Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Data Privacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House panel advances Alaska consumer data privacy bill with 'duty of loyalty' amendment
Summary
The House Judiciary Committee voted 3–2 on May 8 to report HB 367, the consumer data privacy act, out of committee with amendments including a "duty of loyalty" provision modeled on recent Utah law; members debated drafting choices and scope before the roll-call vote.
The House Judiciary Committee voted May 8 to report House Bill 367, a consumer data privacy bill sponsored by Representative Andy Story, out of committee with amendments after adopting a provision described as a "duty of loyalty." The committee approved the motion 3–2 and authorized legislative legal services to make technical conforming changes.
Representative Andy Story, the bill sponsor, said the measure is about increasing transparency and protection for Alaskans regarding their personal data. The committee unanimously adopted a minor drafting correction as Amendment 1 (changing a conjunction on one line).
Amendment 2 introduced language described by committee staff as a duty-of-loyalty concept borrowed from Utah's recent legislation (Utah Senate Bill 275). Dylan Hitchcock Lopez, a committee aide, told members the provision is intended as a flexible, additive backstop—similar in effect to a fiduciary-like duty—to address rapid technological change and power imbalances between data controllers and consumers.
Committee members questioned whether the duty-of-loyalty language would be duplicative of enumerated rights in the bill or create vagueness. Legislative legal counsel Ian Walsh said the phrase "activity related to" collection, processing or transfer was intentionally broad but could be redrafted to read "collect, process, or transfer personal data in a manner that…" and that conforming drafting changes could be made. Walsh said courts or the attorney general could help define the scope if enforcement arose.
Representative Mina moved to report HB 367 (work order 34‑LS1485) out of committee as amended. The clerk called a roll-call vote: Representative Eisheide — yes; Representative Mina — yes; Representative Costello — no; Representative Underwood — no; Chair Gray — yes. The motion passed 3–2. The committee reported HB 367 with individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes.
What’s next: HB 367 is reported out of the House Judiciary Committee as amended; legislative legal services were authorized to make technical and conforming edits before paperwork is finalized.
