are experiencing burnout, frustration, and moral distress related to the unmanageable workloads being heaped on each nurse.

On any given day, a poor outcome may not be evident. They could be brewing if nurses aren't able to pay attention to the subtle details necessary for us to intervene. Nurses intervention— nursing interventions may be small and seem unimportant, but they make a huge difference in patients' care. Being able to provide baths, get patients out of bed to the chair for meals, walking patients in the halls, turning patients regularly, helping feed patients, having conversations to understand the needs of our patients and their families are all significant interventions. Having the time to notice these changes in vital signs, mental status, and getting patients to various tests are all important parts of nursing care.

Laborers Local 341 has a safe staffing form for nurses to voluntarily complete. Nurses can complete these forms as many times as they like related to staffing concerns within their department. Nurses are not known to complain unless conditions are off for a prolonged amount of time. From March 11th, 2026 to date, we have had 30 reports completed related to staffing. Some of these nurses have missed breaks or lunches.

Many have reported staffing ratios too high to provide safe care. Nurses report medications being delayed, near misses, being assaulted, elevated emergency response teams being activated, charge nurses taking patient assignments, precepting nurses with even larger caseloads than normal. All of these events compound over time, which erode nurses' willingness to work in these conditions. Asking nurses to constantly overextend themselves leads nurses to leaving the hospital bedside. This is what happened to me.

I joined Alaska Regional in 2013, and I loved the level of care I was able to provide to the patients back then. I came from a fast-paced ICU, and the charge nurse was always in an assignment. We took our own trashes out, and at times we had 3 patient assignments when the standard is a 2-patient assignment. When we started— when I started at Alaska Regional Hospital, there was a secretary to answer the phone. There was a free charge nurse to provide additional support in the department.

Lift team was available to help with turning, getting patients out of bed, bathing, which are all best practices for patients. There were staff members who would come around to take out our trash, and it felt great to be a nurse in Alaska. I felt supported, and I felt like I could be a bedside nurse over the years. Over the— forever. Over the years, the care changed, but— and the hospital began demanding more of the bedside staff.

Instead of having 3 lift team members to help with patient turns and getting out of bed, 1 lift team member or none would be assigned to the hospital. Sometimes there weren't janitors to help take out trash. The hospital quit having secretaries in the ICU. I transitioned out of ICU care into— and I became an ER nurse, which was great for for me. However, in November of 2024, I was asked to be the charge nurse over the weekend and the demands were unreasonable.

We were short-staffed. It felt impossible to provide lunches to our nurses and safe care. We had one patient who came in with dizziness and I provided her with the only room left in the department. I was acting in 3 roles. I was a patient's nurse, the secretary, and the acting charge nurse.

When a charge nurse is actively taking an assignment, they are not available to facilitate throughput and act as a resource for the other clinicians within the department. The load was too much. The patient fell. I contacted the house supervisor and requested a staff member to sit with the patient. This is common practice if patients are not following directions and act impulsively.

The hospital did not have staff available to accommodate the request. I moved the patient closer to the nurse's station and she still fell a second time. Only after that fall was the hospital able to find a sitter for the patient. I let that patient down and I let her family down by not being able to provide the level of care that this patient deserved. This family trusted their mom would receive great care from us.

I was burnt out as being a bedside clinician. This is not the kind of care I wanted to provide to patients when I signed up for nursing. This isn't the level of care that I was— this isn't the level of care I was able to provide when I started my career in Alaska. As corporations become more interested in record profits, patients and nurses at the bedside suffer. I have described SB 283 to many nurses at Alaska Regional Hospital.

Nurses are excited by the idea of staffing minimums. Some nurses are excited by the idea of having a charge nurse who is not actively taking patients— care of patients and can act as a true resource for the department. One nurse literally smiled and opened her eyes in awe when I described the language within the bill. None of us are immune to illness or injury. Alaskans deserve high-quality nursing care that we can all be proud of.

We want to thank the Senate and Labor Commerce Committee for hearing this bill and providing hope to the nursing profession within Alaska. I'm happy to take any questions.

Very good. Thank you very much, Jolene. Are there any questions from committee members?

