Public Meetings - Anchorage, Alaska

The Municipality of Anchorage Zoning Board of Examiners and Appeals met on October 9, 2026, to consider variance requests for a property in Girdwood (Case 2026-0125, petitioner Elliaska Serendipity LLC). The board also approved prior meeting minutes and a consent agenda with two resolutions. Consent Calendar - The board approved the minutes from September 10, 2026, by unanimous consent. - The consent agenda, containing two resolutions, was approved unanimously. Public Comments & Testimony - Derek Brewer (adjacent property owner) objected to the variances, arguing the hardships were self-imposed and the applicant sought to maximize density on a constrained lot. He expressed concerns about impacts to drainage, utility easements, and the watershed. - Nancy Elrod (civil engineer, downstream neighbor) argued the application fails to satisfy standards D, F, and H, noting that proposed sheet piling and vegetation removal would constrict stream flow and increase runoff. She stated the design does not comply with Title 20 runoff requirements. - Will Brennan (across-street neighbor) opposed the variances, stating the proposed 4,700 sq ft of living space is not the minimum reasonable use and is out of scale with the neighborhood. He asserted that the hardship was self-imposed because the structural deficiencies were apparent at purchase. - Mike Edgington (former Girdwood Board of Supervisors member) commented that stream-crossed lots are common in Girdwood and that the scale of the project far exceeds what is typical. He expressed concern that the variance would not result in a net benefit to the stream setback. The board also acknowledged written comments from the Girdwood Board of Supervisors and other individuals. Discussion Items - Staff Presentation: Staff described the three requested variances, noted that the existing structure had non-conforming rights, and explained that the department recommended denial for variances 1 and 2 (because standard H was only partially met) and recommended approval for variance 3. - Applicant Presentation: The applicants (Todd and Wendy Moe, with architect Marco Zaccaro) described their goal of creating a generational family home providing workforce housing, detailed the site constraints (stream bisecting the lot, steep slopes, utility easements), and explained their efforts to minimize impacts through thoughtful design and coordination with watershed management. - Board Deliberation: - Procedural Motions: A motion to consider all three variances together failed (2-4). A subsequent motion to split variance one into two parts (house addition and garage/ADU) passed (6-0). - Variance 1, Part 1 (house addition encroaching 4.5 ft into stream setback): The board found that all eight criteria were satisfied, and the variance was approved (6-0). - Variance 1, Part 2 (garage/ADU encroaching 14 ft into stream setback): Board members expressed concerns about self-imposed hardship and whether criteria C and H were satisfied. The variance was denied (2-4). - Variance 2 (footbridge crossing the stream): The board agreed that all criteria were met, and the variance was approved (6-0). Several members noted the footbridge was necessary to provide access to the home. - Variance 3 (garage/ADU encroaching 5 ft into front and side setbacks): The department recommended approval, but after discussion about the appropriateness of the ADU under Girdwood-specific code and the linkage to the denied stream-setback component, the variance was denied (3-3; five votes required). Key Outcomes - Approved: Variance for existing structure with addition to encroach 4.5 ft into the stream setback (6-0). - Approved: Variance to allow a footbridge across the stream (6-0). - Denied: Variance for detached garage with ADU to encroach 14 ft into the stream setback (2-4). - Denied: Variance for detached garage with ADU to encroach 5 ft into front and side setbacks (3-3, insufficient votes). - The board took no further action on the case; the applicant may revise and resubmit for the denied components. The meeting concluded with board member comments thanking staff and participants for a complex discussion.

