Legislature(2019 - 2020)BUTROVICH 205
02/04/2020 03:30 PM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB144 | |
| SB164 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 144 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 164 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 164-PEACE OFFICER/VPO: ELIG., STDRS., DEFIN.
4:02:07 PM
CHAIR REVAK reconvened the meeting and announced the
consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 164, "An Act relating to the
crime of impersonating a peace officer; relating to the powers
of the Alaska Police Standards Council; relating to the
definition of 'village police officer'; and providing for an
effective date."
He asked Commissioner Price to introduce the bill.
4:02:42 PM
AMANDA PRICE, Commissioner, Department of Public Safety,
Anchorage, Alaska, introduced herself and Bob Griffiths.
She stated that SB 164, relating to police standards, is an
opportunity to address one arena of the public safety crisis in
rural Alaska. It will ensure that Alaska has rigorous and
enforceable standards for employing police and village police
officers throughout Alaska. She continued the introduction
paraphrasing the following excerpt from the governor's
transmittal letter:
The bill proposes amendments to AS 18.65, Police
Protection, to provide that a person may not be
appointed as a police or village police officer if the
person has been convicted of a felony, a sex offense
defined in AS 12.63.100, or a crime involving domestic
violence as defined in AS 18.66.990. The legislation
further clarifies that the Alaska Police Standards
Council has the power to set standards for employment
for village police officers by regulation and may
investigate when there is reason to believe an officer
or a village police officer does not meet minimum
standards for employment. In addition, this bill would
include a definition for village police officer in
statute.
Establishing in law the standards and qualifications
for the employment of police and village police
officers, will ensure that individuals who are
appointed to these important positions of trust and
authority in our communities, are qualified to hold
such a position.
COMMISSIONER PRICE stated that SB 164 will discourage people
with criminal records from applying for these positions. She
continued, "We do have anecdotal stories of individuals who have
criminal records from down in the states who seek these
positions of authority in our village communities because they
know they can attain them." She said that is a concern.
4:05:14 PM
BOB GRIFFITHS, Executive Director, Alaska Police Standards
Council (APSC), Alaska Department of Public Safety, Juneau,
Alaska stated that the intent of SB 164 is to enhance rural
public safety by ensuring that police officers have the
appropriate qualifications. He acknowledged that in some rural
areas and communities, unqualified individuals have been hired
to serve as village police officers. These candidates were not
just inadequately trained to do the job, but some are convicted
felons, sex offenders, and people or domestic violence
offenders. He noted several instances in which APSC learned,
after the fact, that individuals on active probation for these
offenses were knowingly hired by community leaders. He said the
council is asking the legislature for assistance in addressing
this disconcerting pattern.
MR. GRIFFITHS explained that the Alaska Police Standards Council
was created in 1972 and charged with establishing professional
standards for training and hiring police officers. The council
quickly adopted two sets of standards: 1) an urban, road-system
standard for officers that required a higher level of training
and education; and 2) a rural, off-road-system standard that
required less training. He said the reduced requirements for the
less stringent standard was intended to compensate for the
geography and cultural challenges in rural areas. The latter
officers became known as village police officers (VPOs) and only
exist in regulation, not in statute.
The current regulations set out minimum standards for hiring and
training both types of officers. Felons and people convicted of
crimes of moral turpitude are prohibited from serving. He said
urban agencies have consistently adhered to these standards, but
rural communities have struggled to comply. He acknowledged that
for years APSC has wrestled with its responsibility to track and
train village police officers and enforce the regulations.
MR. GRIFFITHS opined that the current problem is a culmination
of multiple factors. These include exceptionally high turnover
for VPOs, the dynamic nature of leadership in rural communities,
and a dearth of interested or qualified candidates. He said most
community leaders will also cite the lack of resources but SB
164 does not address that.
He pointed out that the legislation to establish APSC did not
include enforcement authority. The council's authority was
limited to enforcing the rules on individual officer
qualifications and training. Thus, when rural communities fail
to report who they hired or fail to respond to official
communications, APSC's ability to enforce the regulations is
impeded. In fact, city managers, mayors, or local leaders who
hire VPOs often do not know the hiring rules. He said the Alaska
Municipal League (AML) has helped with outreach to educate these
leaders and urge compliance, but it has been a challenge.
