Legislature(2013 - 2014)BARNES 124
01/28/2014 08:00 AM House COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB199 | |
| HB181 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 199 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 181 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 199-VPSO FIREARMS
8:03:09 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX announced that the first order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 199, "An Act relating to Department of Public
Safety regulations allowing village public safety officers to
carry firearms."
8:03:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON, Alaska State Legislature, speaking as the
sponsor of HB 199, explained that the Village Public Safety
Officer (VPSO) program provides a host of services beyond law
enforcement in the 90 or so communities where active VPSOs are
located. He reviewed the history of the VPSO Program, which
began in the late 1970s when the program was funded with federal
funds. The number of communities served by VPSOs has fluctuated
over the years in relation to the turnover rate of VPSOs. The
challenges of the program have been somewhat consistent over the
years and include turnover, salary levels, housing, Alaska State
Trooper oversight, and facilities/equipment. Although the
aforementioned challenges remain, he expressed appreciation for
the recent attempts of Governor Parnell and former Commissioner
Masters for to make the VPSO program more viable than it has
been in years, particularly the commitment to add 15 VPSOs every
year in an attempt to place a VPSO in every community in rural
Alaska that would benefit from such a service. Representative
Edgmon related his understanding that VPSOs attend 12 weeks of
rigorous training in Sitka; the training covers multiple areas,
including firefighting, CPR, basic law enforcement, and domestic
violence. However, the training doesn't reach the level of
municipal law enforcement in terms of carrying a firearm and
driving an emergency vehicle. Representative Edgmon emphasized
that the crux of HB 199 is to ensure VPSOs can do their job. He
pointed out that VPSOs in rural Alaska sometimes walk into
lethal situations and the VPSO is armed with only a baton,
Taser, handcuffs, and a protective vest. Representative Edgmon,
noting that he was born and raised in rural Alaska, related that
although the situation in rural Alaska has improved in many
respects, the social issues, domestic violence, and violent
confrontations have increased. For that reason, Representative
Edgmon said he introduced HB 199, which would insert language in
statute that would prohibit the Department of Public Safety
(DPS) from denying local nonprofits and communities to employ
armed VPSOs. To be armed, the VPSOs would have to meet the
minimum standards of firearm training, which he understood would
be certified by the Alaska Police Standards Council. He
acknowledged that there are some smaller communities that have
trepidation or resistance to having armed VPSOs and pointed out
that employment of armed VPSOs would be done with the consent of
the local decision makers and community. The fiscal note, he
noted, is fairly modest as it envisions 20 VPSOs going through
the firearm training in Sitka. The fiscal note includes the
travel of the VPSOs to Sitka, the general liability the
department would have to provide, as well as the necessary
equipment.
8:10:18 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX opened public testimony for HB 199.
8:11:13 AM
ALVIN JIMMIE, VPSO Program Director, Association of Village
Council Presidents (AVCP) VPSO Program, began by noting that his
testimony is on behalf of AVCP and its VPSO Program. He further
noted that the success of the VPSO Program is highly dependent
upon a strong partnership between AVCP, the State of Alaska, and
the local and tribal governments. He attributed the leadership
of the Alaska State Troopers, AVCP, and the local tribes as one
that has forged a relationship that has continued to advance
public safety in the region. The AVCP, he related, supports
HB 199. As many may know, the first VPSO Program began in the
AVCP region in 1979. Over the last 30 years, the AVCP VPSO
Program has grown to be the largest VPSO Program in the state.