The Assembly Governance Committee, formerly the Rules Committee, met on Thursday, October 8, 2026. The meeting focused on legislative employee recognition, reports from various branches of municipal government, and a comprehensive review of proposed updates to Title 28 (Elections) of the Anchorage Municipal Code, including a candidate petition requirement and several administrative clarifications. Chair Anna presided. Legislative Employee of the Quarter - Mandy Honest and Liza Spano from the Business Licensing Team were recognized for developing the online short-term rental registration system. Since February 2026, they have worked with over 1,000 hosts to register over 2,500 short-term rentals. Reports - Mayor's Report (Suzanne Fleet Green): Provided updates on legislative priorities, the upcoming AFN convention, an additional day of early voting (October 23rd), filling 12,000 potholes this year, and the winterization of street maintenance and public transit. Introduced Travis Morrison as the new staff member handling energy and sustainability. - Chair's Report (Anna): Noted schedule updates for budget work sessions and the Fiscal Future Summit (October 30). Announced the formation of an Ombudsman selection committee. Acknowledged a procedural issue with a straw poll at a previous meeting, clarifying it was not procedurally proper under Robert's Rules but the intent was not dilatory. - Clerk's Report (Jamie): Reported a recall petition for the mayor has been approved, requiring over 18,000 signatures in 60 days. Five new petition applications were filed by a single individual seeking to discontinue fluoridation, end property taxation, disallow mRNA vaccines, and require specific streetlight bulbs. - Assembly Council Report (Brandy & Dean): Requested members to CC Brandy on all communications and move project deadlines to Wednesday COB. Chair Anna noted a fully funded third attorney position has not yet been filled. - Legislative Services Report (Ally Hartman): Announced the municipal website (Muni.org) migration to a new platform on October 29. The Fiscal Future Summit at UAA expects over 100 participants. - Ombudsman Report (Daryl): Reported the office is approaching its 1,000th constituent contact for the year. Announced Above and Beyond awards for Development Services staff. Highlighted success in code abatement. Public Comments & Testimony - Jamie Lopez expressed concerns about compliance with surveillance code (AMC 3.102.040), the potential barrier of the candidate petition signature requirement for homeless individuals, and criticized the Mayor's Charity Ball ticket prices ($300-$10,000) as being exclusionary rather than charitable. Discussion Items - Klutna Valley Community Council: Daryl flagged a potential lack of compliance with minimum meeting requirements. A motion to direct the Ombudsman to investigate passed unanimously. - Committee Purpose Statement: The committee reviewed its updated purpose statement to include ethics and election code review. - Pending Business: Members shared legislative projects, including resolutions on multifamily energy units (Daniel), a charter amendment on surveillance (Keith), and research on food access and holiday lighting permits (Sydney). - Candidate Petition Signatures (AO 2026-129): Donald and Jared introduced a proposal requiring 50 signatures for Assembly candidates and 250 for Mayor/School Board candidates. Clerk Jamie confirmed the process would be low cost. Some members expressed concerns about barriers to entry, while others saw it as a way to strengthen democracy. - Omnibus Election Code Update (AO 2026-131): Clerk Jamie presented administrative updates including reducing newspaper notices to save $15,000, limiting candidate challengers to municipal residents, allowing voters to update their signatures, and clarifying certification procedures. Key Outcomes - Unanimous Vote: The committee unanimously directed the Ombudsman to investigate the Klutna Valley Community Council's compliance with meeting requirements and report back in November. - Election Ordinances: AO 2026-129 and AO 2026-131 were discussed. An S version for AO 2026-131 will be prepared. Both ordinances are scheduled for introduction on October 20, 2026, and a public hearing on November 4, 2026.