I have a general question that anyone can speak to if they like. Um, I think the biggest concern that I hear from hospitals about mandatory staffing ratios is a lack of overall people available to work and then cover the staff. So how, maybe, how has that worked in Oregon? Um, is there trouble having enough employees to cover the mandatory staffing ratios?

Okay, Ms. Corliss, could you talk to that?

Yes, I think personally I think that there are nurses in the, uh, In Alaska, it sounds as though there are not— there are many nurses who leave. I know even as nurses become— as they start their profession at the bedside, I just in the last week, I had a report that one nurse lasted 3 weeks off of orientation, but she felt too unsafe to maintain her license or felt too unsafe to continue practicing at the hospital because of the level of care or because of the demands of the patient loads. I cannot speak to what is happening in Oregon at this time.

Very good. Thank you. Any further questions from committee members? Very good. Well, thank you, Jolene and Ms. Davenport, for being here.

I'll just make a couple of comments. Um, I know that having safe staffing levels in hospitals and having work environment where folks feel supported and, and, um, able to execute their job in a reasonable manner, especially when dealing with patients, is super important. And I've heard a concern about that in a couple of places here in Alaska, and I think that it's important to recognize that concern and the ability for our hospitals to have appropriate levels of employees for the amount of patients that they have so that we can make sure Alaskans are getting the care that they need when they are in our hospitals. So we will likely continue this conversation as we go forward into the next legislature.

Take a brief at ease while we set up for our next bill. Brief at ease.

We're back on the record now in Senate Labor and Commerce. Our next item up is House Bill 363. This is our second hearing on the bill. During our first hearing, we had a presentation of the bill and took invited testimony. I would like to invite the bill sponsor, the Honorable Representative Louise Stutes, and her staff, Jane Pearson, to the table to provide a brief recap of the bill.

Thank you, Chair Bjorkman, and hello, members of the Labor and Commerce Committee. I'm Louise Stutes. I represent Kodiak, Cordova, Seward, and several small communities on the I really appreciate the opportunity to come back and see you all again on House Bill 363. And a brief recap of the bill is this is a patriotic organization, um, bill that affects liquor licenses. And how it affects them is it allows these organizations to have the ability under the proper permitting to serve each other in— and when I say each other, I'm talking about different patriotic organizations, i.e., the VFW or the American Legion.

If you're one, you can go to the other. And the other thing it does is when they have a public event— again, I say properly permitted— they will be able to serve non-members spirits as well as beer and wine, as long as they are on their own premise. And it only affects these patriotic organizations. And that's a brief recap, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much, Rep. Stutes. Are there any questions from committee members?

Seeing and hearing none, we will now open public testimony on House Bill 363.

Is there anyone in the room or online who would like to testify to this item? We have with us live and in person Paul Thomas. Mr. Thomas, thank you for joining us today. Thank you. Please state your name and affiliation for the record and begin your testimony.

Paul Thomas. I'm the chairman for Alaska State Char. I also own a liquor license here in town, Alaska Cash Liquor. We're in support of HB 363, the patriotic organization bill for those licensees. But we'd also like to ask for an amendment for the other licensees.

Thank you. In the state to dram shop liability. Right now, this is critical to our industry and the public. I believe this amendment to dram shop liability could bring us in line with the rest of the states moving forward. Without it, this critical amendment will drive people out of business.

It'll put the public at risk as businesses are not able to maintain liability insurance, or if they are, it's at levels that are just no longer able to provide for the coverage that's really needed. Our liability rates go up and up and our coverage goes down and down. More and more bars you're going to see are going without liability coverage, and that's not a good thing for the public. We're not asking to not be held liable for incorrect actions. We're just asking to be brought in line with the rest of the country.

Thank you. Very good. Thank you very much, Mr. Thomas. Is there anyone else in the room who would like to testify?

We will go online now to John Blasco.

Good afternoon. Thank you for your time. My name is John Blasco. I'm the CEO of Anchorage Distillery, and I just wanted to call in on two points. One is to voice the support for HB 363.