In fact, the AVCP VPSO Program currently employees almost one-
quarter of all the VPSOs in Alaska. With the help of the State
of Alaska, AVCP's goal is to place at least two VPSOs in each
village; the AVCP region consists of 56 tribes. Mr. Jimmie told
the committee that AVCP's VPSOs are highly dedicated individuals
committed to providing the highest level of public safety
service to their respective villages. The AVCP's standards of
employment ensure that only individuals who satisfactorily
complete a strict background check are hired. He opined that
continued employment is dependent upon successful completion of
the 12-week annual and field training at the VPSO Academy as
well as a probationary period. He further opined that in
addition to the training, [AVCP] VPSOs possess a unique
dedication and courage to respond virtually alone to calls on a
daily basis, which places VPSOs in a unique class of officers
that few would be willing to join. Mr. Jimmie informed the
committee that he is a former VPSO who understands the risks
involved with unarmed law enforcement protection. The debate
regarding whether to arm VPSOs is not new and needs no more
debate, but it does require a coordinated effort between the
state, the VPSO programs, and the communities they serve to
decide how to proceed. The Native nonprofits aren't simply VPSO
employers, but are responsible and sophisticated organizations
that provide resources to engage in law enforcement policy
issues at an educated and goal-oriented level. Only within such
a framework, he proffered, will solutions emerge through the
continuing questions raised during the debate. Mr. Jimmie
related that a poll of AVCP VPSOs reveals that they 100 percent
support being armed. He further related that AVCP is ready to
take on this new responsibility. Proper training,
certification, and other law enforcement standards must remain
in place prior to implementation. However, he highlighted that
funding is critical to ensure appropriate equipment, initial and
ongoing training, and other items that accompany implementation.
In closing, Mr. Jimmie related confidence that with a commitment
from the stakeholders all of the issues that may arise can be
addressed and the partnership with the state can reach a new
level of public safety for those [in the region]. "The lives of
our officers depend upon it," he said.
8:16:41 AM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK asked if Mr. Jimmie will supervise the AVCP VPSO
Program if HB 199 passes.
MR. JIMMIE stated that the matter is still under discussion.
[The AVCP VPSOs] can take responsibility as they have in past
years and he would be the individual who would continue to
supervisor officers in the region.
8:18:03 AM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK interjected that VPSO supervisors should also be
trained with the VPSOs in terms of firearm use.
8:18:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked if Mr. Jimmie is supervised by an
Alaska State Trooper.
MR. JIMMIE replied no, adding that he is currently supervised by
AVCP. However, he expressed the desire to work closer with
Alaska State Troopers.
8:20:00 AM
MIKE COONS, referred to letters in the committee packet from the
Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association, Inc. dated August 21,
2013, and from Robert Claus dated September 17, 2013. Both
letters express concerns with regard to who will set the rules.
Mr. Coons noted his agreement with [Co-Chair Nageak's] earlier
comment that supervisors of VPSOs who carry firearms should have
an extensive firearm background. Mr. Coons then turned to his
prepared statement, which he read as follows:
I'm a former Alaska state defense constable, a retired
paramedic, and a former armed security officer with
the United States Air Force at [Joint Base Elmendorf-
Richardson] JBER. I have seen and worked with VPSOs
and the Hooper Bay Police. I worked in Allakaket as a
paramedic for the better part of a year and a half.
As the constable, I was at Hooper Bay for three months
working with the Hooper Bay Police Department. The
concept of VPSOs and police in small villages like
Hooper Bay has definite pros and cons. While at
Allakaket, we had several cases of domestic violence
situations with criminal subjects armed, mainly with a
rifle, shooting up the girlfriends' homes. In one
occasion, we had several people shooting up the
village and specifically destroying (indisc.)
equipment and its property. In all cases, Alaska
State Troopers were called in to stop the criminal
activity and make the arrest. The VPSO at the time
was unable to do much since he was unarmed and not
allowed to use deadly force. Fortunately, nobody was
serious injured or died. Of the greater problem,
though, was that the Fairbanks judges kept letting
these people out on bail, return to the village, and
the same problem happened over and over again. We
need to address criminal behavior and lenient judges
who put others in remote villages at an increased risk
over that of just arming the VPSOs. That same
situation with the judges was seen at Hooper Bay as
well. At Hooper Bay, although we as constables were
armed ... we seldom carried at the request of the
police chief. Good verbal skills diffused all but one
situation and the State Troopers were called in for a
barricaded person with a firearm ... resolved without
injury. The police chief had an excellent department
and with the proper training of his officers, I
believe those officers would have done well being
armed, mainly because of the excellent supervisory
aspect of the police chief. This situation is
different than single VPSOs without direct
supervision, like at Hooper Bay. What I saw and
experienced in the culture, most of the issues were
alcohol related with people wanting to fight
occasionally. Anytime an officer carries a firearm,
it isn't just training, it is a mindset and judgment
that must come into play. Of paramount importance is
the mindset that if the occasion were to arise that
deadly force was necessary that that officer has the
mental ability to do so. Some may some may not. I
agree that there are times where a VPSO needs to be
armed to protect others as well as himself. However,
the arming of VPSOs should be based on a host of
factors and judgment by those State Troopers
overseeing the VPSOs. Those factors range from
village culture, size, past criminal problems to a
solid subjective and objective review of each VPSO.