The Anchorage Assembly held a work session on October 2, 2026, to receive a comprehensive briefing on the assembly's role in collective bargaining agreements (CBAs). The session was led by Chief Human Resource Officer Aaron Billingsley and Assistant Municipal Attorney Jason Bachins. The meeting was recorded due to internet outages preventing a live stream. Assembly members present included Ms. Park, Mr. Raleigh, Mr. Handlin, and Ms. Holly Day, with Mr. Martinez joining by phone. Discussion Items - CBA Structure and Overview: The presenters defined CBAs as multi-year contracts (3-5 years) negotiated with nine certified bargaining units. They cover negotiable subjects such as wages, hours, benefits, and grievance procedures. Subjects excluded from bargaining include management rights, substance misuse testing, and retiree medical. - Employee Categories: Employees are classified as represented (union CBAs), non-represented (exempted by code and governed by Title 330 personnel rules), or executive (at-will). The non-represented category is designed to include roles like HR, law, IT, and assembly staff to avoid conflicts of interest in bargaining. - Negotiation Process and Arbitration: The process begins with a 180-day notice to bargain. If impasse occurs, steps include mediation, fact-finding, and arbitration. For essential services (Police, Fire, EMS, Water/Sewer), binding interest arbitration applies; the arbitrator chooses an article-by-article best final offer, and the assembly has no ratification role as the award is final for two years. For other units, the assembly must ratify by majority vote or the municipality implements its last best offer. - Assembly Role and Guidance: The assembly sets policy via resolutions (AR 2019-417-S, AR 2024-23). During active negotiations, assembly members are barred from communicating with the bargaining unit about the negotiations. The assembly can issue general guidance, which the administration recommended remain high-level to allow bargaining flexibility. The assembly must ratify contracts and any mid-term administrative agreements requiring an appropriation. - Essential Services Classification: Mr. Handlin questioned why water/sewer treatment is an essential non-strike service while electric generation is not. The administration noted the classification is established in code and that the municipality no longer operates the electric utility. - Budget Implications: Once ratified, CBA financial terms are fixed multi-year obligations in the budget. The municipality lacks discretion to reduce these costs unilaterally. Approved benefits for non-represented employees can prompt unions to request mid-contract meet-and-confer sessions to extend similar benefits. Key Outcomes - No Formal Action: The work session was for informational purposes only; no votes were taken. - Upcoming IBEW Negotiations: The assembly will receive a memorandum within the next two meetings notifying them of upcoming negotiations for the IBEW contract (expiring June 2027), opening a 30-45 day window for assembly guidance. - Current Teamsters Negotiations: The administration confirmed it is actively engaged in negotiations with the Teamsters. - Process Clarifications: Assembly members received clarifications on the binding nature of essential service arbitration, the statutory restrictions on member communication during active bargaining, and the lack of discretion over approved union wage and benefit costs in the budget.

The Anchorage Assembly held a work session on October 2, 2026, to discuss the Anchorage Childhood Care and Early Education (ACE) Fund. The meeting featured a presentation from Trevor Storrs, chair of the ACE Fund board, and testimony from Laura Rourke, executive director of Anchorage Montessori School. The main topics were an update on the fund's activities and the board's recommendations for the FY27 budget, which faces a reduced revenue projection of $5.2 million compared to the previous $10 million in FY25. Public Comments & Testimony - Laura Rourke, Executive Director, Anchorage Montessori School: Described how the school serves 142 young children (48 toddlers starting at 19 months, 94 ages three through kindergarten) and benefits from all three ACE funding streams (early educator subsidy, operational assistance, capital improvement). She shared that the school's operating budget is roughly $3 million, with 78 cents of every dollar going to salaries, payroll taxes, and benefits. She detailed unexpected September expenses totaling over $21,000 (break-in repairs, fire exit lights, roof leaks) against an annual repairs budget of $15,000. She expressed full support for ACE capital funding but stated she does not support directing ACE funds to the Anchorage School District pre-K programs or Best Beginnings while many licensed child care programs have unmet needs. She emphasized that without capital funding, smaller centers or home providers could be forced to close. Discussion Items - ACE Fund Overview and Budget Recommendations (Trevor Storrs): Storrs presented two budget scenarios based on a projected $5.2 million in marijuana tax revenue (down from $10 million in FY25 due to reduced rollover and lower usage). The board's recommended budget zeroes out funding for ASD pre-K ($2 million) and Best Beginnings ($125,000), redirecting those to child care work subsidies ($1.5 million), flexible operational grants ($2.4 million), capital grants ($572,000), and administration (9%). A contingency budget (reflecting the mayor's proposal) reduces child care work subsidies to $1.4 million, cuts operational grants by 43%, eliminates capital and pilot funding, funds ASD pre-K at 75% ($750,000), and zeroes out Best Beginnings. Storrs argued that early childhood investment is upstream