SB 145-VILLAGE PUB.SAFETY OFFICER PROGRAM  SENATOR RICK HALFORD, sponsor of SB 145, said that many Alaskan Natives who are in correctional institutions for probation violations are not able to go back to their villages because of the lack of probation supervision in their community so they are stuck in regional centers or large communities. Several years ago a pilot program was created through the village public safety officer (VPSO) program to put probation and parole supervisors in small communities. That program has been a success. SB 145 would expand that program into a statewide program. The VPSO program has been administered by the Department of Public Safety (DPS). SB 145 would coordinate that program with the Department of Corrections (DOC) with regard to probation and parole. SB 145 would do four things: it allows people on probation to return to their villages; it provides for a pay increase for VPSO officers; it creates a career ladder for VPSOs; and it allows VPSO officers to participate in the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) if they chose to do so. SENATOR COWDERY moved to adopt CSSB 145(JUD), version 22-LS0584\S, as the working draft of the committee. There being no objection, CSSB 145(JUD) was adopted for the purpose of discussion. MR. RON SOMERVILLE, Resource Consultant to the House and Senate Majority, explained the changes made to the committee substitute (CS) and commented that an amendment had been proposed (amendment 1) to Section 3. The CS contains a new section that deals with civil liability for acts or omissions of VPSOs. Section 2 provides for probation and parole under the direction of DOC, similar to the pilot project in the Bristol Bay region. The commissioner of DOC is given the authority to adopt regulations related to the functions of the VPSO program. SENATOR COWDERY moved to adopt amendment 1, which deletes Section 3 and adds a new section and reads as follows. AMENDMENT 1 to CS FOR SB 145(JUD) Page 2, Line 23. Delete Section 3 and substitute the following: Sec. 3. AS 18.65 is amended by adding a new section to article 9 to read: Sec. 18.65.680. Regional public safely officers. The  commissioner of public safety may appoint regional public safety officers to (1) provide an expanded public safety and law enforcement presence in rural areas of the state; (2) provide oversight and training for the village public safety officer program; (3) administer functions relating to: (A) protecting life and property in the rural areas of the state; (B) conducting investigations; (C) conducting search and rescue missions; (D) conducting local training programs in drug and alcohol awareness and prevention, water safety, and gun safety; (4) perform other duties relating to public safety as directed by the commissioner. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked Mr. Somerville to explain amendment 1. MR. SOMERVILLE said Section 3 creates a new position for a regional public safety officer (RPSO). This position is intended for small regional areas, with the RPSO overseeing four or five VPSO officers and it would act as a link between DPS and the VPSO program. The key component of SB 145 would be the career path opportunity. The RPSO would be selected from the VPSO officers and would go through a training process by which he or she could become a certified police officer. That person would then be authorized to handle firearms and conduct all the business of a trooper. Number 722 SENATOR THERRIAULT clarified that the RPSO would be a state employee. He asked what the pay range would be. MR. SOMERVILLE responded that the pay range would be established through DPS, but the intent is to make the pay range somewhere between a trooper and VPSO officer. SENATOR THERRIAULT asked how the duties of a RPSO would differ from that of a trooper. MR. SOMERVILLE said the RPSO would go through the same training as a police officer but the job description would not require them to move around the state. SENATOR THERRIAULT said that if the RPSO performed the same duties as a trooper, that position should receive the same pay. He questioned whether not having to move around the state is enough justification for lower pay. MR. SOMERVILLE said the job description would require less and not having to move around might justify a lower pay range. SENATOR THERRIAULT asked what changes would be made by the amendment. MR. SOMERVILLE said the wording of the amendment makes it clear that the regional officers are state employees who assist and represent DPS. