HB 199-VPSO FIREARMS  8:04:27 AM CHAIR LYNN announced the first order of business was HOUSE BILL NO. 199, "An Act relating to Department of Public Safety regulations allowing village public safety officers to carry firearms." 8:05:26 AM REPRESENTATIVE BRYCE EDGMON, Alaska State Legislature, as prime sponsor, presented HB 199. He recollected that at the prior hearing on HB 199, on 2/13/14, Representative Hughes had asked a couple questions. 8:07:01 AM REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES explained that her questions had been in regard to the screening and training of VPSOs, and she said she would like the Department of Public Safety (DPS) to address them. CHAIR LYNN indicated he would hear other testimony first. 8:08:07 AM JOE MASTERS stated that although he had worked in law enforcement for over 30 years - as a Village Public Safety Officer (VPSO) in Unalakleet, a rural police officer, an Alaska State Trooper, and five years as commissioner of DPS - he was testifying on his own behalf. He said he would discuss the unique nature of VPSOs and their duties and the issue of their safety. He said VPSOs are an important and integral part of the safety of rural villagers. He said many communities with VPSOs have no other source of law enforcement. Occasionally there are village police officers (VPOs), but often they are not armed either. He said over the past few years there has been an increase in assaults on police officers in Alaska. Since 2002, the rate of injury assaults on Alaska police officers increased by 66 percent, while the rate of non-injury assaults increased by 137 percent. He said there have been seven incidents over the past several years where VPSOs have been threatened by subjects using fire arms. He said the aforementioned incident that ended Mr. Madole's life was widely publicized, but just prior to that there was a known incident in Southwest Alaska, outside of Bethel, where a VPSO was chased by a subject with a shotgun and received pellets to the face. He said there was also a VPSO in a community outside of Kotzebue, who was backed down the street by a subject, who was tackled by another bystander and did not shoot at the VPSO. He said there are many similar examples. He stated that VPSOs have been law enforcement officer for over 30 years in rural Alaska. 8:12:10 AM MR. MASTERS said the idea of a VPSO being armed is not a new concept; in the early '80s, a VPSO could be armed if their communities accepted additional liability insurance. He said he does not recall what the training requirement was. 8:12:45 AM CHAIR LYNN asked Mr. Masters if there have been past incidents where armed VPSOs misused their weapons. MR. MASTERS answered that he does not recall any incidents during the time he served as a rural officer, but cannot say for certain. Mr. Masters relayed that in the early '90s there was a transition course, which helped VPSOs fill traditional police positions. He said he was a trainer in Sitka at the time and also instructed courses in the use of firearms. He said during that time there were no more problems as a result of the training or relating to decisions of when the use of deadly force was acceptable compared to any other law enforcement academies. He acknowledged that there are people concerned about training and background [checks] for VPSOs, which are issues he said need to be addressed. Notwithstanding that, he opined that it is time to offer the necessary tools to VPSOs that are trained properly so that they can defend themselves. He said under current statute, VPSOs are allowed to carry a firearm, but only under extreme exigent circumstances; however, those circumstances can happen so quickly that a VPSO may not have time to go get a firearm. Mr. Masters emphasized his strong support of HB 199. He revealed that when he was commissioner, he had begun a regulation process to allow VPSOs to be armed and address the training aspect, as well, because he was sure that DPS "held the responsibility and the authority to dictate what level of training and certification was required prior to a VPSO being allowed to be armed." 8:16:30 AM CHAIR LYNN expressed appreciation for Mr. Masters' testimony because of his varied related job positions. He asked how the training back at the time VPSOs were armed in the past compares to the training proposed under HB 199. MR. MASTERS answered that the amount of training given in the 1980s to all types of law enforcement officers was much less than it is today. He posited that it is more relevant what kind of training will be given today, and he warned against putting too much detail in VPSO training to the point that it would be above and beyond that which a police officer does. 8:19:13 AM JAKE METCALFE, Executive Director, Public Safety Employees Association (PSEA) Local 803, said Local 803 serves state troopers, airport police, court service officers, and municipal police departments in Ketchikan, Sitka, Juneau, Fairbanks, Soldotna, Unalaska, and Dillingham. He said VPSOs are not members of Local 803; however, the state troopers oversee them and work with them on a daily basis. He related that from 1990- [1994], he worked as an assistant district attorney, and from 1994-1997 he was a district attorney in Bethel, where he worked in the capacity of prosecutor with VPSOs employed by the Association of Village Council Presidents. He said the people who worked in his office worked with VPSOs on a regular basis. He said he thinks not only does he know how important VPSOs are to villages, but he also has an understanding of their job duties. He said VPSOs are certified to be VPSOs, not police officers; law enforcement is a limited portion of what they do, and it is done on a limited basis. He said VPSOs do not go through the same amount of training as state troopers or municipal police officers go through, which he explained is one of the concerns that PSEA Local 803 has with the proposed legislation. MR. METCALFE said police officers receive a great deal of training before being authorized to work alone with a weapon, and he offered his understanding that under HB 199 and the attached fiscal note, that training has not been considered. He said PSEA Local 803 thinks that the fiscal note is not accurate, because there is training that should be required. He said a police certificate requires 900 hours of training, while a VPSO certificate, which does not require the basic law enforcement training, requires approximately 600 hours. Further, when a police officer finishes training, he/she goes out in the field with an experienced police officer for up to six months. He said if the same thing is anticipated under HB 199, then that would require a state trooper to do the field training, which would mean a considerable amount of increased funding. 