prevention for homelessness and economic stability, and suggested that the alcohol tax could partially fund ASD pre-K to free up ACE dollars for capital projects. - Assembly Member Comments: - Ms. Baldwin Day: Noted that the mayor's administration previously indicated ASD pre-K funding would return to the alcohol tax after FY26. She raised concerns about the impact of free pre-K on home-based providers, as families may leave paid options, harming those providers' viability. She suggested evaluating capital proposals separately for in-home versus center-based care, as small investments ($10,000 or less) could be transformative for home providers. - Mr. Voland: Affirmed that the ACE board’s recommendations are advisory and that the assembly retains full authority to make budget amendments, including direct grants to organizations. He encouraged his colleagues to bring forward amendments if they wish to support specific organizations like Best Beginnings. - Storrs (in response): Clarified that the only binding commitment is to ASD pre-K for the current program year ($940,000 remaining). He also addressed the administrative burden of using Biz Express for grant applications, noting the Children’s Trust has offered free access to its own online system as a temporary solution. Key Outcomes - No formal votes were taken; the work session was informational and part of the ongoing budget process. - The ACE board’s recommendations will be considered by the assembly as the FY27 budget moves forward. The assembly will receive additional briefings from the mayor’s office. - The board reiterated its availability to provide further data and answer questions. The meeting concluded with thanks to the presenters and board members, and the chair adjourned the session.

The Anchorage Assembly held a work session on October 2, 2026, from 1:00 to 2:00 PM, featuring the Anchorage Park Foundation (APF). The session provided an overview of the Foundation's accomplishments, 2027 goals, and requests to the Assembly, alongside preliminary discussion of the Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The mayor's budget had been introduced earlier that day; the CIP document under review was an excerpt from the 120-day memo, not the proposed budget. Discussion Items - APF Overview and Accomplishments: Executive Director Beth Nordland (retiring March 31, 2027) and incoming Executive Director Michelle Lebau presented. APF raised $53 million in funding and volunteer time over 22 years, mobilized $77.85 million in local park bonds, and unlocked more than $40 million in federal match. Key programs include Youth Employment in Parks, neighborhood challenge grants, the Trails Initiative, Indigenous Place Names, inclusive playgrounds (23 built), tree planting, and fiscal sponsorship. - 2027 Goals: Transition to new leadership; design the Indigenous Place Name Plaza at the mouth of Ship Creek; plant 1,000 trees with 100+ volunteers; pass the 16th consecutive park bond; work with the governor to recognize outdoor recreation as economic growth; support Chugach State Park connectivity and Eagle River Trail connectivity; continue Ship Creek Stream Bank Restoration. - Asks to the Assembly: Host an annual work session; partner in promoting parks as an economic development asset; maintain support for annual park bonds; provide letters of support for fundraising; consider funding for park activation programming; celebrate all project wins (big and small); challenge each assembly member to think about how their district could work with APF. - Cuddy Family Park: Assembly Member Park raised that Cuddy Family Midtown Park was not included in the proposed budget for 2027–2032. Anchorage Skates reported raising $1 million committed, $950,000 in bond money, and over $50,000 from private donors, and expressed surprise at the omission. Chair deferred detailed discussion to future budget work sessions, noting that a Cuddy Park master plan is needed first (Parks and Rec is developing an RFP). Assembly Member Vaughn reminded that the Assembly can amend projects onto the bond list, as done previously. - Trail Connectivity and Alaska Long Trail: APF supports multiple trail projects, including the downtown trail connection (gateway to the Alaska Long Trail), safe Lake Otis crossing on the Moose Loop (funded via AMATS but at risk due to state transportation plan issues), and the Fish Creek Trail to the ocean. The Alaska Long Trail will be a 500-mile route from Seward to Fairbanks; APF advocates for downtown Anchorage as an on-ramp and has raised funds for a gateway at Ship Creek. - Park Activation and Volunteerism: Assembly Member Bodindick inquired about empowering district-based volunteer groups for park activation. APF noted existing volunteer coordination through the Point system and cited examples like a singles tree-planting night. They expressed support for brainstorming neighborhood-level activation. - Challenge Grants: The next cycle opens in 2028. APF provides up to $40,000 in matching funds per project, leveraging volunteer time or donations. - Inclusive Playgrounds: 23 inclusive playgrounds built since 2011. The next major project is at East Chester Woodside (District 1), for which APF plans to help raise funds. Key Outcomes - No formal votes were taken; the session was informational. - The Assembly expressed interest in establishing an annual work session with APF. - Assembly members were encouraged to engage with APF for district-specific projects and state legislative advocacy. - APF will continue promoting park bonds and supporting capital projects as they move through the Assembly's budget process. - Further budget work sessions will occur in the coming weeks, where the Cuddy Park issue and other CIP items will be addressed.