4:12:10 PM
MR. GRIFFITHS stated that as part of the outreach effort, APSC
identified 47 VPOs serving in 18 communities that the council
did not know about. One community reported having three officers
but a community official could not provide their names. Just one
of the 47 VPOs has completed the necessary two-week training and
achieved APSC certification. He said APSC identified 55
communities that have no law enforcement other than the Alaska
State Troopers (AST). What is more alarming, he said, is that 38
incorporated communities that are off the road system have never
responded to a request from APSC.
He said the APSC owes it to constituents in rural Alaska to do
better. SB 164 is intended to clarify and strengthen existing
regulations by amending the statutes to clearly disqualify
individuals from serving as a peace officer if they have been
convicted of a felony, or a misdemeanor sex or domestic violence
crime. Additionally, it will add a disincentive for anyone who
is disqualified for those reasons from seeking such a position.
He said APSC regulations reflect the policy of the council as
authorized by the legislature. Given that the policy is
occasionally violated, APSC felt it was time for the legislature
to clearly articulate its policy on acceptable conduct for
police officers charged with ensuring peace and public order in
these communities. The hope is that with the weight of law,
compliance will be elevated statewide.
MR. GRIFFITHS said in recognition of the disparity of resources
between urban and rural communities, SB 164 does not increase
existing training and hiring requirements. It simply puts what
is in current regulation into statute.
4:14:56 PM
MR. GRIFFITHS paraphrased the following sectional analysis for
SB 164:
Sections 1 and 2 work together to clarify that an
individual who is ineligible to become a police
officer or village police officer in Alaska due to
disqualifying criminal history may be prosecuted for
impersonating a peace officer. This is done by
amending the definition of "peace officer" under AS
11.81.900 to exclude individuals who have been
convicted of certain crimes, and by adding a new
subsection to AS 11.56.827 to clarify that it is not a
defense to prosecution for impersonating a peace
officer if an individual was employed as a peace
officer at the time.
Section 3 of the bill amends AS 12.62.400 concerning
national criminal history records checks to clarify
that the department of public safety may submit
fingerprints to the Federal Bureau of Investigation
prior to issuing police certification to a village
police officer.
Section 4 of the bill amends AS 18.65.220 concerning
the powers of the Alaska Police Standards Council to
clarify that APSC has the power to adopt minimum
standards for employment of village police officers,
and to investigate when there is reason to believe a
village police officer does not meet these standards.
Section 5 makes conforming changes to AS 18.65.230
concerning Alaska Police Standards Council training
programs and pre-appointment criminal records checks.
Section 6 amends AS 18.65.240 concerning police
officer standards to include village police officers.
Section 7 adds two new subsections to AS 18.65.240.
Subsection (e) would explicitly prohibit appointment
of a police officer or village police officer, even on
a probationary basis, an individual who had been
convicted of certain crimes. New subsection (f) would
provide that the Alaska Police Standards Council has
the power to establish standards for village police
officers by regulation. The Alaska Police Standards
Council has been setting standards for village police
officers in regulations for decades, however village
police officer is not currently defined in statute.
Section 8 amends AS 18.65.290 by adding a definition
for "village police officer" in statute.
Section 9 provides that section 1 of the Act, and the
change in definition for peace officer in AS 00.81.900
within Section 2 of the act will apply to offenses
committed on or after the effective date.
Section 10 provides for an immediate effective date.
4:18:18 PM
MR. GRIFFITHS offered to answer questions.
4:19:14 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if the cultural and economic challenges
in rural Alaska that he mentioned still exist and how this bill
will help address them.
MR. GRIFFITHS said the bill might not fix those problems, in
fact, those problems have worsened. The bill will help the APSC
address rural communities not following the regulations, which
will become statute. It will address one element in the process.
SENATOR KAWASAKI recounted that 47 village police officers are
unaccounted for, that 55 villages are without police presence
and 38 villages did not respond when contacted. He questioned
how much of the issue is due to a lack of communication and how
this bill will solve the problems the state is trying to solve.
