Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Universal Changing Facilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers hear emotional testimony on universal changing facilities; sponsor seeks narrower language
Summary
In an initial hearing on House Bill 141, advocates and family members described the lack of accessible changing facilities in public buildings; DOT staff provided cost and code context and legislators signaled interest in narrowing the bill’s scope and adding technical standards.
The House Health and Social Services Committee held an initial hearing Thursday on House Bill 141, a sponsor‑filed measure that would require universal changing facilities in public buildings when new construction or remodels exceed $30,000. The hearing included lived‑experience testimony, technical guidance from the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, and questions about cost, standardization and practicability.
Sponsor Representative Ashley Carrick (House District 35) said the bill aims to provide private, safe and hygienic spaces for personal care for adults and children with disabilities, and to foster inclusion. Griffin Soukayo (sponsor staff) walked the committee through the draft sectional language that would add a new section to AS 18.35 requiring at least one universal changing facility in public buildings undergoing new construction or remodels over $30,000, with exemptions when installation would make restrooms noncompliant with accessibility standards. The draft makes the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities responsible for maintaining a publicly accessible registry of facility locations and directs the department to adopt implementing regulations.
Advocates described practical harms. Chelsea Burke of the Governor’s Council on Disabilities and Special Education and Wendy Cloyd of Key Coalition said caregivers often must change people on restroom floors or in vehicles, denying dignity and creating health risks. Judy Edwards, a parent and Changing Spaces campaign advocate, recounted changing her son on a bathroom floor at an airport and said the Anchorage airport later installed a universal station after advocacy.
DOT staff and engineers described technical and cost considerations. Committee staff noted commonly available models: freestanding tables ($1,500–$4,000) and wall‑mounted units ($2,000–$5,000). Witnesses cited industry guidance that adjustable universal tables hold up to 400 pounds and measure about 70 by 30 inches. DOT staff said the Ted Stevens International Airport installation cost roughly $75,000 (about $15,000 design and $60,000 construction) because the restroom footprint was expanded by roughly 50 square feet and mechanical/electrical systems were modified. DOT’s fiscal analysis also included a broader estimate for statewide DOT facilities that the sponsor and staff said warrants further review.
Committee members expressed several concerns: the bill’s broad definition of “public building,” the $30,000 remodel threshold (members asked whether that threshold will cause frequent triggers), potential legal exposure tied to the statute’s “practicable” standard, and the fiscal implications for DOT and other agencies. Representatives suggested narrowing the language to target high‑traffic public facilities or campus hubs rather than every state‑owned structure; the sponsor said she is open to amending the bill and working with agencies on practicability and standards.
The committee set an amendment deadline and left HB 141 for a future hearing. DOT staff and sponsor staff will follow up with additional technical guidance, cost breakdowns, and possible references to accessibility standards (the 2024 International Building Code chapter on accessibility, section 1110.4, was noted in committee materials) for use in implementing regulations.