8:23:18 AM MR. METCALFE stated that Captain Steven Arlow has given a presentation on the VPSO Program to a couple of legislative committees, and one statistic given is that there is about a 30- percent turnover in the VPSO Program on a yearly basis. He said that by his calculations, there is a complete turnover about every three years. He said he thinks that turnover is something that should be considered as repetitive in terms of the cost to the state. He urged the committee to get more information about the training that would be required and the true cost under HB 199 in arming VPSOs. 8:24:41 AM CHAIR LYNN pondered whether the stress of working in remote locations without proper defense is a factor in the high turnover of VPSOs. MR. METCALFE ventured there are a number of factors that go into the turnover rate, including: the lack of a retirement program; insufficient pay, and working outside ones own community. He said part of it could be the stress of being unarmed; however, much of what a VPSO does is not related to law enforcement. For example, VPSOs are involved in search and rescue, fire, and educating students in schools. He said the law enforcement aspect involves helping state troopers with misdemeanor cases; very seldom are they involved in felony cases other than to help a trooper who is going into a community to investigate a felony. He reiterated that there are many factors that go into the turnover of VPSOs. 8:26:53 AM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER challenged Mr. Metcalfe's testimony that a turnover rate of approximately 30 percent means that there is a complete turnover about every three years, because "you may get turnover rates up because of problems in one area that can be dealt with." 8:27:33 AM MR. METCALFE said he appreciates Representative Keller's comment, because there are a number of ways to look at the issue. He opined that 30 percent a year is an amount that needs to be considered in the cost of training, because 30 percent in any program is costly. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER clarified that his comment had not been pointed to the 30 percent a year turnover, but rather to Mr. Metcalfe's conclusion that that means the whole program turns over every three years. MR. METCALFE said 30 percent is huge amount that should be considered in the cost of the proposed legislation. 8:29:09 AM MARK SPRINGER said although he serves on the Bethel City Council and is on the Alaska Municipal League (AML) Board of Directors, he is testifying on behalf of himself. He said he has lived in rural Alaska since 1976, in Hooper Bay, as a city administrator who hired VPSOs. He opined that Mr. Metcalfe's characterization of the job of a VPSO - as focused primarily on fire fighting, search and rescue, and visiting schools - was a mischaracterization of the work done by VPSOs. He said dispatch cards will show that VPSOs enforce state laws every day. They involve themselves in driving under the influence (DUI) and domestic violence cases, conducting preliminary investigations of serious crimes, securing crime scenes until state troopers arrive, and assisting troopers with felony investigations. He related one reason that it is said VPSOs do not do felony work is that often a district attorney will not take felony paperwork from a VPSO, even though a VPSO "may be, by dint of experience, perfectly qualified to perform the initial part of a felony investigation." MR. SPRINGER stated his full support of HB 199 and urged the committee's support. He concurred with the testimony of former VPSO and commissioner of DPS, Mr. Masters. He said both Mr. Masters and Mr. Metcalfe made an important point that VPSOs in Alaska are not peace officers under state statute. He stated he has always thought that they ought to be. He said they used to be certified by the Alaska Police Standards Council (APSC), but that ended more than ten years ago. He opined that the APSC should be the agency that sets the standards for training for VPSOs to carry firearms. He said Alaskans can be proud of how the Alaska State Troopers' "consistent, judicious, and measured application of force, and particularly deadly force, as compared to a lot of other law enforcement agencies in the United States." He indicated his confidence in allowing the commissioner to set and enforce the standards for VPSOs to be armed and be trained to the same degree as the troopers. He described a situation where a trooper responds to a call where there may be an inebriated person with a shotgun and the door gets kicked in, and he said that is the type of situation he wants to see VPSOs handle. He said there are a lot of experienced VPSOs in the state; many in his region have been certified police officers. He said when a police officer becomes a VPSO, "the clock stops" on his "law enforcement time" for the APSC. Mr. Springer concluded his testimony by relating that he has had his life protected by a VPSO, and by reiterating his support of HB 199. 8:35:17 AM REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON expressed appreciation for Mr. Springer's testimony. He indicated that during its prior hearing on HB 199, the committee learned that the requirements for the minimum standards and training would be directed by the APSC. He asked Mr. Springer to confirm that he supports that portion of the proposed legislation. MR. SPRINGER answered yes. 8:36:50 AM REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES asked the next testifier, Captain Steven Arlow, to address the issues of training, screening, and the ability of Native corporations that hire VPSOs to conduct "extra background screening or anything like that." 8:37:57 AM STEVEN ARLOW, Captain, Alaska State Troopers, VPSO Support, Department of Public Safety (DPS), said he has overseen the VPSO Program for DPS for the last eight years and is familiar with the issues that the program faces. He said he listened to the previous testifiers and would like