Village Safety Officer Program

James Messick

By James Messick
Office of the Director
Alaska State Troopers

I. The Problem

     Public safety in rural Alaska is perhaps the most neglected aspect of village life, and this poses a serious threat to the bush residents inhabiting about 200 villages with state.
     Consider that rural Alaska:

• Suffers the highest loss of life and property due to fire within the United States, and indeed the industrialized Western world;
• Suffers the highest loss of life due to boating mishaps and drownings in the United States;
• Is one of the most inaccessible areas of the United States to obtain assistance from law enforcement agencies;
• Is one of the most inaccessible areas of the United States to obtain major medical emergencies assistance;
• Leads the states [sic], and perhaps the nation in the incidence of search and rescue missions;
• Leads the state in incidence of alcohol abuse and alcholism; and
• Has the least developed local resources to address these problems of the state, and possibly the entire United States.

     It is safe to assume that no group of Caucasian communities would tolerate similar circumstances, and that they would demand equal protection under the law. {See Alaska Justice Forum, April and May 1979.) The question of why these conditions exist, and more importantly how they can be alleviated is the subject of this paper.

II. Existing Public Safety Responsibilities

     A review of government agencies charged with one or more aspects of public safety, or the lack of assignments of such responsibilities, helps explain the high toll of accidental loss of life and property in Alaskan villages. It also suggests ways to alleviate the total public safety problem in rural Alaska.

A. Law Enforcement

     The Division of State Troopers, within the Department of Public Safety is charged with law enforcement in the bush villages. Located at various remote outposts, but with limited resources, they respond as quickly as possible, but circumstances often preclude an immediate response.
Limited resources also means that they cannot respond to many minor offenses, but must concentrate their work to major concerns. Nevertheless, the Troopers represent by far the largest force of public safety personnel in rural Alaska. The extent of crime is not known with any certainty due to inadequate records at the village level.
     Often the Troopers are called as a last resort by a village when a law enforcement problem cannot be dealt with by the village, rather than as the initial response mechanism as in an urban Caucasian community. Their task is often made more complex by the minority ethnic groups whose traditional law ways and methods of dispute resolution are often perceived to be in conflict with the dominant Anglo adversary system.
     Although many villages have hired local police officers through the manpower programs within the several regional corporations during the last year, most of their personnel are untrained in even basic law enforcement aspects, suffer high rates of turnover due to low wages and peer pressure, traditional subsistence activities, and the CETA program limitations that do not apply to small ethnic villages in Alaska.

B. Water Safety

     Boating mishaps and water-related deaths are the concern of two agencies—the State Troopers who enforce state legislation related to water safety; and the Coast Guard who enforce federal laws and also conduct boating and water safety programs. Due to limited resources and other reasons, the Troopers primarily investigate water-related deaths rather than become involved in prevention efforts.
     Reduction of these deaths requires immediate on-the-scene response, coupled with effective educational and prevention-oriented efforts. The Coast Guard, with only seven prevention and educational personnel in the state are likewise restricted in their efforts. ^

C. Fire Service

     The fire problem in Alaska is particularly acute, even tragic, when it is realized that fire-related deaths in rural Alaska are greater than anywhere else in the Western World. Although rural lifestyles involving the use of flammable liquids, lack of building and electrical codes and other factors are prime causes of high fire losses, it is also true that there is no state agency charged with the development of local fire suppression efforts.
     Unlike law enforcement the fire service in Alaska has no assistance from a comparable state agency. The two state agencies with fire-related objectives are the Fire Service Training Program in the Department of Education and the Division of Fire Prevention in the Department of Public Safety. The former has a training responsibility, the latter a prevention responsibility. Even then only the Division of Fire Prevention is a legislative program; the other is merely a portion of the continuing education function of the Department of Education. There is little evidence that the legislature comprehends the fire loss problem in rural Alaska. Some of the remedies proposed during the last session—purchasing self-contained breathing apparatus and buying fire trucks—reflect a singular inappropriateness to small rural villages.