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR noted that the language on page 2, lines 26 and 27, was replaced with, "provide an expanded public safety and law enforcement presence in rural areas of the state." The wording on lines 28 and 29 on page 2 was replaced with, "provide oversight and training for the village public safety officer program." Page 3, subsection (b) was removed and replaced with, "(3) administer functions relating to: (A) protecting life and property in the rural areas of the state; (B) conducting investigations; (C) conducting search and rescue missions; (D) conducting local training programs in drug and alcohol awareness and prevention, water safety, and gun safety." He said this last subsection had originally provided for probation and parole supervision, and he thought the intent was to keep that in the bill. MR. SOMERVILLE said the change was requested by DPS because probation and parole supervision would be provided by DOC so it does not need to be written in the statute as it relates to a DPS employee. SENATOR THERRIAULT said that probation powers are being extended to the VPSO officers but the bill creates a new category of employees - RPSOs without probationary supervision powers. He said there had once been a problem with that type of thing and, unless it could be solved, the state would end up with more troopers through court decree, instead of regional officers. SENATOR HALFORD said: Because they [the RPSOs] don't need them. Because the others need it specifically delegated and they need a dual line of authority - one to Corrections and one to Public Safety because they're actually employees of a regional non-profit corporation. With regard to the troopers, the troopers already have the ability, any level of trooper, wherever you go in Public Safety, they already have the ability to work with Corrections at Corrections' direction on a parole probation question. They can go check on somebody right now, a parole officer could ask a trooper to make a check on somebody on probation in a community they are going through very easily, and they do it. So it's just not necessary. But Senator Therriault, your concern is exactly right with regard to how do you create something less than a trooper that you want to keep in an area and not get sucked into the same problem the original constables had. Number 1122 SENATOR THERRIAULT said he believes there needs to be some type of limitation on what the regional officer could do if the pay scale were to be different. SENATOR HALFORD said that concern is legitimate, but a job requiring someone to move around the state at someone else's discretion should have a higher pay scale. He said it might be necessary to go through the original case to see where the holes are and solve those problems in SB 145, but he thought there was a legitimate difference in the pay scale. SENATOR HALFORD said the goal was to start with four positions, putting the officers in areas where they are needed most. A VPSO's level of ability in a community depends on whether troopers would be able to get there and support them. Where troopers support them they have respect; where troopers do not support them they are sometimes ignored and in some cases dangerously ignored. SENATOR THERRIAULT said he understood how backup from a trooper would give strength to how a community views a VPSO officer. He had heard criticisms that contractual arrangements with non-profit organizations can limit what a VPSO officer could do by virtue of the contract provisions. In some communities the officers are not held in high esteem because the contract does not give them much power. SENATOR HALFORD said everything flows downhill from the fact that the officers are underpaid and under-supported. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if there was an objection to amendment 1. There was no objection, so amendment 1 was adopted. MR. SOMERVILLE said Sections 4, 5, and 6 deal with participation in PERS. Regional public safety officers would participate in PERS because they would be state employees and VPSO officers would also have the opportunity to participate if they chose to do so. However, some non-profit organizations have better retirement programs than the state, so an officer could choose to stay within the non-profit retirement system. SENATOR THERRIAULT asked where that language was in CSSB 145(JUD). MR. SOMERVILLE suggested that language was on page 4, line 9. He said some non-profit organizations pay the total contribution of their own system. If an employee chose to be in PERS, he or she would be responsible for their portion and the non-profit would be responsible for the employer portion. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR then took public testimony. Number 1589 MR. GUY BELL, Director, Division of Retirement & Benefits, Department of Administration, said the department had submitted a zero fiscal note that still applies to the CS but that he might have some suggestions after looking at CSSB 145(JUD) in more detail. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR cautioned him because the legislature had moved into the 24-hour notice period and CSSB 145(JUD) would be leaving the Senate Judiciary Committee and moving to Senate Finance in the next few days, and the questions that Senator Therriault asked are very important. He thought those questions will be very important to the Finance Committee. MR. BELL said the department would be looking at sections 4, 5, and 6 relating to Title 39. SENATOR THERRIAULT said the language he had been looking for was on page 4, lines 17 through 23, which says, "credited service under this subsection is indebted to the system." He asked how to calculate what the market would have earned on that money had it been accruing for five years. MR. BELL said the interest accrues at seven percent under regulation, so