to outline the department's current plan and address statements that were made. He relayed there are ten contracting entities in the VPSO Program that will be involved in all aspects of the department's decision-making process. He said the department wants to hold VPSOs to the same firearms training standard as that of Alaska State Troopers. He said there has been discussion among the various nonprofit groups and contractors regarding the possibility of doing a polygraph test and psychological evaluation. He indicated a cost of $400 related to evaluation. He said that is something the department would entertain doing. MR. ARLOW, regarding the question about turnover, said the percentage is about 33 percent; however, he said it is not accurate to say that the entire program is at 33 percent, because it is more of a region-specific turnover. There are some stable regions that have very little turnover. He said the VPSO Program was designed to conduct search and rescue and fire safety efforts and take part in school resource activities, as well as take part in law enforcement; it was not intended to be predominately law enforcement focused, but has morphed into that because of the large volume of service calls in some areas. He said that is where there is a high turnover rate. He said he does not disagree that a high turnover rate is expensive for the department; however, he said that percentage has been in the program for several decades. He said the department has studied the turnover and believes the cause is not pay or retirement, because each nonprofit provides a 401-K base - one of them in the Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) - and the current pay for VPSOs is "fair and reasonable" and matches that of many law enforcement entities in the state. He related that there are some VPSOs who make $70,000 to $80,000 a year and a few, with longevity, who are making six figures. He said he thinks the attrition is due to burnout and a region in the state that is experiencing a high volume of law enforcement work. He said half of the turnover rate is a result of VPSOs making poor choices on and off the job; they are being dismissed for failure to perform their duties. 8:43:56 AM CAPTAIN ARLOW stated that he does not disagree with Mr. Metcalfe's characterization of the fiscal note as inaccurate, but suggested Mr. Metcalfe might not understand the fiscal note is a representation of what the department would like to do if HB 199 passes. He explained that DPS is interested in starting a pilot program where a few VPSOs in a particular region would be put through a gamut of training and evaluation, introducing the VPSOs into a community, and measuring the community reaction. He said DPS anticipates that such a pilot program would entail "less of a funding need right now." He said once the department can verify that the program is well-received by a community and that the VPSOs are using the firearms in the manner in which they are trained, then it will feel more comfortable in opening up the program. 8:45:21 AM CAPTAIN ARLOW said firearm training is as much about when not to use one as when to use one. During field training, a "seasoned person" would be paired with a training VPSO to determine the judgment of the VPSO. In regard to VPSOs not being members of DPS, but rather being affiliated with non-profit entities, he said continuity is paramount. He said the department's insurance policy can be amended with language that would "help in the relationship." 8:47:56 AM REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON asked if, under the pilot program, VPSO time would count toward recertification of a municipal or police officer whose certification had lapsed. 8:48:37 AM CAPTAIN ARLOW responded that he would like to see that happen, but said there will be "a considerable amount of structuring of the Alaska Police Standards Council to get there." 8:49:35 AM REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES thanked Captain Arlow for addressing her concerns regarding training. She recalled testimony indicating a high turnover of VPSOs in regions of the state where the large portion of the duties of the VPSOs is in law enforcement, and she asked Captain Arlow if he thinks the training program and subsequent arming of those VPSOs would likely lower the turnover rate. CAPTAIN ARLOW said 30 percent is a high turnover rate. He expressed his hope that training VPSOs to be equipped with firearms would lower that rate, but he said time will tell. In response to a follow-up question, he said he thinks that someone in a uniform carrying a firearm increases people's perception of authority. He related that right now the mere presence of a VPSO makes people willing to report crime and over a period of time, "we see that crime stabilizes and we have less reports of paused service." He stated, "I think introduction to the fire[arms] would certainly ... mirror that, as well." 8:52:42 AM CHAIR LYNN opined that someone in uniform carrying a firearm gives more perception of authority than does an unarmed officer. 8:53:05 AM REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON expressed appreciation of all comments, including those critical of bill. He talked about the longstanding cooperative relationship between VPSOs, the nonprofit agencies that hire them, and DPS. He said VPSO coordinators meet quarterly and, in addition to that, meet with the department. He said there have been numerous attempts over the years to focus on the strengths and weaknesses of the VPSO Program, most recently, in 2008, there was a Senate task force addressing the VPSO Program, the result of which was the commitment by former Commissioner Masters to increase the number of VPSOs around the state. He offered his personal impression that allowing VPSOs to carry arms will act as a deterrent [to crime], decrease the number of VPSOs dropping out, and give VPSOs the means to be law enforcement officers, which he said is their charge. He thanked the committee for its work on the proposed legislation. 8:55:18 AM CHAIR LYNN, after ascertaining that there was no one else who wished to testify, closed public testimony on HB 199. 8:55:29 AM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to report HB 199 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, HB 199 was reported out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.