D. Emergency Medical Service

     Major medical emergencies, like water accidents, usually require an immediate response. Many villages have Community Health Aides (CHA) funded through the Indian Health Service of the U.S. Public Health Service with additional assistance also provided by itinerant State Public Health nurses.
     The CHA program, however, is primarily oriented to daily health concerns, rather than emergency medical response. Their program also experiences personnel turnover and is subject to times when the CHA is absent from the villages. Bad weather may mean a delay of several days before a severely injured person may be evacuated. Other than the CHA, and possibly other residents with prior training in first aid, many villages can offer only limited response to a medical emergency.

E. Search and Rescue (SAR)

     Search and Rescue is perhaps more nearly a function of weather problems, vast distances and inhospitable terrain than any other aspect of public safety. Many SAR missions require an immediate response, and the Department of Public Safety is legislatively charged with the responsibility for SAR in Alaska. In discharge of that mandate the department has named SAR coordinators in each detachment and has developed statewide and detachment level SAR plans.
     However, nowhere within the organization is there the specialized resources needed for the broad array of SAR missions experienced. They must therefore rely extensively upon military and civilian rescue capabilities.

F. Village Ordinances

     Local government in rural Alaska is often nonexistent, at least in the formal sense. Many villages are "unorganized" although equally true, many are second-class cities, thus making them eligible to receive state-shared revenue and other assistance programs. While eligible for these purposes, their local government machinery is often informal.
     Local ordinances to enable the village to act upon and resolve issues of local interest are incomplete at best, often out of date, and on occasion unconstitutional. The Department of Community and Regional Affairs is the state agency most closely aligned with local government. Other agencies, such as certain CETA efforts to train village administrators, Native Regional Corporations, the AFN, and at least one borough have all been involved in the ordinance program. Their efforts, however, have generally existed independently of each other. As a result, one may uncover evidence of three or four previous efforts to upgrade ordinances in a given village, but the village may still not have a complete set of ordinances.
     These previous efforts have generally been of short duration, with the notable exception of the Department of Community and Regional Affairs. Needed is an ongoing well-coordinated effort amongst all interested agencies.

III. Village Public Safety Analysis

     In developing a viable, effective public safety program for bush Alaska, one must appreciate the character and nature of village public safety problems.
     Requests for law enforcement assistance are generally uncomplicated. Most involve alcohol abuse and domestic disturbances.
     Village fires tend to involve relatively small structures, although they may be quite intense given the flammable nature of the construction, and must be suppressed immediately or the structure, and perhaps lives, will be lost. Village residents can be most helpful in determining the need for search and rescue missions as they have intimate knowledge of both the individual and the area involved. Boating mishaps and drownings are aggravated by silt-laden waters, cold water temperatures, and lack of water safety skills.
     Although villages face a broad array of public safety problems, the number of problems that occur in one village in a year are not great, since most villages have only a few hundred residents. Most problems involve law enforcement, but typically only one or two fires occur. Perhaps only one drowning or maybe none occur in a given year. Most search and rescues are successful.
     It is readily apparent that with the low number of calls for assistance and the relatively uncomplicated nature of the calls, that the nature of law enforcement, fire fighting, and emergency medical services, such as are needed in urban areas are not needed in a village program. Therefore, a paid fire chief and paid police chief is not applicable in the bush. Equally inappropriate are big city fire trucks, patrol cars and home-rule status for the village.

IV. Program Requirements

A successful village program should consider the following:

• The response effort for fire suppression, and many other public safety aspects, must be immediate, and therefore from within the village in order to be effective.
• The village public safety program must interface with other existing public ^ safety programs to be maximally cost effective, and produce the best results.
• The program must be sensitive to, and utilize to the greatest extent possible the traditional means of dispute resolution and law ways.
• Over the long term, state legislators, regional corporations, village council presidents and other decision makers in Bush Alaska must be convinced of the value and approach of the program, in order to assure long-term support and funding.
• The approach must place emphasis upon local decision making and control to assure the program meets village objectives and concerns.
• The State Troopers should develop the program and take responsibility for its implementation since they are the largest public safety force in the Bush and have responsibilities for more elements within the public safety field than any other agency.