The Anchorage Assembly held a work session on September 25, 2026, to discuss proposed Ordinance AO 2026-108 and its substitute versions (S and S1), which establish rules for the use of surveillance technology by the Anchorage Police Department (APD), particularly the Real-Time Crime Center (RTCC) and automated license plate readers (ALPRs). The session included presentations from ordinance sponsors, invited legal experts, the Municipal Attorney, and APD Chief, along with extensive deliberation on privacy protections, data retention, interagency data sharing, and oversight mechanisms. No votes were taken; the ordinance is scheduled for debate and possible amendments on October 20, 2026. Presentations and Discussion - Sponsors' Presentation: Assembly members Sydney Scout and others outlined the history of the RTCC, noting that the $12.4 million RTCC build-out and a $598,000 asset forfeiture approval preceded any code protections. They presented three versions: the original AO 2026-108 (broad definition of surveillance technology, 14-day retention in code), the S version (narrowed definition, retention in policy, sharing for criminal justice purposes), and the S1 version (tightened sharing to require warrant/court order, lower suspension threshold, prohibition on sharing ALPR data with DMV without assembly approval). Key questions were raised about scope, retention, and suspension provisions. - Invited Guest – Daryl Thompson (Attorney): Mr. Thompson discussed Alaska’s express constitutional right to privacy (Article 1, Section 22) and argued that warrantless use of ALPR data for historical tracking may violate both the U.S. and Alaska constitutions, citing United States v. Jones and Carpenter mosaic theory. He urged the assembly to require warrants for accessing stored data. - Invited Guest – Mike Garvey (ACLU of Alaska): Mr. Garvey recommended preserving the original broad definition of surveillance technology, including an explicit data retention limit in code (rather than policy), and strengthening the private right of action to allow direct court access rather than an administrative exhaustion requirement. - Municipal Attorney Eva Gardner and Chief Case: Ms. Gardner explained existing guardrails (state/federal law, APD policies, assembly oversight) and walked through the S version’s structure. Chief Case described current APD technologies: RTCC staffed by sworn personnel, ALPRs on dash cameras with 14-day retention, traffic cameras (250+ intersections, 3-5 day overwrite, limited live access due to copper wiring), and private camera integration (one commercial site). They noted that APD’s Axon contract (approved September 23, 2025) includes body cameras, dash cameras, tasers, and other items, not solely RTCC technology. - Key Debate Points: - Sharing Standard: The S version allows APD to share surveillance data with other law enforcement for criminal justice purposes without a warrant. The S1 version requires a warrant or court order for any sharing with non-municipal agencies. Ms. Gardner argued the S1 could hinder joint investigations (e.g., human trafficking, drug operations). Mr. Thompson and Mr. Garvey supported warrant requirements. - Data Retention: The original ordinance had 14-day retention in code; the S and S1 versions place retention limits in internal policy with mandatory 30-day notification of changes to the assembly. - Definition of Surveillance Technology: The original broad definition was narrowed in the S version to technology “primarily designed to surveil using automated ML/AI.” The ACLU urged restoration of the original definition to avoid loopholes. - Suspension Provision: The S version requires a “knowing, material, and consistent” violation before the assembly can suspend a technology’s use; the S1 removes that qualifier, allowing suspension for any unresolved code violation. Key Outcomes - No formal actions or votes were taken; the session was informational. - The ordinance will return for public hearing and possible amendments on October 20, 2026. - Sponsors agreed to accept written questions from assembly members through the clerk and will provide responses. - A follow-up work session may be scheduled, and a red-line copy of the S1 version was requested. - The assembly noted that the existing contractor (Axon) does not have access to APD’s data, and that current APD policies include robust auditing and training requirements.