This should not be a blanket decision and the DPS
commissioner must have the ability to determine on a
case-by-case basis if and whom the VPSOs are to be
armed and under what guidelines and circumstances.
There should be cross talk with city and tribal
entities and corporations, but the final decision
should rest with the commissioner. I do believe that
HB 199 is taking this to a better level due to the
need for the public and VPSO safety.
8:24:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER inquired as to the training program to
carry firearms.
MR. COONS informed the committee that the training he received
was extensive, particularly at Elmendorf Air Force Base where
the rules of engagement and use of force continuum were taught.
He specified that the training is knowledge beyond drawing the
weapon and placing bullets in a certain size area; the training
includes knowledge regarding what is behind the target, when and
when not to draw, the use of verbal judo, the use of Tasers and
pepper spray, and the use of other means before reaching the
point of drawing a firearm. He pointed out that [firearm]
training has to be continuous and the Alaska State Troopers need
to help instill the aforementioned thought processes with VPSOs.
The aforementioned will take time.
8:27:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked whether Mr. Coons supports HB 199.
MR. COONS clarified that he supports the concept of HB 199 and
that there are VPSOs who can handle and for whom it would be
beneficial [to carry a firearm]. He reiterated that the ability
for VPSOs to carry firearms should be under strict training and
supervision, which he questioned whether HB 199 addresses fully
or appropriately. He then stated that the DPS commissioner
needs to have a lot of [oversight] on the matter. Mr. Coons
said that overall he supports [HB 199].
8:28:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON inquired as to why a VPSO would need more
training to carry a firearm than a municipal police officer,
particularly in light of Mr. Jimmie's comment that the training
would be ongoing.
MR. COONS said he didn't have a problem if the VPSOs take the
same minimum training as that of the municipal police officer
and it's ongoing.
8:30:01 AM
TERRY VRABEC, Deputy Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Public Safety, related DPS's support for HB 199,
but acknowledged that there are some very important things to
address in order to achieve success. With regard to training,
he noted that the DPS Academy falls under his purview. If
HB 199 passes, Mr. Vrabec said he and the Academy commander are
comfortable that they can develop a successful training program.
As the attached fiscal note specifies, the costs are minimal.
8:31:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked whether Mr. Vrabec believes only
select individuals should be trained and that [the VPSO Program]
should fall directly under the commissioner.
MR. VRABEC explained that [the program] would essentially fall
under the commissioner because DPS oversees the DPS Academy and
performs Alaska State Trooper oversight for the VPSO Program.
Mr. Vrabec clarified that he didn't want to refer to training
for select officers, but rather pointed out that not every
officer will be able to get through the training. For those
organizations that want to employ armed VPSOs, DPS will support
them to make it work.
8:32:23 AM
MR. VRABEC, in response to Representative Herron, agreed that
there are always some officers and trooper recruits who don't
make it through the training and don't graduate from the DPS
Academy.
8:33:10 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX asked if VPSOs are hired on an annual contract.
MR. VRABEC deferred to Captain Arlow, but reminded the committee
that although VPSOs are trained through the DPS Academy and
receive oversight from DPS, they aren't officially state
employees as they work for the nonprofit organizations.
8:33:52 AM
STEVEN ARLOW, Captain, Alaska State Troopers, VPSO Support,
Department of Public Safety, confirmed that once VPSOs are hired
by the nonprofits they are nonprofit employees and that doesn't
have to be renewed annually. He noted that there is a large
turnover rate with VPSOs.
8:34:23 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX posed a scenario in which [a VPSO] is hired for
a discreet amount of time and [that VPSO] is not required to be
armed at that time but is still working when HB 199 passes. She
then asked what would happen to such a [VPSO] who couldn't pass
the training.
CAPTAIN ARLOW noted that there have been conversations on that
issue. The conclusion of the 10 entities with which [the Alaska
State Troopers] contract is that VPSOs who are not interested in
carrying firearms won't be dismissed from the program.