V. Program Proposal

     In view of the relatively uncomplicated nature and limited number of calls for assistance in individual villages, it is recommended that one person from each village be broadly trained in all aspects of public safety to include law enforcement, fire protection, emergency medical services, search and rescue, boating and water safety.
     This individual, the Village Public Safety Officer (VPSO), would then be broadly responsible for improving all public safetv aspects in his village, and should attempt to interest other residents to assist him in this task.

A. Training

     Three levels of training are envisioned. Initially a one-week survey course will be conducted that is designed to present an overall view of the public safety field to the prospective VPSO as well as reveal those who, by temprament or other reason, would not perform well.
     A five-week session would be held shortly thereafter consisting of two weeks of law enforcement, search and rescue, water safety and local ordinance development; two weeks of emergency medical training, and one week of fire fighting and fire prevention.
     The one-week familiarization course would be held in major communities of the state where most trainees live; whereas four of the five-week session would be held at the Trooper Academy in Sitka to take advantage of the training aids, as well as the reduced subsistence cost there.
     The fifth week for fire service training would be conducted at one of the five regional fire training centers, funded through a recent bond issue, and coordinated by the State Fire Service Training Program. These training centers will be constructed in Anchorage, Fairbanks, Kotzebue, Bethel, and Juneau, with the Anchorage facility to be completed in October 1979, and the others thereafter.
     To limit the time the VPSO's are away from their villages, the one-week program could be held in their local area at a certain time, the four weeks Academy program a month or so later, and the fire service training either on their return trip from the Academy, or separately a short time thereafter. Full dormitory and classroom facilities, plus practice areas at the Regional Fire Training Centers will solve many the logistics pertaining to the fire training portion. It is anticipated that the State Fire Service Training Program, and the Division of Fire Prevention, in coordination with local fire departments, will present the fire service portion of the training.
     Other Public Safety agencies will assist the Sitka Academy staff in the instruction there. The Coast Guard, Department of Community and Regional Affairs, Criminal Justice Planning Agency, and detachment level Troopers will assist in their particular areas of expertise.
     CETA training funds would pay for travel and subsistence/per diem for the trainees. Instructional-related costs would be borne by the several Public Safety agencies.
     Training received would result in:

1. Certification by the Alaska Police Standards Council as a Village Police Officer;
2. Certification by the State of Alaska as an Emergency Medical Technician;
3. Certification by the Department of Education as a Rural Fire Fighter I;
4. Award (of an as yet undetermined number) of college credits by Sheldon Jackson College/University of Alaska.

     Completion of the five-week training program does not mean the VPSO needs no further guidance, and training. Indeed State Troopers undergo 11 weeks of follow-up field training after completing 13 weeks of formal academy training.
     It is proposed that follow-up field training be accomplished by dividing the various subjects into a prescribed number of objectives, tailored to village conditions. Each time a Trooper visits a particular village, he would present information on a particular objective. Documentation of completion of each segment could be developed in a training jacket so that as other Troopers visit that village, information is readily available about what training has been completed and what subjects need to be covered. In this manner, field training is accomplished in an orderly manner even though different Troopers may be involved.
     Present Trooper background and experience qualifies them to present follow-up training in areas of law enforcement search and rescue, and related fields. Although individual experience and interests will vary, some Troopers will not consider themselves qualified to provide follow-up training in fire suppression, ordinance development, shared revenue, emergency medical aspects, and water safety, and therefore will need to undergo supplemental training in these fields.
     At least two possibilities exist to accomplish this extra Trooper training. In the short term, existing Bush Troopers could attend training sessions in these areas. In the long term, an advanced Academy training session could be developed for all Troopers destined for assignment to Bush posts. These Troopers could be certified to a higher level of accomplishment by the Police Standards Council.