The Anchorage Assembly held a work session on Friday, September 25, 2026, to discuss AO 2026-98, an ordinance sponsored by Chair Brawley and Assembly Member Volland to create a formal advisory board for the Chugach Access Service Area (CASA). The meeting included a presentation on the need for the board, its proposed structure, and a discussion of unresolved issues such as membership composition, cooperative agreements with road service areas, and maintenance responsibilities. The ordinance was introduced July 7, had a first public hearing August 4, and is continued to October 6, 2026. Consent Calendar No consent calendar items were discussed. Public Comments & Testimony No public testimony was taken during this work session, but the sponsors noted they have received feedback from the CASA advisory working group, limited road service area representatives, the Basher Community Council (which passed a resolution with amendments), HOA representatives, and individual members of the public. The sponsors are incorporating feedback into an S version to be considered on October 6. Discussion Items - Presentation by Co-Sponsors: Chair Brawley and Assembly Member Volland presented the rationale for an advisory board, citing the need for a clear public process for prioritizing CASA projects, balancing access improvements with neighborhood impacts, and integrating CASA decisions with the municipality's Capital Improvement Program (CIP). They highlighted that CASA was created by voters in 2023 and has funded bond projects in 2024, 2025, and 2026 (e.g., Canyon Road improvements, Basher parking lot, wayfinding for Stuart Trail). They also showed voter support maps, noting that precincts in downtown Anchorage showed 81% support for establishing CASA, while some hillside and Eagle River/Chugiak precincts had lower support (corrected to show opposition percentages). The proposed board would be advisory to both the mayor and assembly, with membership modeled after the Public Naming Commission: seven voting members (one with trail design expertise, one with transportation infrastructure experience, one with outdoor recreation background, and four at-large members – two from ARTSA and two from road service areas within CASA) plus an ex officio non-voting member from Chugach State Park. - Membership Composition: Assembly Member Yaro Silvers expressed concern about overly prescriptive seat requirements that could hinder filling positions and suggested flexibility. Assembly Member Donald Handelin proposed considering assembly districts for geographic diversity. Chair Brawley and Assembly Member Volland noted challenges of balancing expertise with accessibility and avoiding an oversized board. The sponsors are already working to refine language to require at-large members from road service areas that are adjacent to Chugach State Park and to emphasize demonstrated familiarity with public access over specific technical expertise. - Cooperative Agreements: Assembly Member Zach Johnson asked about maintenance responsibility for new projects and the removal of the requirement for cooperative agreements with road service areas. Assembly Member Volland argued that cooperative agreements allow a single stakeholder group to unilaterally veto projects, which is not representative of the entire service area. He stated that all CASA-funded infrastructure is public right-of-way and should benefit all residents. Chair Brawley clarified that consulting with road service area boards would still be required, but the ordinance deletes the specific term "cooperative agreement." They noted that maintenance questions (e.g., who plows new parking lots) need to be resolved before bonds are presented to voters, possibly through the advisory board's recommendations. - Bond Maintenance Funding: Assembly Member Baldwin Day asked if maintenance costs can be included in bonds. Assembly Member Yaro Silvers confirmed that for the Basher trailhead bond, $75,000 per year for maintenance was built in. Assembly Member Volland added that this is typical for road projects to cover staffing and maintenance. - Scope and Next Steps: The sponsors emphasized that the ordinance does not adopt specific CIP projects, change the existing CIP process, or resolve all implementation issues. It establishes the board and defines its advisory role on budgeting and planning. An S version is being drafted for the October 6 meeting, incorporating public feedback including more explicit public hearing requirements for board recommendations. Key Outcomes - The work session concluded with no formal votes. The ordinance remains on the agenda for continued consideration on October 6, 2026. - The sponsors will release an S version with amendments based on feedback, including refined membership criteria and a required public hearing process. - Assembly members indicated they may offer further amendments, such as those from the Basher Community Council resolution, when the ordinance is heard on October 6.