Conversely, a VPSO who has qualified and completed all of the
aspects of firearm training, but later falls below the standards
could lose the ability to carry a firearm.
8:36:38 AM
JOSEPH MASTERS, speaking on his own behalf, noted that he is the
former commissioner of DPS and will be leaving the post in
October. He also noted that he is a former VPSO, which he
opined places him in a unique position. Mr. Masters said that
he has also been in the unique position of being one of the two
commissioners who was sitting when a VPSO was lost in the line
of duty. He related that during the last five years he has
observed a new dynamic in terms of violence toward law
enforcement officers at all levels and locales. Since 2002,
assaults against police officers that resulted in injury
increased by 66 percent and non-injury assaults increased by 137
percent. Therefore, on average there is an assault against a
VPSO every month; seven of the most recent events in the past
several years involved threatening officers with the use of
firearms. Under current regulations, VPSOs are prohibited from
carrying firearms in the performance of their duties. The
aforementioned presents an interesting dynamic for VPSOs because
with escalations in the use of force against them and the
increased demand to respond in villages, the VPSO job is
becoming more dangerous to the point that VPSOs are carrying
firearms even though prohibited. This situation places the
state in a unique position as it has to determine how best to
assist the VPSOs and the employing nonprofits to mitigate the
risks. Basically, the law enforcement duties to which the VPSOs
respond could be reduced or VPSOs could be provided the proper
training and certifications to do their job. Drawing from his
past experiences, Mr. Masters opined that effective delivery of
law enforcement services is dependent upon community involvement
and a partnership between the various law enforcement agencies.
He further opined that the reduction of the duties of VPSOs
isn't a viable solution because the Alaska State Troopers can't
absorb the increased workload and the communities would be
placed at higher risk and danger. Therefore, this is the time
to change the thinking in terms of how VPSOs are viewed and
their ability to carry firearms to defend themselves and the
public. He noted his agreement with the comments of Mr. Jimmie
and Mr. Coons. Mr. Masters then related his support for HB 199,
which he pointed out doesn't provide free rein to armed VPSOs.
The legislation, he remarked, needs to be considered in context
with existing statutes and regulations as currently the DPS
commissioner has the authority to set regulations that dictate
the training requirements for VPSOs to be armed and HB 199 does
nothing to diminish that.
8:43:22 AM
MR. MASTERS related that standing with the family of fallen VPSO
Thomas Madole during his services provided a sense of clarity
regarding how much sacrifice VPSO families go through in
allowing a family member to serve. The aforementioned also
highlighted the need for leaders in the state to ensure that
communities have the right people to protect them and that they
have the appropriate background, training, and equipment for the
job. In closing, Mr. Masters opined that HB 199 is necessary
and it's time to allow VPSOs to be armed after receiving the
proper training and certification.
8:45:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON thanked the committee for HB 199. He
noted that both of the fatalities, in 1986 and 2013, in the VPSO
Program occurred in Bristol Bay. From talking with a number of
VPSOs, Representative Edgmon obtained the understanding that
giving communities the option of armed VPSOs may help with
recruitment and retention problems that have plagued the program
as a whole. He then informed the committee that this last year
DPS has worked diligently to place language within the
regulations that would allow VPSOs to be armed. However,
Representative Edgmon contended that placing such language in
statute is a step further and provides iron clad authority for
the current and future department heads and administrations.
8:47:48 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX asked whether Village Police Officers (VPOs) are
currently allowed to carry firearms.
MR. MASTERS explained that VPOs receive their authority through
statutes and municipalities, which have the ability to establish
police departments and hire police officers under the Alaska
Police Standards Council (APSC) regulations and statutes. If
they are remote, off the road system, and of a certain size,
villages can employee VPOs under a different set of statutes.
Villages can decide whether or not to arm their officers.
Therefore, the proposed statute in HB 199 would not impact a
village with a VPO. In further response to Co-Chair LeDoux, Mr.
Masters clarified the Anchorage Police Department and its
officers are established under ASPC regulations and thus the
standards of training and certification process is quite
different than the regulations for VPOs.
