SB 80 - MUNICIPAL POLICE SERVICES Number 217 CHAIR JAMES said we only had a few minutes, but SB 80 would be heard next. The sponsor, Senator Steve Rieger, was there and she called him forward to present a sponsor statement. She received a note from her Committee Aide that Anchorage Mayor Mystrom called with strong opposition to this legislation, saying it would create severe damage to public safety. SENATOR STEVE RIEGER came before the committee with his sponsor statement, saying that SB 80 is the culmination of a grassroots effort to try to find an interim solution to an ongoing problem in the Anchorage area. The bill is a measure to allow a citizenry, which has expressed a desire and willingness, to pay for the cost of their public safety protection. This will have a positive affect on the Department of Public Safety's operating budget. It would help every legislator who has public safety enforcement in their area, and it is clearly a local option, and a self- determination issue and has received a full hearing in the district he represents. He thought it was a local annexation issue and this was probably the reason for the call from Mayor Mystrom. Senator Rieger said it does not, in any way, preclude any local annexation issues. There is inflammatory rhetoric from downtown Anchorage, but he urged the committee to recognize that was not their concern, as state officials. Their concern was about a local effort, and a desire and willingness to pay, if they should allow it to happen. Senator Rieger said this bill would prevent that from happening. Number 252 CHAIR JAMES asked if this bill passed, if he would have the authority and wish to pay the Department of Public Safety for protection, and where the people would come from who would provide the protection. She asked if they would take people from other areas, which might result in those areas being short of protection. SENATOR RIEGER said additional money would go into the department, which would pay for additional troopers for backup. Not only would there be no erosion for anybody else's services, this bill would provide an override financially to contribute to the rest of the system. The additional people put on in public safety would serve as an additional backup if there were a special need anywhere in the state. There would be a financial and manpower benefit to all areas of the state. Number 265 CHAIR JAMES said she supported this bill when it passed last year. The reason was that it might relate to her area, the Healy area, which needed a trooper. They had been working to get a trooper there for two years. TED BACHMAN, a Lieutenant with the Alaska State Troopers in Anchorage, wanted to put on the record that the department strongly opposes this bill, as Mayor Mystrom did. He had a number of reasons, and one was that it draws from other areas of the state. The bills says it won't, but it will. If this bill passes, Mr. Bachman said, they would be under a contractual obligation to provide a certain number of troopers to particular areas. They are not under contractual obligation now, to provide positions anywhere else in the state; positions are provided on a management decision basis. A statement was made that troopers would act as backup for other areas of the state. This could present problems if an emergency called troopers out of the contract area. Number 308 REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN mentioned being involved in the fire department and asked if they could get a mutual aid agreement with the APD that would cover it. LIEUTENANT BACHMAN answered that he did not know that they would need a mutual aid agreement. He thought they could get one, but he did not know if he could respond adequately. CHAIR JAMES queried whether this bill spells out exactly what would be in that contract agreement. She thought those things could be included in the contractual agreement so it would work for both parties. LIEUTENANT BACHMAN said that to an extent some of the things could be accounted for, although it says in the bill that "the contract will be for direct services to the contract area." That was another point they objected to. They could not account for the indirect services: for instance, criminal investigation units, drug investigation units, and laboratory services. All these things would come to the contract area by virtue of the fact that the area was being served by the state troopers. CHAIR JAMES thanked Lieutenant Bachman for his statement and said time was running out. Her feeling was that there were other areas of the state that do not have police powers and might be able to get more police protection by contracting with the state troopers. If they had that opportunity they could have more troopers, and everyone would be better off. Number 343 REPRESENTATIVE ED WILLIS asked where the bill will go next if they passed it out of committee. He had mixed feelings about it. CHAIR JAMES determined from the committee that it would go to Finance. REPRESENTATIVE WILLIS said he would feel better about it knowing it was going to another committee. If it got to the floor he wondered if he would vote for it. He resented actions being taken outside of the local jurisdiction, and Anchorage is a first class home-ruled city and there are ways to address it. CHAIR JAMES asked if there was anyone who wanted to move the bill out. REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said he was having problems with the bill. Public Safety is against it, the mayor is against it, and the richest area of the state is not willing to pay for its own police protection. Number 367 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said he would move to pass the bill out of committee. He was not sure of its chances, however. CHAIR JAMES asked if there were any objections. REPRESENTATIVE OGAN objected. CHAIR JAMES said that since there were only four members present, since Representative Robinson was called to HESS, and one member objected, the bill could not be moved out.