Anchorage Distillery is a veteran and Alaskan-owned distillery located in Anchorage. We do a lot of business with VFWs and Legions around the state, and so we're definitely very in support of this bill. And appreciate the additional language that allows it to include other alcoholic beverages. Similar to Paul Thomas, I would like to just ask the committee to consider an amendment to have this bill include the civil liability changes that were being discussed this year within the legislature. The challenge our industry is facing is real.

I run a very small distillery up in Anchorage, and to start the year in January, our broker sent me an email from our carrier saying that they are no longer interested in providing insurance to distilleries with tasting rooms. After much discussion back and forth, they did agree to continue insurance for another year, and I just received our insurance rates for this year. They did go up almost 50%. So as a small business, that is quite impactful. Our distillery is just a small piece of our business, but there are cases when it's just a small piece of our business, but when you see a 50% increase in your insurance bill, it becomes impactful.

And so I just wanted to strongly urge that amendment be considered because civil liability, the way it's written in the state, is becoming reasonable for small businesses like ours to maintain. Thank you for your time and appreciate the bill that's being put forward.

Very good. Thank you very much, Mr. Blasco. Up next is Michael Ward.

Good afternoon. My name is Michael Ward. I am here in Anchorage, Alaska. I am the Director of Cook Inlet Char, the local affiliate for Alaska State Char, and I'm also a small business owner. I own the Pioneer Bar downtown.

Like Paul and John, I'm here to testify in support of this bill and to amend the bill to include Dram Shop Record, uh, rendering who is civilly liable for injuries resulting from intoxicated person. Much like John was just saying, our, our insurance bills have increased significantly over the last few years, they've gone up approximately 300%, and our coverage has decreased about 85%. And this is just— makes it very difficult to move forward. Like Paul said earlier, we're not asking to be absolved of any liability. We just want to be— not be able to be held accountable for things that we are not responsible for.

And bring us in line with the rest of the nation. Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you, Mr. Ward. Next, we will go to Michael Cervantes. Mr. Cervantes, please state your name and affiliation for the record and begin your testimony.

Good afternoon, Chairman and committee members. My name is Michael about this. I am the operating owner of Vee Banks Ale House up here in Fairbanks, Alaska. I want— I'm here to testify in support of HB 363. Um, I would ask that Representative Stutes or other committee members to consider adding an amendment to the bill for civil liability.

As you've heard from the previous three testifying individuals, uh, this is quite critical in the the state of Alaska. As a business owner up in Fairbanks, I can see firsthand how it is affecting some of our fellow industry members, uh, with being able to afford coverage or even carry coverage. And so I would ask that the committee and the sponsor please consider adding an amendment to— for civil liability. And I appreciate your time and consideration today.

Very good.

Is there anyone else in the room or online who wishes to testify to this item?

Also available online for questions is the director of the Alcohol and Marijuana Control Office, Keith Richard.

Questions for Mr. Richard? Hearing and seeing none, at this time we will I will close public testimony.

And we will take a brief— brief ease.

We're back on the record. It's 2:21 PM now in Senate Labor and Commerce. Thank you all for the public testimony. We greatly appreciate it. Many of the public testifiers did speak in favor of dram shop and liquor liability reform, and I appreciate that testimony very much.

We were talking during the at ease with— on a little bit of background, which I'll repeat here on the record so that the public can hear. I did file a bill as a committee bill, Senate Bill 284, to deal with our dram shop laws and liquor liability. Unfortunately, As we went back and forth with the Division of Insurance and others to craft a bill that would hopefully move the needle for liquor liability insurance costs in the state of Alaska, um, it became difficult to deduce, um, what effect the current bill language in Senate Bill 284 would have. And we also ran into, uh, a decent amount of resistance to that type of policy call. So what my intentions are to do in the interim is keep working on that bill and this idea about dram shop reform with stakeholders and to make sure that we get the policy right.

Unfortunately, with less than a week to go in session, adding a policy like that to this piece of legislation I think would be kind of perilous for the legislation as well as the public process surrounding that. So although I am very sympathetic to the cause and want to get things right for liquor liability in this state, putting that very significant policy change inside of this bill at this time is not, not what I'm prepared to do. And it sounds like the majority of the committee feels the same way. So I appreciate the testimony and appreciate folks chipping in and I will continue to work on that issue.