8:50:52 AM
JAKE METCALFE, Executive Director, Public Safety Employees
Association (PSEA) Local 803, began by informing the committee
that PSEA represents the rank and file Alaska State Troopers,
court service officers, airport police and fire, deputy fire
marshals all of which are state employees. The PSEA also
represents rank and file police officers in the municipalities
of Ketchikan, Sitka, Juneau, Fairbanks, Soldotna, Dillingham,
and Unalaska. Therefore, PSEA represents around 800 members,
all of which are certified police officers in Alaska and
regulated by ASPC. Mr. Metcalfe then directed attention to a
recent article in the Juneau Empire by Chris Gifford entitled
"Rural Alaska deserves certified, trained officers".
8:52:42 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 8:52 a.m. to 8:54 a.m.
8:54:03 AM
MR. METCALFE, referring to Sergeant Gifford's article,
highlighted that VPSOs are not certified police officers and are
private employees employed by the nonprofit corporations.
Furthermore, VPSOs don't go through the same rigorous hiring
process, training, or background checks that certified police
officers go through. The aforementioned differences between a
VPSO and a police officer are of concern, he opined. However,
he agreed with Mr. Masters that times have become more dangerous
and it's time to change thinking. He then suggested reviewing
whether private police should perform police functions in rural
Alaska. This legislation extends law enforcement to VPSOs,
which are private employees, and places weapons in the hands of
folks who don't receive certified police training like the state
regulates. Mr. Metcalfe related his belief that VPSOs do a good
job with the job duties and resources they have. He informed
the committee that from 1990-1997, he served as the district
attorney in the Bethel region where AVCP employed the VPSOs
whose work included search and rescue, fire, limited law
enforcement, and they were overseen by the Alaska State
Troopers. The VPSOs serve a purpose, but it's not the same
purpose as that of Alaska State Troopers and certified police
officers. Mr. Metcalfe opined that it's time the legislature
consider having state employees perform law enforcement. If
those state employees are VPSOs, they should become certified
through basic police officer training, which would ensure
firearm training and supervision.
8:58:51 AM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK asked if it's the responsibility of the local
communities and regions or the state to take care of public
safety.
MR. METCALFE explained that police enforcement, through the
Alaska State Troopers, is provided to all members of the state.
Police enforcement is provided through airport, police, and fire
and municipal police departments provide law enforcement in
municipalities. Communities and the state provide law
enforcement that is regulated by the state. Although he
characterized it as a good law enforcement system, he
acknowledged that it could do better by increasing the number of
Alaska State Troopers, port service officers, and airport and
municipal police officers. The number of Alaska State Troopers
hasn't grown significantly in the last 20 years, while the
number of VPSOs has increased significantly in the last few
years. He recalled that for 3-4 years, the number of VPSOs was
increased by 15 annually. Since VPSOs aren't certified police
officers, Mr. Metcalfe opined that rural Alaska is receiving a
different kind of law enforcement than municipalities and other
regions of the state with significant Alaska State Trooper
resources.
9:02:08 AM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK highlighted that organized boroughs can create
their own police departments. The state, he opined, needs to
review the responsibility [chain for law enforcement in the
villages].
9:03:58 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX asked if it's realistic to think that even if
the number of Alaska State Troopers is increased, one would be
placed in small communities with populations of 20-30.
MR. VRABEC answered that although there is the desire to have
more Alaska State Troopers, placing an Alaska State Trooper in
every village or rural area isn't realistic. Furthermore, some
of the rural communities like their VPSOs and that type of law
enforcement.
9:05:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON, in response to Mr. Metcalfe's comments,
noted that he sits on the House Finance Committee and chairs the
House Finance Subcommittee on the Department of Public Safety
and the House Finance Subcommittee on the Department of
Corrections and will do all he can to retain the current level
of Alaska State Troopers, 315 throughout the state. However,
budget circumstances are going to make it challenging.
Representative Edgmon remarked that he could argue that HB 199
is as much about Alaska State Troopers as it is about VPSOs
because the legislation is about providing more tools for law
enforcement as a whole. Therefore, he expressed hope that Mr.
Metcalfe's comments were to accompany the bigger picture of the
proposal to arm VPSOs. With regard to comments that VPSOs are
private police, Representative Edgmon emphasized that they are
not private police, particularly when one considers their close
working relationship with the Department of Public Safety and
other entities involved in the criminal justice system.
9:07:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON opined that Mr. Metcalfe is minimizing the
working relationship Alaska State Troopers have with VPSOs,
which would have been apparent when Mr. Metcalfe was the
district attorney in Bethel. He then asked if Mr. Metcalfe
intends to offer amendments to HB 199.