The Anchorage Assembly Legislative Committee held a transitional meeting on September 25, 2026, under new Chair Janice Park. The committee reviewed its purpose statement, discussed the timeline and priorities for the upcoming 2027 legislative program, evaluated progress on previous year requests, and heard public testimony. Members present included Donald, Anna Brawley, Janice Park, Silvers, and Martinez (via phone). Nolan Cloud (administration) and Jennifer Venaklausen (legislative services) provided staff support. Committee Purpose and Transition - The committee purpose statement was read, emphasizing its role in guiding federal, state, and local legislative priorities, the six-year capital program, and budget priorities. - Anna Brawley noted this is a transitional meeting with new leadership; the committee is being restarted after turnover. She highlighted that the committee's core function is developing the legislative program, with a timeline requiring introduction before the budget and passage by December 10th. - Nolan Cloud provided a high-level overview of the upcoming legislative program, noting potential interest in a general obligation bond, infrastructure needs (port, roads, drainage, housing), education funding, behavioral health, community assistance, and defined benefit pensions. Discussion Items Legislative Program Timeline and Process - The administration intends to bring a preliminary written draft to the October 6th meeting, with a more fulsome version in November. The final program must be passed before December 10th per municipal code. - Members were urged to engage early and submit district priorities, especially capital projects, to avoid last-minute amendments. Jennifer Venaklausen reminded members that any state capital requests must be in the CIP/CIB and entered into the state CAPS system. - Nolan Cloud noted that the committee should preserve time to adjust after state elections (for legislature and governor) in November. Review of 2025 and 2026 Legislative Programs - Nolan Cloud reviewed the 2026 program, structured around three themes: Safe, Secure, and Affordable. The top ask was port modernization ($15 million received). Small capital asks (e.g., real-time crime center $1.5M, drones, blight reduction) were calibrated for an austere budget but were not funded. - The 2025 program had four top priorities: adequate snow removal on state roads, securing energy future, stabilizing school funding, and restoring defined benefit pensions. No district-level capital projects were funded last year; only the port received state funding (as a statewide asset). - Discussion on which 2026 asks were granted: port funding ($15M with $10M waterfall), general relief assistance increase, community assistance program fully funded (extra vetoed), and pension bill passed but vetoed. No capital asks other than port were funded. - Anna Brawley suggested rewording road rehabilitation requests to be non-district-specific to allow flexible allocation by municipal departments. District Priorities and Federal Policy - Members were asked to work within their districts to identify priorities (typically capital projects). Nolan Cloud noted federal priorities will be a shorter list accompanying state priorities, focusing on port and JBER housing. - Anna Brawley noted that district priorities can also elevate issues without dollar amounts (e.g., bluff erosion at the airport). - Member Silvers questioned whether items already funded (real-time crime center, drones, Chugach State Park access study) should be replaced with continuing needs. Staff indicated the departmental canvas for legislative updates has not yet been completed. Public Comments & Testimony - Jamie Lopez C Sankridge testified in support of HB334 (reducing fees for IDs and birth certificates), stating many people have lacked IDs for 5–10 years. He urged the committee to include support for the poor and capital improvement bonds for shelters, and expressed concern that the 2026 legislative program did not address poverty. He complimented the new chair and urged continued attention to those falling into poverty. Key Outcomes - The committee will continue developing the 2027 legislative program with a draft expected from the administration by October 6. - The next committee meeting is scheduled for October 7, 2026, from 1:00 to 2:00 PM. - Members were directed to submit district priorities and ensure projects are in the CIP/CIB. Staff will reach out for member feedback. - No formal votes were taken; the meeting was primarily informational.