B. Program Elements

     The following section describes the village programs to be developed and encouraged by the VPSO:

1. Provide Law Enforcement Services. The VPSO should in effect, act as an ^ extension of the state Trooper at the village level. For more serious crimes, the VPSO should take the immediate actions required such as notifying the Trooper, protecting the scene, preserving evidence, determining witnesses, and other actions as directed by the Trooper.
        The greatest number of problems, however, will involve relatively minor offenses. Drunkenness, petty theft, local ordinance violations and related problems should in most instances be resolved by the VPSO and the Council.
        He will also have to be proficient in report writing, keep basic statistics, and perhaps most importantly, become prevention oriented. Attempts to help resolve smoldering differences before a crime is committed, assisting persons who become intoxicated so they do not harm themselves and others, and related efforts will all help to prevent problems from occurring. He should also insure that the council is aware of and applies for shared revenue on the basis of law enforcement in the village.
    
2. Help Organize a Village Fire Department. The VPSO can stimulate interest among the Council and other residents to form a basic fire protection capability utilizing portable extinguishes, smoke detectors, portable pumps and lengths of hose, voluntary home inspections, school-oriented prevention programs, and similar efforts.
        The extinguisher should be the dry chemical, multi purpose, cartridge units, rated for cold weather. These units can be refilled in the village, with the long-term goal of one in every house. A supply of powder and cartridges should be stockpiled in the village.
        As a long-range goal, smoke detectors best suited for village home conditions should be in every home.
        While the VPSO may be a member of the fire department he ideally should not be the fire chief. The more villagers that can be involved in the public safety program, the better their village conditions will become. He should, however, know how to apply for revenue sharing for fire prevention, how to help organize a local fire department and how to report fires to the state Division of Fire Protection.
    
3. Help Organize a Local Search and Rescue Group. The VPSO can stimulate interest in forming a volunteer cadre of villagers to assist the Troopers and other agencies in search and rescue.
        This effort could consist of villagers who own snow machines, or have boats who have agreed to form a rescue group. The group could undergo training in first aid, and other areas determined appropriate. They could sponsor prevention efforts such as assuring everyone who goes on an extended trip has survival gear, has made his itinerary known to someone within the village, etc. Although the VPSO should ideally not be head of the SAR group, both the SAR group head and the VPSO should be knowledgeable about how to be reimbursed by the state for fuel, and equipment, etc., that were expended during the SAR mission. Rescue group personnel can be of particular help in evaluating the actual need for a search and rescue mission when a local resident is overdue, as well as other aspects of assistance to rescue authorities.
        As may be seen, the Fire Department and the Rescue group, although described separately here, can easily consist of the same personnel, and in fact should be the same persons. Training in fire suppression, artificial respiration and other subjects is plainly applicable to both functions.
    
4. Assist the Community Medical Provider. Many villages have a resident Community Health Aide, or other medical provider. The role of the VPSO is to offer such assistance as is deemed appropriate, but not attempt to take the place of this individual. In some cases the VPSO may be the only person trained in response to medical responder. The VPSO and CHA can jointly arrange for first aid training to be taught to villagers, help procure needed medical supplies for emergency situations, take each other's place when one or the other is absent from the village, and similar joint efforts.
    
5. Assist the Coast Guard to Upgrade Boating Safety and Water Survival. The VPSO can assist the Coast Guard in boating and water safety efforts, by arranging for the showing of films, displaying posters, assuring life jackets are in boats when persons are on the water, arrange for swimming classes if feasible and refer flagrant violators of safe boating practices to the Coast Guard and generally assist in other Coast Guard efforts toward safer marine practices.
    
6. Work with Village Council to Improve Ordinances. Numerous aspects of the VPSO's work will be made easier if local ordinances can provide the legal basis for areas of local concern. The VPSO can make suggestions to the Council about fire hazards that could be addressed by ordinance, safe boating and snow machine practices, local dog control, juvenile curfew, alcohol beverage control, trash and garbage disposal, discharging fire arms in the village and numerous other topics of local concern.
        In addition to suggestions about needed ordinances, perhaps even precedent to them the VPSO should know how ordinance are promulgated and what agencies and programs can be called upon to assist the village to develop a viable set of ordinances.

C. State Level Programs

     For the Village Public Safety Office concept to be successful requires assistance from several state agencies, for program development, research and continued assistance. Although there are many state agencies with programs of interest and value to the small rural communities, this section describes three major areas where research is needed, that pose particular advantages and value to the Public Safety Officer program.