MR. METCALFE responded that it's possible to offer amendments
and he is available to talk with committee members and the
sponsor. With regard to his time in Bethel as the district
attorney, he confirmed that his time in Bethel was a great
experience. Rural Alaska, he stated, has issues that have
existed for 20 years. Mr. Metcalfe related his opinion that
rural Alaska has received the short end of the stick in terms of
resources. He further opined that the state needs to pay more
attention to law enforcement in rural Alaska, including placing
more Alaska State Troopers, police department officials, and
certified VPSOs in rural Alaska. Although VPSOs perform an
outstanding job in terms of [their current duties], he said
there is no reason the state can't take over VPSOs, have them
work for DPS, and place them under the same regulations and
certification requirements as municipal and state police. He
pointed out that court service officers are DPS employees and
are supervised by Alaska State Troopers; these court service
operators receive training and are constantly monitored by
Alaska State Troopers. Like any issue in state government, it's
a matter of the state's priority. Mr. Metcalfe opined that for
those in rural Alaska a priority is to have good law enforcement
and the best way to achieve such is to have highly trained
people, which can include VPSOs. Mr. Metcalfe asked that VPSOs
be trained and fall under the same regulations as state and
local law enforcement. He emphasized that [his comments] are
not an attack on HB 199 or VPSOs, rather the desire is to make
it better.
9:12:03 AM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK noted his agreement with Mr. Metcalfe and
emphasized that it's the responsibility of the state to provide
public safety for all Alaskans, particularly for those in
unorganized areas. He suggested that the committee should
continue to discuss Mr. Metcalfe's comments.
9:14:46 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX asked if VPSOs were under the purview of the
state until about 10 years ago.
MR. VRABEC agreed it has been some time [since VPSOs have been
under the purview of the state] and reiterated that VPSOs are
not officially state employees, although they receive over 600
hours of training at the DPS Academy and oversight from DPS. He
acknowledged Mr. Metcalfe's suggestions to extend the training
of VPSOs and make them employees of the state and offered that
considerable time was spent by Mr. Masters on those matters.
The VPSO program, he opined, has come a long way and can
continue to grow.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON, in response to Co-Chair LeDoux, related
his understanding that he didn't recall VPSOs ever being state
employees.
CAPTAIN ARLOW, drawing from his history of the VPSO Program,
said that he didn't recall seeing documentation that VPSOs were
ever state employees.
9:17:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD surmised that certification of VPSOs
would increase costs. She then highlighted the difficult budget
situation in which the state finds itself and asked if this is a
cost effective way in which to have a sustainable public safety
presence in villages over the long term.
MR. VRABEC explained that since VPSOs are already in place now,
the proposal in HB 199 would provide their employers the ability
to provide an extra tool with minimal cost. With a difficult
budget situation, it's not reasonable to believe 30-50 Alaska
State Troopers will be funded. The DPS is willing to try to
train VPSOs [in the use of firearms].
9:19:30 AM
JESS CARSON, Sergeant, Special Projects, Alaska State Trooper,
Department of Public Safety, related his belief that when VPSOs
are provided firearms, they are being made police officers in
the state. Providing VPSOs with firearms provides them the
greatest responsibility of police officers, the ability to take
lives. The testimony that VPSOs go through the DPS Academy is
not entirely true because VPSOs do not go through the same
physical and mental requirements. Simply providing firearm
training doesn't make VPSOs police officers as it doesn't
provide the physical capabilities to retain the weapon and make
the proper choice regarding when and when not to shoot. The
aforementioned begins with the officer selection process that
includes background checks, polygraph tests, psychological
tests, and [interviews] with experienced officers that determine
whether an individual has the mental and physical capacity to
make the necessary choices and do the job. Only after the
aforementioned can one attend the DPS Academy, which has a high
dropout rate. Once one completes the training at the DPS
Academy, individuals continue training during which other
officers and supervisors observe their every move. He agreed
with early statements that the state is becoming more dangerous
and consideration should be given with regard to the environment
in which VPSOs are working. However, providing VPSOs, a lesser
trained individual, a firearm is problematic as it places
Alaskans and officers at greater risk. Situations [that call
for the use of firearms] should be dealt with by [certified]
police officers. He recalled the Regional Public Safety Officer
(RPSO) program, which placed certified police officers in the
villages and that he characterized as a great idea. Sergeant
Carson emphasized that carrying a firearm is the greatest
responsibility of law enforcement and the fiscal note of $62,000
for HB 199 is a fraction of the cost if someone is wrongly shot.
