Anchorage testimony splits over powers of proposed public safety commission

Advocate says proposed police oversight commission lacks teeth

Anchorage police have shot 18 people since the city's former public safety commission ended in January 2024, and 11 people have died from those interactions, advocate Amber Batts told the Anchorage Assembly in written testimony on the ordinance that would create a replacement.

Batts said she supports a commission, but not this one. The proposal would seat 14 members, nine of them community members. It bars the body from conducting independent investigations, issuing subpoenas, or influencing personnel discipline. The commission would meet at least quarterly.

"As it stands, this commission cannot investigate, subpoena records, or access information beyond what the public can already obtain," Batts said. "That is not oversight, that is a listening session."

Batts asked for independent staff and counsel, public tracking of police shootings and use-of-force complaints, and meetings more often than four times a year.

Community United for Safety and Protection, in testimony signed by Maxine Doogan, Batts and Kat McElroy, said the commission's effectiveness would depend on mayoral appointments and on whether the Assembly acts on nonbinding recommendations. The group said elected officials cannot credibly oversee law enforcement while remaining financially or politically dependent on the organizations representing the officers and agencies they are expected to hold accountable. It urged the Assembly to oppose the ordinance unless it is amended to add subpoena power and records access.

Residents split on whether a commission is needed at all

Three Anchorage residents opposed creating the commission at all.

John Oldfield and Kristina Oldfield each wrote that Anchorage already maintains internal affairs processes at the police and fire departments, plus oversight by the mayor's administration and the Assembly. "Creating yet another commission adds unnecessary bureaucracy without addressing a demonstrated gap in current systems," Kristina Oldfield said.

Both said they were particularly opposed to any amendments expanding the commission's authority toward investigatory powers. Such powers would duplicate existing procedures, compromise active investigations and raise due process concerns for officers and the public, they wrote.

Both also objected to the added administrative costs. Public safety money should instead go to front-line operations such as hiring and retaining officers, improving response times and community policing, they wrote.

Pamela Raygor said the proposal has "too many missing details to pass this initiative as an ordinance."