1. Development and Maintenance of Village Ordinances. The improvement of village ordinances is an important aspect of increased local control and self determination. To date, there have been many generally independent efforts by various organizations to address this problem, but none have been entirely successful. ^
        At the request of the Department of Public Safety the Criminal Justice Planning Agency is developing a concept paper about how the ordinance problem can best be addressed.
        An early aspect is the convening of a meeting by agencies with an interest or existing program in thie field. It is anticipated that the Departments of Public Safety, Law, Community and Regional Affairs, the AFN, Yupitak Bista Manpower program, Doyon Ltd., Criminal Justice Planning Agency, Criminal Justice Center, and others will meet to discuss which agency has done what, the existing programs and capabilities, and how each can dovetail their efforts with the other, and the overall parameters of a long-term ordinance development and maintenance program.
    
2. Developing Mechanisms of Local Dispute Resolution. To enable local villages to resolve as many minor disputes as possible serves several purposes. Many village councils already informally assess penalties to miscreants that typically include restitution in kind to the aggrieved party, and the production of useful work for the villagers. This approach has the advantage of local decision making that best suits the offense, a penalty that is clearly related to the offense, (rather than appearance at a court elsewhere, the defendant's release on his own recognizance and his return to the village a few days later) and clearly an alternative to formal processing through the criminal justice system. Local offense resolution should be encouraged, and expanded, though within the parameters of constitutional rights and guarantees.
        An earlier attempt to utilize local decision making for dispute resolution involved the concept of the reconciliation board. Begun several years ago by the Alaska Court System, the program involved local village residents who attempted to arrive at a mutually agreeable solution to both sides of a dispute. This alternative to formal justice system processing was set up in several villages, but was only marginally successful, and dropped soon thereafter by the court system. This program should be reviewed, both in terms of its acceptability and value at the village level. If found to be of potential value, it could be modified as required and reinstituted.
        Additional study is needed in the area of traditional dispute resolution within the different ethnic areas of the state to determine if they include constitutional rights and guarantees and if they could apply to villages in rural Alaska.
    
3. Village Control Mechanisms for Alcoholic Beverages. As noted earlier, providing the means to respond to public safety concerns is in reality dealing with the manifestations of a deeper underlying social problem—that of alcohol abuse.
        Specialty agencies within the broad field of public safety acknowledge that nine out of ten public safety problems are related to, or are the direct result of alcohol abuse. There is no question that many villages want to control or eliminate alcoholic beverages in their communities but do not know how best to proceed or even how to proceed at all. The depth of the alcohol problem, and the benefits to be gained by its control have led several villages to institute drastic measures to prevent alcoholic beverages from coming into the villages. Some of these approaches are certainly effective but obviously unconstitutional.
        Simultaneously with the development of the Village Public Safety Officer program, a research effort should be mounted to explore all the means and options that a village has or could have with changes in the law in order to deal with the alcohol problem. The Attorney General's Office, the Criminal Justice Planning Agency and the State Troopers should be involved and possibly the Office of Alcoholism and selected social service agencies. The objective is to identify the means a village could use to prevent/control the influx of liquor into the village, rather than any attempts to determine the sociological reasons people drink, etc. No more worthy commitment of resources can be imagined.

D. Funding

     Objective—The long-term objective is to develop continuing funding for the village public safety program. There are several approaches that appear possible. Although discussed individually below, it is likely that a combination of the funding sources would be used for the program.

1. Comprehensive Education and Training Act (CETA). In the short-term CETA manpower funds of the several Native Corporations will continue to fund salaries and travel costs. Training conducted by the State Troopers to date—one-week sessions in Bethel and Nome—has been CETA funded. The first month-long session scheduled for September will also be financed by the Manpower program.
        However, the CETA program envisions units of government assuming salary costs after persons have been temporarily hired by CETA. Present CETA regulations stipulate that employment is limited to 18 months at which point the employee is terminated, theoretically to then be paid by the local community. At that point, a new person may be hired for the same job and paid by CETA funds. Needless to say most small villages in Alaska have little or no resources to pay the salary of any employees.
        It is during the initial term of employment by CETA, that alternative means for funding must be developed to meet the objectives of both the Village Public Safety Officer and CETA program.
    