a seven percent rate of return is assumed. A net present value of expected future benefits of the years of service the person is claiming is the cost, assuming a seven percent interest rate. SENATOR THERRIAULT asked if the employer was liable for the employer's contribution and if the employee was liable for their contribution, picking up the seven percent interest. MR. BELL replied no, as CSSB 145(JUD) is written, the full obligation goes to the employee. If the employee wished to purchase prior service, 100 percent of the liability would be the employee's liability. SENATOR THERRIAULT said the contributions and interest would have accrued and, by regulation, the interest would be seven percent. MR. BELL said that was correct. SENATOR THERRIAULT asked if any of the cost was spread into the retirement system. MR. BELL said the responsibility was entirely on the employee. Number 1748 MR. DEL SMITH, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Public Safety, said that DPS had been working with Senator Halford on the VPSO program and would like to see more troopers, VPSO officers, and more RPSOs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SMITH said the department shared the same concerns as Senator Therriault with the "like work, like pay issue." The arbitration that occurred with the original constables occurred before his time with the department but the department would try to craft the VPSO program, as it would have under the constable program, with slightly lower levels of responsibility. The job description would be crafted to ensure that the problem of like work, like pay would not be revisited again. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said the committee would be relying on DPS and if SB 145 passed it should be stated for the record: On behalf of the committee, it is specifically not our intent to create a new class of troopers and end up with that class of troopers then going through that same process of like pay, like work because, if that's the case, we will have defeated the very purpose for which the legislation was crafted to give us a person that wouldn't be transferred, that would have a lower pay range and we would be able to provide more of them. So that's certainly the intent of this committee and anything you can do to assist through the department in drafting regulations would be very much appreciated. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SMITH said that was consistent with the course the governor wanted to take. Number 1865 SENATOR THERRIAULT asked if a directive in statute was needed to say the job duty was to be less than a trooper's. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SMITH replied that he did not think this was needed. He felt it is possible to create this position without legislation because the trooper, sergeant and corporal rank had not been created in legislation. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR suggested that the department should have an amendment ready to submit to the Finance committee if the department's advisors feel that legislative authorization is needed to justify the definitions within department regulations. SENATOR THERRIAULT asked whom the department would be dealing with in drafting the regulations. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SMITH said the department would write the job description - regulation was not a term he would use. The job description would detail what was to be accomplished by this position, and eventually the department would have to negotiate with the Public Safety Employees' Association (PSEA). Number 1993 Mr. Robin Lown, VPSO Program Manager for Southeast Alaska, Tlingit Haida Central Council, said he currently has nine VPSO officers working for him and he is also the chairman of the VPSO Program Managers Coordinating Committee, which consists of nine VPSO managers around the state. He said the VPSO managers support SB 145 and support a statewide program. A pay increase to compensate for the additional duties is also supported and would help keep VPSO officers in the program. VPSO managers also support the career path possibility and the inclusion of a better retirement option for officers. He noted the PERS provision needs more work. Overall, Mr. Lown said any incentives that will help to retain VPSOs are appreciated and important. MR. RICHARD KRAUSE, VPSO Manager, Aleutian Pribilof Island Association, said he supports 145. Number 2174 MR. JIM KNOPKE, Tanana Chiefs Conference, thanked Senator Halford for bringing SB 145 forward. He said that having a good retirement program would help increase the viability of the VPSO program and it would also help with retention and in obtaining new resources for the program. He said SB 145 may not solve all the problems but it is a step in the right direction and he supports it completely. TAPE 01-17, SIDE B  MS. CANDICE BROWER, Department of Corrections (DOC), thanked Senator Halford for seeing the need for probationers and parolees in the villages. The VPSO program enables people to go back home where they tend to be more successful. As a former shelter director in rural Alaska, she has seen first hand the problems that VPSO officers face