The Anchorage Assembly Public Safety Committee held a work session on September 25, 2026 from 10:30 to 11:35 AM to continue discussion on the independent review by 21CP Solutions of Anchorage Police Department (APD) use of force policies, training, and implementation of recommendations. Chief Michael Case presented an update on policy changes, 21CP recommendations, and answered questions from members. Discussion Items - Policy Implementation Overview: Chief Case reported that APD has addressed approximately 230 recommendations over the past 2.5 years, with 198 already implemented. Of the 52 specific recommendations from 21CP Solutions, 48 have been fully addressed in policy, 3 are underway, and 1 (adding a third internal affairs investigator for use of force) remains a staffing question. - Use of Force Policy Changes: Key changes include: redefining "imminent threat" with three elements (ability, opportunity, jeopardy); clarifying proportional force; expanding de-escalation language; creating a new policy 1.10 on duty to intervene and duty to report; and tightening language on chemical agents and electronic control weapons against restrained persons. - Use of Force Review Board: A new monthly review board was established for serious (Level 3) use of force incidents, including deadly force. The board includes command staff, internal affairs investigators, training cadre, and the involved officer's commander. It reviews completed criminal and administrative investigations to identify training and policy gaps, even when no violations are found. - Officer Care After Critical Incidents: Policy now requires a mandatory seven-day administrative leave and mental health assessment for officers who discharge their weapon (officer-involved shooting). Chief Case noted this is an increase from four days and that actual recovery time often extends to one or two months. The assessment is voluntary under ADA, but the department encourages participation through peer support and an in-house clinician. - Vehicle Tactics and Pursuits: Chief Case explained APD’s restrictive pursuit policy and use of blocking/pinning maneuvers to prevent high-speed chases. APD rejected the 21CP recommendation to limit these tactics to specialized units, continuing to allow patrol use except when a known firearm is in the fleeing vehicle. APD also opted to maintain the PIT maneuver threshold at 45 mph (rather than the recommended 35 mph) due to local icy road conditions and vehicle safety features. - Community Impact and Upstream Factors: Member Scout raised the need for upstream policy changes in housing, childcare, and food access to reduce downstream violent crime. Chief Case acknowledged that police policies alone are insufficient without broader social interventions and noted ongoing data collection efforts. - Alaska Native Use of Force Disparities: Member Bulland referenced the 21CP report finding that approximately 45% of use of force instances involved Alaska Native individuals, who make up about 7% of the population. He suggested funding a collaborative cultural competency training effort, possibly using alcohol tax funds. Chief Case supported community-based training with meaningful interaction rather than lecture-style. - Staffing Impact: Ms. Silvers asked about the effect of the extended leave periods on patrol staffing. Chief Case confirmed that recovering officers are out for months, compounding overtime costs, and that the department uses a $500,000 training budget for backfill. Key Outcomes - APD will continue current vehicle tactics and pursuit policies as described, with specific modifications (e.g., no vehicle tactics when known gun is involved). - The use of force review board will meet monthly to review all qualifying incidents. - No formal votes were taken; the discussion was informational for the upcoming budget cycle. - Chief Case will provide data on the rate of post-pursuit apprehensions to member Gerger. - Continued dialogue on 21CP recommendations and cultural competency training is expected.