House Finance hears testimony on bill making mail theft a state crime
Loading...
Summary
Sponsors and witnesses told the committee HB 77 would create a state mail‑theft offense (theft in the second degree, class C felony) to give local law enforcement charging tools; agencies submitted mostly $0 fiscal notes but described the potential caseload as indeterminate.
Representative Julie Colom introduced HB 77 as a bill to establish mail theft as a state crime and classify it as theft in the second degree. "HB 77 establishes mail theft as a state crime and classifies it as a theft in the second degree," she said, adding statutory definitions for mail, authorized depository and mail receptacle and noting the bill explicitly covers private delivery companies.
Detective Tiffany Loughman, who brought the issue to the sponsor, testified by phone that police are seeing a large increase in thefts from mailboxes and that current statutes and federal case‑acceptance thresholds leave local officers few options. "We are seeing a huge uptick in mail theft ... it doesn't meet the threshold that the U.S. attorney's office is taking," she said, describing circumstances where officers find vehicles full of stolen mail but cannot identify a prosecutable value.
AARP Alaska's state director of advocacy, Marj Stoneking, urged support, saying mail theft disproportionately harms older residents who rely on mail for benefits and prescriptions and that stolen mail often leads to check fraud and identity theft. "When mail is stolen, the result is often check fraud, identity theft, and long lasting financial damage," Stoneking said.
Multiple agencies — the Alaska Court System, Office of Public Advocacy, Department of Law and Department of Public Safety — submitted fiscal notes marked $0 while acknowledging prosecutorial workload is difficult to predict. James Stinson (Office of Public Advocacy) and Terrence Haas (Public Defender) said the change could increase prosecutions but the volume and cost are indeterminate; Haas noted the difficulty of predicting law‑enforcement and prosecutorial behavior in a newly codified offense.
Law‑enforcement testimony from Brian Ranger (private citizen, former officer) described practical enforcement limits without a specific state crime: "There's no law currently ... we would have to establish that one of those pieces of mail has a specific value or an access device," he said, arguing a state statute would allow officers to charge suspects before downstream fraud occurs.
What happens next: The committee set an amendment deadline for HB 77 of Monday, April 20 at noon so members can submit amendments rapidly and advance the bill if desired.