when domestic violence becomes dangerous. She said DOC supports SB 145. SENATOR THERRIAULT asked Ms. Brower what limits the VPSO officers' effectiveness in villages. MS. BROWER replied that domestic violence is the most dangerous situation a person can come across and many times a VPSO officer is related to the person perpetuating the violence. Intervening in that type of situation could be problematic and it requires a lot of diplomacy and skill. VPSO officers have not been well paid and they need to be compensated for that type of job duty. SENATOR THERRIAULT asked how parole and probation supervision would be limited so the state would not fall into the trap of equal work, equal pay. MS. BROWER said RPSOs would not have the same powers a parole and probation officer would have. The program that is in place now relies on VPSOs to do things at the direction of the probation officer, such as request breathalyzer tests and a urine analysis. RPSOs also check on probationers and parolees but they do not have the authority to arrest or detain people. They also notify the probation officer of violations. SENATOR THERRIAULT said that unlike the new position that is being created, VPSO officers clearly do not have the statutory powers that a correction officer has. MS. BROWER said that is correct. MS. THERESA KOBUK, St. Michael VPSO, said she is in full support of SB 145. She said as a VPSO officer she was barely making it financially and would appreciate the pay raise that SB 145 afforded. MS. JOSIE STILES, Program Manager, Kawerak, Inc., said she was elated that Senator Halford had introduced SB 145. Ms. Stiles said she had been in the VPSO program for 17 years and the starting salary was $13.99 an hour. Because of the low pay, some officers qualify for food stamps and others have a second job. A pay increase would help officers focus on public safety and the community. She said the VPSO program and Kawerak support the addition of regional managers. Those positions would give officers who have been in the program many years an opportunity for a career step without having to become a trooper and leave their community. SENATOR THERRIAULT asked Ms. Stiles to list a few of the restrictions that DPS has placed on VPSO officers. MS. STILES replied that in serious felony cases or major misdemeanor cases, officers are told not to respond. She said officers face many hardships and high levels of job stress. Often the back-up coming from the troopers is slow and depends on the geophysical location and the severity and priority of the case. SENATOR THERRIAULT said he heard that VPSO officers could not issue traffic situations. MS. STILES said that is correct. SENATOR THERRIAULT asked if VPSO officers could enforce Alaska fish and game statutes. MS. STILES said officers do not enforce Alaska fish and game statutes because they already have too many duties, such as search and rescue, fires, law enforcement, and emergency trauma. MR. TOM OKLEASKI, Vice President of Community Service, Kawerak, Inc., Nome, said the board supports SB 145 and it passed a resolution of support. He said the wage increase in SB 145 was an effective way to increase the pay scale for officers, which would help with retention and recruitment. Number 1787 MR. BRAD ANGASAN, VPSO Program Manager, Bristol Bay Native Association (BBNA), said BBNA supports SB 145, particularly the pay increase and the opportunity for officers to participate in PERS. BBNA is funded to provide 12 VPSO officers and it administers the parole supervision pilot project. [Mr. Angasan's transmission was cut off at that point and he was not able to complete his testimony.] MAJOR BRUCE DOUG NORRIS, Alaska State Troopers, said at one time a VPSO officer in Southeast Alaska had actively stopped people for traffic violations, and the VPSO program was never intended for that. Where villages are connected to road systems, there are state troopers for serious traffic incidents, and when there are minor infractions the VPSO officer can notify a trooper for later action. It is policy to discourage VPSO officers from doing active traffic enforcement, they are trained for traffic stops but they are not armed. In villages where there is no connection to a road system, VPSO officers can stop people and cite them. MAJOR NORRIS said VPSO officers help with fish and game matters by gathering evidence and reporting matters to the fish and game officer, but they do not take an active role. SENATOR THERRIAULT asked if VPSO officers could issue traffic citations in McGrath. MAJOR NORRIS said absolutely. VPSO officers are told they cannot actively work traffic but they are not told they cannot write citations. SENATOR THERRIAULT said the level of respect in the McGrath area has been impacted by the fact that people think VPSO officers do not even have the authority to issue traffic citations. MAJOR NORRIS said there was possibly a communication problem in that area. Number 1470 SENATOR HALFORD asked if McGrath has a trooper or a VPSO officer. MAJOR NORRIS said McGrath had a Fish and Wildlife officer. SENATOR COWDERY moved CSSB 145(JUD) from committee with individual recommendations. There being no objection, CSSB 145(JUD) moved from committee.