9:24:35 AM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK inquired as to whose responsibility it would be
to get an individual who killed someone back on track.
MR. VRABEC said that there would be liability of the employer
and it could extend to the state in terms of training.
9:26:48 AM
ANNE SEARS, Alaska State Trooper, Department of Public Safety,
began by informing the committee that she has been an Alaska
State Trooper for 13 years. With regard to training, she
informed the committee that from day one the DPS Academy
provides daily training on the use of force continuum. She
recalled her own training at the DPS Academy, which lasted 16
weeks after which she had another 16 weeks of field training
with experienced Alaska State Troopers and certified officers.
Following field training, she worked [as an Alaska State
Trooper] with the benefit of having experienced Alaska State
Troopers present for five months. Ms. Sears said she still has
the benefit of working with experienced Alaska State Troopers
who went through the same training. Ms. Sears then related that
she was born and raised in rural Alaska and the same problems
exist today that did 20 years ago. In fact, she related that
her mother has said that the same problems existed when she was
growing up in rural Alaska in the 1940s.
9:29:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked whether the suggestion is to make
all VPSOs Alaska State Troopers. She then inquired as to the
average cost of the training provided at the DPS Academy and the
average 20-year salary and benefit package of Alaska State
Troopers. She further inquired as to whether there are proven
outcomes, such as a decrease in crime, due to the presence of
Alaska State Troopers.
MR. VRABEC answered that whether an Alaska State Trooper or VPSO
is present, there has been success in terms of reduced crime.
The cost difference between VPSOs and Alaska State Troopers is
considerable. He noted that not all police department
[officers] are trained through the DPS Academy and the field
training will vary. As evidenced by the testimony, Alaska State
Troopers receive extensive training. He acknowledged that if
HB 199 passes, training issues and differences will have to be
reviewed. The existing VPSO Academy consists of 600-plus hours
of training while the DPS Academy for Alaska State Troopers
consists of 900 hours of training. He clarified that VPSOs
don't respond to everything, which is why Alaska State Troopers
are asked to respond to serious incidents and will continue to
be the case [even with the passage of HB 199]. Still, Mr.
Vrabec opined that the VPSO Program is very important in rural
Alaska.
9:32:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD inquired as to the price difference
between a 20-year VPSO and a 20-year Alaska State Trooper.
MR. VRABEC answered that the difference would be considerable as
they are two different positions. He estimated that the
difference would amount to $100,000s per officer over a 20-year
timeframe.
9:33:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD questioned then whether it's better to
place some [level] of [sustainable] public safety in [the rural
areas] and coordinate that public safety.
MR. VRABEC pointed out that there are weather challenges that
can prohibit Alaska State Troopers from being in a village
exactly when needed. The Alaska State Troopers can't be
everywhere all the time, he stated.
9:33:57 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX posed a scenario in which Alaska State Troopers
were placed in all villages, and asked whether the current
hiring policies for Alaska State Troopers allow selection of
troopers to come from within the particular village in which he
or she would serve. She explained that when she represented a
rural area, she found that VPSOs from the village in which they
serve are more successful than those VPSOs who are from
elsewhere.
MR. VRABEC agreed that there are villages who love their VPSOs
because of who they are and the same can be said of some Alaska
State Troopers.
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX clarified that her question is whether there are
seniority rules that allow Alaska State Troopers to select posts
and preclude villages from selecting their own troopers.
MR. VRABEC answered that the placement of Alaska State Troopers
will be controlled by DPS through a bidding process with PSEA.
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX surmised then that the process would take it a
bit out of local control.
MR. VRABEC replied yes.
9:36:56 AM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK returned to the fact that the state is
responsible for public safety, yet in the villages nonprofits
are taking the responsibility of public safety with no power,
resources, and a lower level of training. The proposed
legislation merely provides firearm training to allow VPSOs to
carry a firearm, which is a large responsibility.