With public testimony closed, that brings House Bill 363 back before the committee. Representative Stutes, do you have any closing remarks?

Thank you for the opportunity, Senator Bjorkman and committee members. Members, I appreciate it. For the record, Representative Stutes representing District 5 in the House. I certainly can appreciate the concern of the proposed amendment. The first I was made aware of the possibility of this amendment was last Friday, and as you can see, it has long-reaching effects.

Having had a liquor license myself, I know how critical it is. And now my brother has that very same liquor license. So it's— it is a critical issue, but a lot of times when you do something that quickly, having not had it vetted, you have unforeseen circumstances that occur doing that. Something like this, getting involved in Title IV, needs to be vetted thoroughly as known. The last time we were involved in Title IV, I think it was a 6 or 8-year process.

I'm sorry, 10-year? Ah, see, I was off by 2 years. Yeah, it was really a long, arduous process. And so, Senator Bjorkman, I am more than happy to work with you on this. Having had— or having the opportunity to have been a liquor license owner, I know how critical it is, and I know how critical it is for these businesses.

So please consider me as an asset and a colleague in working on coming to a resolution on this. And with that being said, I really appreciate the fact of the second opportunity for you to have heard this bill. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Rep. Stutes. I think I heard her say— I heard her say bill sponsor.

Did you guys hear that? Thank you, Rep. Stutes. We appreciate you being here. Is there any further discussion on House Bill 363?

Seeing and hearing none, what are the wishes of the committee? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to report House Bill 363, version 34, lime sierra 1460 backslash golf, from committee with individual recommendations and attached zero fiscal note. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Is there any objection?

Hearing and seeing no objection, House Bill 363, version 34, dash LS 1460 backslash G, is Senator Martin is in golf. Is reported from committee with individual recommendations and attached zero fiscal note. We will take a brief at ease while we sign the paperwork and set up for the next bill. Brief at ease.

We're back on the record. Next up on our agenda is House Bill 50. This is our second hearing on this bill. During our first hearing, we had a presentation of the bill and took invited testimony. I would like to invite sponsor of the bill, the Honorable Representative Sarah Hannan and her staff Hunter Meacham to the table to provide a brief recap of the bill.

Thank you so much, members of the Labor and Commerce Committee here on the Senate. We love to say Senate when we're here in your committee because we can't say it on the floor.

I represent— I'm Sarah Hannon representing House District 4, which you are seated in and which you were here this winter to experience our record snowfall. And that's an additional inspiration for the bill before you, which you heard back in March.

House Bill 50 is a very narrow, simple change in the charitable gaming laws that already exist. It changes nothing about eligibility or administration or qualification or beneficiaries. All it does is take out the specificity that currently exists in statute limiting Snow Classics, guessing the depth of snow, to one location and one beneficiary. So by taking out that from the law, other locations and communities could have Snow Classics.

Very good. Are there any questions for the bill sponsor?

Seeing and hearing none, we will now open public testimony on House Bill 50. Is there anyone in the room or online who wishes to testify to this item?

Seeing and hearing none, we will close public testimony.

That brings the bill back before the committee. Is there any committee questions or committee discussion?

Seeing and hearing none, Representative Hannan, do you have any closing remarks? No, but we do hope that we will be able to sell tickets to tourists and talk about the record snowfall. We think it would have been a really good promotional year to have it in place and talk about the over 6 feet of snow that we had in this community. This year. So I hope you'll be buying a book or two because I know you're an active skier.

Thank you very much, Rep. Hannon.

Seeing and hearing no further questions or discussion, what are the wishes of the committee? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to report House Bill 50, version 34 Lima Sierra 0288/alpha from committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal note. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Is there any objection?

Hearing and seeing no objection, House Bill 50, version 34-LS0288/A, as in alpha, is reported from committee with individual recommendations and attached zero fiscal note. We'll take a brief at ease while we set up for our next item on our agenda. Brief at ease.

We're back on the record now. It's 2:33 PM. Next up is House Bill 25. This is our second hearing on the bill. During our first hearing, we had a presentation of the bill and took invited testimony.