2. Legislative Appropriation. As with the State Trooper program, state appropriations may be made to fund the VPSO program, as an adjunct to, and as an extension of the State Troopers. Such appropriation could be made to the Department of Public Safety which could contract with the several nonprofit Native regional corporations, or through some alternative means. Direct legislative funding could be either for entire program costs, or to be used in conjunction with one or more of the other potential funding sources. ^
    
3. Revision of Shared Revenue Formula. Presently state-shared revenues are apportioned on a per capita basis—$12/person for law enforcement and $7.50/person for fire protection. Although a regional cost differential is applied, there is little concern with the adequacy of the funds, existing tax base, local effort, or even whether or not the majority of funds are spent in those areas for which eligibility is derived. Only recently has the Department of Community and Regional Affairs stipulated by regulation that at least 20 percent of monies so derived be spent for that service in the village. The legislature could require that shared revenue funds awarded on the basis of existing police and fire services, be utilized to upgrade and otherwise support those programs in the villages. Currently only 20 percent of the entitlement must be so spent.
        A proposal could be developed for the legislature in which a minimum amount could be specified for public safety services. Perhaps $25,000 per village, or some other figure that could support a full-time public safety individual. Or, the per capita basis could be increased and changed to include recognition of local effort, such as the existence of a village sales tax or other means of municipal income that reflect a good faith effort by the village to help themselves.
    
4. Contract Services. Another aspect involving shared revenue is the idea of villages contracting with the Department of Public Safety to provide public safety services through the use of the village's shared revenue entitlement. Currently shared revenue funds in most cases would not support a full-time Village Public Safety Officer.
        Supplemental funding from either the legislature or the department would be needed if this approach is to be utilized. The goal of such an approach is to develop the program in the village and then involve the council to an increasing degree, until the village can administer the entire program. However, the department would continue its oversight and supervisory function, as described earlier.
    
5. Rural Public Safety Revolving Loan Fund. A concept that could be developed to fund the expense of training future Village Public Safety Officers, if CETA Manpower funds are reduced is to develop a revolving loan fund, similar to other student training loan funds. The legislature would be requested to establish the fund within the Department of Public Safety. Village residents meeting certain minimum qualifications (age, residency, education, etc.) who desire to become a Public Safety Officer would apply for a loan after obtaining the sponsorship of a village which intends to hire him at the completion of his training. Those granted loans would attend the training and then return to the village as a VPSO. His loan would be forgiven upon the completion of three years of satisfactory service. Preliminary work has already been done by the Public Safety Academy staff on this concept.
    
6. Contracts from Other State Agencies. Financial support may be available from other government agencies with irregular needs for short-term tasks in rural areas by contracting with Native nonprofit corporations to perform the tasks through the Public Safety Officer. Currently state and federal agencies send several persons into the Bush to perform the needed tasks. Often they are unfamiliar with the Bush, do not budget adequate funds for the job nor allow sufficient time to do it, have no entree with the villages, and may not relate well to village residents. Substantial time and money is often expanded for less than successful results.
        In the alternative, the government agency could contract for the task to be performed. Since the VPSO's have intimate knowledge of their village and others nearby, they could perform the work required with a minimum of effort. As a result, valid information would be gathered in a timely manner without the costs of travel, per diem, and salary.
        The regional corporation would then forward the appropriate amounts of the contract to the villages involved for use in support of the public safety program.

     If this concept proves feasible, it holds implications for state agencies with Bush responsibilities. In the long term, a generalist in the villages would evolve who knows quite a lot about many state agency functions and could perform on-site tasks for functional specialty agencies of state government. As an example, the diverse requirements of the Departments of Health and Social Services, Labor, Education, etc. could be fulfilled by the "village coordinator."
     If true our entire framework of thinking about state government operations in the Bush would have to be re-examined. Instead of functional specialists separated by the traditional hierarchical pattern on organizational charts, a generalist who performs work for many differing agencies would evolve, and at potentially great cost savings to the traditional ordering and approach of government agencies.