MR. VRABEC clarified that by statute DPS is charged with
providing public safety throughout the state. However, the
level of service desired by the villages or cities drives the
type and size of law enforcement. With regard to VPSOs, Mr.
Vrabec reiterated that the VPSO Program is a valued program.
9:42:01 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX, upon determining no one else wished to testify,
closed public testimony.
9:42:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON noted his appreciation of today's
testimony. He reminded the committee that the legislature
represents the unorganized boroughs, and thus the legislature
must provide public safety to those areas that cannot afford it.
Therefore, the question, as it was posed by Mr. Metcalfe
earlier, is whether the legislature wants to have public safety
throughout the state.
9:43:54 AM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK said his answer is yes, he wants his people
protected and to have the best available. He acknowledged, from
his time as the mayor of the North Slope Borough, that it costs
a lot [to provide protection for people]. However, he
questioned what it will cost not to have [public safety] in the
villages. Co-Chair Nageak opined that [the villages] need some
sort of [certified] police officers.
9:46:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER commented that until more resources can be
provided to rural Alaska to provide the same level of protection
in rural Alaska, HB 199 is a step in the right direction. This
legislation, he further commented, is something that can be done
now with minimal resources.
9:46:44 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX announced her intention to hold HB 199 to
consider today's testimony and comments. She then highlighted
how integral firearms are in villages and pointed out that
without this legislation, VPSOs may be the only ones in the
village who are not armed.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 199 ver U.pdf |
HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/4/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 199 |
| HB 199 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/4/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 199 |
| HB 199 DPS Draft Revised VPSO Regs.pdf |
HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 199 |
| HB199 fiscal Note DPS.pdf |
HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/4/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 199 |
| HB 199 Informational Meeting Summary 9 26 2013.pdf |
HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/4/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 199 |
| HB 199 Information Hearing Supporting Documents.pdf |
HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/4/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 199 |
| HB 199 Supporting Document ADN Article.pdf |
HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/4/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 199 |
| HB 199 Supporting Document ADN Editor Letter.pdf |
HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/4/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 199 |
| HB 199 Supporting Document Alaska Dispatch.pdf |
HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/4/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 199 |
| HB 199 Supporting Document Letter Robert Claus.pdf |
HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/4/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 199 |
| HB 199 Supporting Document Letters.pdf |
HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/4/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 199 |
| HB 199 Supporting Document McCarthy Letter.pdf |
HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/4/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 199 |
| CSHB 181 ver U.pdf |
HCRA 4/9/2013 8:00:00 AM HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 181 |
| HB 181 ver A.pdf |
HCRA 4/9/2013 8:00:00 AM HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 181 |
| HB 181 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HCRA 4/9/2013 8:00:00 AM HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 181 |
| HB181-DNR-MLW-4-6-13.pdf |
HCRA 4/9/2013 8:00:00 AM HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 181 |
| HB181-DOR-TAX-04-05-13.pdf |
HCRA 4/9/2013 8:00:00 AM HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 181 |
| HB181-DOR-TRS-04-05-13.pdf |
HCRA 4/9/2013 8:00:00 AM HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 181 |
| HB181-DCCED-DCRA-04-04-13.pdf |
HCRA 4/9/2013 8:00:00 AM HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 181 |
| HB 181 leg research applicability.pdf |
HCRA 4/9/2013 8:00:00 AM HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 181 |
| HB 181 Supporting Documents legal service memo.pdf |
HCRA 4/9/2013 8:00:00 AM HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 181 |
| HB 181 Support East West Nome Beach Public Mining Area R (3) (1).pdf |
HCRA 4/9/2013 8:00:00 AM HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 181 |
| HB 181 Supporting Documents Nome Mining Map.pdf |
HCRA 4/9/2013 8:00:00 AM HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 181 |
| HB 181 Supporting Documents Nome Offshore Lease Tract Map (March 2012).pdf |
HCRA 4/9/2013 8:00:00 AM HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 181 |
| HB 181 Supporting Documents Nome Vessel Calls Chart at 11 06 12 edited.pdf |
HCRA 4/9/2013 8:00:00 AM HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 181 |
| HB 181 Supporting Documents Nome Vessel Stats Spread at 11 06 12.pdf |
HCRA 4/9/2013 8:00:00 AM HCRA 1/28/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 181 |