MR. GRIFFITHS said the issue identifies a definite breakdown in
communication. The APSC's resources are by phone, e-mail, and
mail. If these attempts currently fail, they may likely fail in
the future. The APSC has partners such as the Alaska Municipal
League, which has offered assistance to do outreach to the
communities. The APSC also partners with the Alaska State
Troopers (AST), who are valuable resources to the council.
COMMISSIONER PRICE added that the department also evaluates the
element of positive unknown. Some rural communities do not know
how to hire a village police officer. If the law informs them of
the state's expectations, one positive impact may be an
additional step of readiness for communities. She acknowledged
that this bill will not solve all of the challenges, but it will
allow the state to indicate that those individuals with a
violent offender history should not have positions of
significant authority. The likelihood of an individual officer
responding to someone that the person has previously victimized
is much higher in a small community and the trauma inflicted to
the victim and community would be immensurable.
4:23:49 PM
SENATOR COGHILL opined that codifying the requirements is good.
He referred to Section 1 to the provision that will clarify that
it is not a defense to prosecution for impersonating a peace
officer if an individual was employed as a peace officer at the
time. He asked whether that defense could currently be used.
MR. GRIFFITHS said no. Someone who is currently an appointed law
enforcement officer taking enforcement action would not be
subject to this statute. The intent of the bill is to change the
definition of a police officer so an officer who is a felon is
not considered a police officer even if the individual was sworn
in.
CHAIR COGHILL said that comports with his understanding. He
added that this is the first time that the village public
officers (VPOs) will be codified in statute. He predicted this
will improve communication between the department and the
communities. He related his understanding that communities will
incur additional costs to conduct background checks on
applicants. He asked what communities could expect to change
with passage of SB 164.
MR. GRIFFITHS said the current requirements to hire urban or
rural police officers include a fingerprint-based background
check and a rudimentary background investigation. This could
mean making a few phone calls to prior employers or it could be
a comprehensive one conducted by the Anchorage Police Department
or the Alaska State Troopers. He did not envision that the bill
would add any additional requirements for rural communities, but
it will allow the APSC to provide rural communities with
assistance and advise them that the AST and APSC will process
the fingerprints for them. He acknowledged that taking
fingerprints would pose challenges for some communities. He
related his understanding that the AML will provide background
investigations at no cost to the villages.
CHAIR COGHILL asked about the nexus between village public
safety officers (VPSOs) and village police officer (VPOs). He
also asked if additional requirements will be added for VPOs and
whether this bill separates them. He related his understanding
that the current requirements are in regulation.
4:28:24 PM
MR. GRIFFITHS said VPSOs and VPOs are often confused. He
explained that a VPO is a police officer appointed by city or a
police department. A VPSO is a grant-funded individual who works
for a nonprofit grantee of the Department of Public Safety. Both
are peace officers with different classifications, but these two
classes of officers have different authorities and slightly
different requirements. There would not be any elimination of
VPSO eligibility due to the passage of this bill, he said.
4:29:36 PM
COMMISSIONER PRICE added that a legislative working group has
been reviewing the village public safety officer (VPSO) program.
One recommendation would include potential certification for the
VPSO program. Currently, VPSOs are not identified as police
officers so the APSC has not developed a certification process.
The Department of Public Safety has recommended a certification
process be developed so all officers, including the VPOs, VPSOs,
municipal or borough department officers, and Alaska State
Troopers meet the minimum state identified standards for law
enforcement officers.
SENATOR COGHILL envisioned that regulations will be adopted. He
asked how the standards will be enforced. He related his
understanding that most of this would fall under Title 29. He
suggested that some communities will be held to a new degree of
accountability.
MR. GRIFFITHS said enforcement of regulations will be through
the Administrative Procedures Act. Currently, the APSC has
regulation changes in process that parallel this Act. He did not
anticipate the need to modify those regulations at this point
but that may change, depending on the final outcome of the
regulations.
CHAIR COGHILL asked if there are conversations about higher
training levels.