I would like to invite bill sponsor, the Honorable Representative Andy Josephson, and and Andy Josephson to the table to provide a brief recap of the bill. Welcome back. Could please provide a brief recap? Sure. First of all, Mr. Chairman, I'm delighted to be back here and I appreciate the second hearing.

A brief recap is that this bill would require after New Year's Day that restaurants, although they could use any stock of restaurant foodware they possess on December 31st. They could carry that into the next year as long as they wish, but effective January 1st, restaurants would not be allowed to use polystyrene. Um, and there's a pretty expansive definition of restaurant in the bill as amended on the floor. Um, the state also, in its procurement, in sort of its restaurant procurement, if you will, and so think of the ferry service, restaurants could also not use polystyrene foodware. DEC would enforce this like it enforces anything else.

That's the essence of the bill. Very good. Thank you very much, Representative Josephson. Are there any questions for the bill sponsor?

Hearing and seeing no questions, we will now open public testimony on on House Bill 25.

Is there anyone in the room who wishes to testify?

Is there anyone online?

First up we have Deani Chapman. Ms. Chapman, please state your name and affiliation for the record and begin your testimony, please.

Good afternoon, Chair Bjorkman and members of the committee. My name is Deani Chapman. I'm the State Director of Alaska Environment, a statewide nonprofit organization that focuses on issues relating to clean air and water and open space. And we're in strong support of House Bill 25. Polystyrene is a plastic, and plastic pollution is a mounting problem.

If we continue on our current course of action, studies have predicted that there will be more plastic in our ocean than fish by weight by 2050. And we have plastic pollution that's washing up on our shores around Alaska. We see it on our city streets, and when we look with a microscope, it's in our water as well. In the summer of 2023, our organization tested 39 water sources in South Central Alaska for microplastics and found them in 100% of the samples, including Anchorage tap water. And similar studies have found very similar results around the state.

And this is bad for a host of reasons, uh, First off, wildlife often mistake small pieces of plastic for food. They can't always digest it, and if their belly's filled with plastic, it can lead to starvation. Studies have shown that salmon exposed to microplastics move more slowly and are less able to avoid predation. And in humans and animals, exposure to plastic has been linked to fertility problems, developmental issues, cancer, and most recently dementia and other neurological issues. And we need to take steps to tackle this problem, and the most important step is to turn off the tap.

Polystyrene is one of the gnarliest of the plastics. It easily breaks down into small pieces that are really hard to clean up. It floats, it looks like food when it ends up in our waterways to fish and other wildlife, and it's particularly toxic to humans and wildlife. And it also takes centuries to fully degrade. A few communities and many restaurants in Alaska have independently moved away from polystyrene, indicating how possible it is, but it's which is definitely still really common in our state.

And then we have proof from other states and municipalities that when these bans pass, the litter decreases. Two trash collecting machines in Baltimore's Inner Harbor were gathering almost 82% fewer foam containers a year after Maryland opposed a statewide ban on polystyrene foam for food service products in October 2020. So passing this bill will help get rid of some of the worst of the plastics and help keep both people and our wildlife healthier. Bottom line, nothing that we use for just a couple minutes should pollute our environment for hundreds of years. Thank you so much, and please support the bill.

Thank you very much. Up next is Ms. Lindsay Stovall. Ms. Stovall, please state your name and affiliation for the record and begin your testimony, please.

Yes, good afternoon, Chair Bjorkman and members of the committee. My name is Lindsay I am here today in respectful opposition to HB 25. While we support efforts to reduce plastic waste, we believe the legislation would increase costs, create implementation challenges, and fail to achieve its intended environmental objectives. HB 25 would impose significant economic impacts on businesses, consumers, and the state. Alternative food service materials are substantially more expensive than polystyrene.

And these costs would likely be passed on to consumers. Various state analyses illustrate these increases. Pennsylvania's Independent Fiscal Office found alternatives cost between 100 and 193% more depending on the product, while Washington State's foam ban projected trade costs would increase by 445%. To better understand Alaska-specific cost impacts, ACC commissioned an independent economic analysis alternatives in 2025 using GSA Advantage destination pricing. The study found bio-preferred alternatives cost up to 313% more and paper alternatives cost up to 276% more than polystyrene, even at the lowest available government prices.