MR. GRIFFITHS answered yes, but a lot of additional training is
not anticipated. The hope is that the 46 officers who have not
completed their training will want to do so. The only VPO
academy is located in Bethel and training is offered several
times per year. He said the department has had some discussion
about expanding the training by rotating it into hub areas.
However, training expansion is still under discussion, subject
to resource limitations.
4:33:41 PM
CHAIR REVAK asked how many VPOs are in Alaska.
MR. GRIFFITHS said the APSC has identified 57 VPOs in the state.
He suggested there are more, but he is uncertain of the number.
This bill will help the APSC to identify them and get the VPOs
on the track for training and certification. In further
response, he stated that this bill will affect the [57]
officers.
4:34:45 PM
CHIEF JUSTIN DOLL, Anchorage Police Department (APD) and Chair,
Alaska Police Standards Council, Anchorage, Alaska, said, as
chair, it has been interesting to learn about challenges that
law enforcement faces in rural Alaska. He said he has lived in
Anchorage and did not understand the challenges officers face in
rural Alaska. The APSC has been frustrated because it wants to
set reasonable yet high standards for law enforcement in Alaska
and to enforce them. He said that is much of what the council
does, including reviewing incidents and background for officers
who have applied and been rejected. Some parts of rural Alaska,
in an attempt to deal with the challenges of attracting, hiring,
and retaining qualified applicants, have bypassed all of the
existing regulations and hire people whose backgrounds are not
appropriate for law enforcement.
He said SB 164 will codify the regulations that some communities
have ignored. He added that in the past year, additional focus
on law enforcement in rural Alaska has revealed some of those
deficiencies. Consequently, more people are aware of the issues.
He related that some law enforcement officers have felony
convictions for domestic violence or sexual assault, which most
people would agree is not reasonable. Everyone has the right to
have the law enforcement officers serving in their communities
be subject to reasonable minimum standards and backgrounds. More
importantly, the standards need to have some "teeth" to allow
the department to enforce and assess penalties if a locality
does not follow those standards. He advocated for uniform
standards for law enforcement officers in Alaska. As a
regulatory body, the council has the ability to take action on
individual applicants, but not on a government entity that is
hiring and employing individuals as law enforcement officers.
4:38:34 PM
SENATOR COGHILL asked if there were qualifications in addition
to the minimum standards in current regulation.
CHIEF DOLL answered yes. Law enforcement applicants must be of
good moral character, without any criminal convictions or other
conduct that is inconsistent with a law enforcement profession.
He said the council has been working for several years to obtain
tools to enforce these standards.
4:40:43 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI referred to the APSC's minimum qualification
sheet in members' packets. He related his understanding that
currently a VPO who has a prior felony, sex crime, or domestic
violence conviction could still become a village police officer
(VPO).
CHIEF DOLL said he did not believe so but deferred to Mr.
Griffiths who is the subject matter expert for all tiers of law
enforcement.
4:41:44 PM
MR. GRIFFITHS said VPOs cannot have a prior felony conviction or
criminal conviction of a crime of moral turpitude. The
qualifications do not specifically identify "sex offense" or
"domestic violence" crimes, but the council's interpretation has
been to include those crimes as factors for denying applicants.
In further response to Senator Kawasaki, he said the current
requirements are articulated in existing regulation and the bill
will state in statute that those crimes are reasons to deny
applicants. He reiterated that the council has interpreted these
crimes as a means to deny VPO applicants, but this will place it
in law.
4:43:46 PM
CHAIR REVAK opened public testimony on SB 164.
4:44:22 PM
NILS ANDREASSEN, Executive Director, Alaska Municipal League
(AML), Juneau, stated that the AML welcomes this legislation,
offered by the governor, and recognizes the important
contribution it makes to further enhance public safety in
Alaska. This bill potentially would affect 100 communities.
There are currently 39 known VPOs serving in the state, but
there may be more VPOs in communities. This discrepancy may be
due to the lack of staff or resources to meet the reporting
requirements, he said.
He reported the combined population in the 39 communities with
VPOs is 19,000 Alaskans. The average number of employees of
these political subdivisions is 8. The combined budgets of the
39 communities is $30 million, with an average budget of
$860,000. The combined tax revenue is just over $3 million. He
stated that roughly 10 percent of their overall revenue is
derived from sales taxes. The rest of community budgets are made
up of federal and state grants and other assistance, including
revenue from bingo and fees for utilities.
MR. ANDREASSEN said community assistance, which was reduced in
the past five years by 50 percent, is about $3 million for these
39 communities. These communities will see an additional
$300,000 in revenue reduction again this year. All but four of
the 39 communities are on the Division of Community and Regional
Affairs stressed community list. This means these communities
lack the sufficient capacity to meet many of the current
requirements such as elections, audits, and workers'
compensation. Some believe these communities are differentiated
from urban communities by geography and culture. He argued that
the difference is tax based because these cities do not have the
tax base to provide services for residents. Still, these
communities are working hard to fulfill residents' expectations.
4:47:22 PM
MR. ANDREASSEN said he could juxtapose these 39 communities with
39 urban communities that have municipal law enforcement in
place to contrast the differences in the communities. These
urban communities have all adopted the same powers under Title
29 for police powers. Their combined public safety budgets total
$270 million, or roughly $75 million more than the Department of
Public Safety's budget, or nine times the budget of all the VPO
communities.
He said he called many of these communities and overwhelmingly
heard that SB 164 would improve public safety in the state.
However, rural communities overwhelmingly believe that this bill
will not change the reality of the lack of access to a qualified
pool of candidates, nor will it augment the capacity of local
governments to recruit and retain qualified officers or comply
with existing standards or new statutory requirements.
MR. ANDREASSEN acknowledged that these issues are part of a
larger conversation, but he offered his belief that this bill
will provide an opportunity to offer incentives to these
stressed communities by funding this mandate. He said a mandate
is clearly necessary, but it is also necessary to provide
funding for the requirements that come with these
responsibilities. He encouraged the committee to amend the bill
to make communities eligible for a base level of funding to
offset the cost of the required police professional liability
insurance. This funding could help communities provide uniforms,
bullet-proof vests for officers and housing, where necessary.
This funding could also help ensure these officers have funding
to travel to obtain training. He said this funding is essential
if the goal is to increase communication and provide local
governments a means to comply with statutory requirements of the
state.
4:49:51 PM
MR. ANDREASSEN offered to follow up on Title 29 questions. He
further commented on the definition of VPO. These incorporated
cities and municipalities are the only ones eligible to have
police powers in a rural area. He suggested that it may be time
to update the statutes that were adopted in 1972.
4:50:32 PM
CHAIR REVAK asked for his testimony in writing.
4:50:55 PM
BRITTANY MADROS, Tribal Government Specialist, Tanana Chiefs
Conference (TCC), Fairbanks, Alaska, testified in support of SB
164. She said she provides technical assistance to the 37 tribes
within the TCC region on tribal court systems and public safety.
She agreed with the sentiment of SB 164, particularly about
background checks to disqualify sex offenders from becoming law
enforcement officers. However, precluding felons and domestic
violence (DV) offenders from applying as VPOs could be
catastrophic without a waiver process or time limit. A
nonviolent felony from a person's youth could prevent someone
from applying years or decades later. A misguided shouting match
between siblings or a roommate that led to an arrest and
conviction could keep them from applying if it resulted in a
harassment or domestic violence charge.
She said TCC respectfully asks the committee amend SB 164 to
address the felony or DV issues, similar to the foster care
regulations that allow someone who may have had a barrier crime
secure a foster care license. She noted that the TCC was not
previously asked to comment on the bill.
4:54:19 PM
KATIE BOTTZ, representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 164. She said police officers should be held to a
higher standard and be accountable since they enforce the laws.
As a victim of sexual abuse, she said she supports the
provisions that disqualify law enforcement applicants who were
convicted of sexual abuse crimes. She asked members to please
move the bill forward.
4:56:02 PM
CHAIR REVAK closed public testimony on SB 164 and encouraged the
public to submit written testimony to
[email protected].
He held SB 164 in committee for future consideration.