These increased costs have real consequences. The analysis projected household spending on restaurant meals could rise up to $11.4 million annually. While restaurants could lose up to $8.6 million in revenue due to reduced demand. State agencies would also face higher costs. For example, the Department of Corrections alone could incur an additional $1.8 million to switch to paper clamshells or roughly $2.6 million for degradable options.

The bill also raises operational concerns by limiting businesses' ability to choose packaging that best meets their preferences. Particularly for temperature-sensitive foods, while creating unclear exemption standards that could lead to inconsistent application. It is also important to note that polystyrene has been used in food packaging for decades and is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for food contact. Finally, while polystyrene food service packaging is not currently recycled in Alaska, many of the alternative materials businesses would likely switch to also lack established recycling infrastructure in the state. Rather than singling out one material, a more effective approach would focus on improving recycling and waste management systems across all material types.

For these reasons, we respectfully urge the committee to vote no on HB 25, and I thank you for the opportunity to testify today.

Thank you very much, Ms. Stovall. Are there any questions from committee members?

Seeing and hearing none at this time, we will close public testimony.

That brings House Bill 25 back before the committee.

Representative Josephson, one of the invited test— one of the public testifiers mentioned a cost incurred to corrections. I don't see a fiscal note here from corrections. Can you help me understand what's going on there? Yes, uh, Mr. Chairman, Andy Josephson, House District 13. I may have forgotten to note who I was when I reintroduced the bill.

Uh, there is no such fiscal note. There simply isn't one. And, um, I don't know what Ms. Stovall is talking about.

Very good. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Committee Members?

Seeing and hearing none, Members have a draft proposed amendment in their packets. May I have a motion, please?

Brief it ease. Brief it ease.

We're back on the record. It is 2:42 PM now. May I have a motion, please? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move Amendment N as in Nancy, A as in apple, 1.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Object for purposes of discussion. My conversations with Representative Josephson, he mentioned this amendment as a way that we could provide some potential local control into this bill. What this allows for is an opt-out by ordinance for municipalities if they wish to opt their locality out of this styrofoam ban. So that's very simply what the amendment does, and it is here for your consideration.

Any additional comments?

Seeing and hearing none, I remove my objection. Is there any further objection? Mr. Chairman, Senator Gray Jackson. Thank you. I'd like to hear, if it's okay, from Representative Senator Josephson, his thoughts on this amendment.

Absolutely. Chairman, absolutely. Thank you. Through the chair, Senator Gray Jackson, um, we're a democracy and I'm happy that I'm back before this committee. And if this is the broad consensus, I would be delighted to have the amendment in my bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Rep. Josephson. Is there any further objection to Amendment N.A.1? Seeing, hearing no objection, Amendment N.A.1 is adopted. Any final committee comments on the underlying legislation?

Do you have any closing remarks? Mr. Chairman, as I said before, I'm grateful to be back. Before you. I think that this is a first step. I know that you and I share this passion.

You have a resolution on marine debris, and I think this is a first step. And under this amendment, local governments can have a conversation, and that's important too. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Seeing and hearing no further discussion or comments on the Bill. What are the wishes of the committee? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, um, move to report House Bill 25, version 34, Lima Sierra 0256 November Alpha, as amended from committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal note. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Is there any objection? Seeing, hearing no objection, House Bill 25, version 34-LS 0256 backslash N.A. As amended, is reported from committee with individual recommendations and attached zero fiscal note. Please stay after we adjourn to sign the committee report. Please stand by as well for any additional meetings.

If we need to meet again, we will let you know as soon as possible. The deadline, in case for folks, the thousands in attendance and the millions watching around the world, if you're wondering when the deadline is under the 24-hour rule, it's 4:00 PM. So if a meeting isn't posted before 4:00, there will not be a meeting the next day. I'd like to thank all members of the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee for your work and conversations this year. We've had a lot of fun together here in Belts, talking about a lot of issues that matter and watching a pigeon or two.

Thank you very much for Doug Bridges and Kerry Tupo, who have been here a lot with us as well. It's, uh, it's been a good legislature. So thank you. As there is no further business to come before the committee, we are adjourned at 2:46 PM.