Mud Bay, Lutak and Upper Valley residents are preparing to choose whether or not they want to create an on-call police service area in their neighborhoods. If they vote yes, their property taxes will increase to pay for police respone to, essentially, imminent threats to life and property. What happens if they vote no?

If any or all of the neighborhoods vote no, it will fall to the Haines Borough Assembly to provide guidance to Haines Police.

Police chief Heath Scott told a crowd of upper valley residents that voting no potentially means his department stops responding to calls. “I’m stretching this a little, but my expectation would be that I get something in documentation from the assembly and or my boss that says, ‘you’re not to provide service out there,’” Scott told residents. “I generate a policy that says we’re not going to provide service out there. I get that signed from general counsel. Staff reads and signs and everybody understands.”

Assembly member Stephanie Scott joins the police chief in that understanding. If the majority of voters vote no, the assembly should restrict police to the townsite, Scott told the CVN last week.

“If it doesn’t pass I think we have to be absolutely strong on not letting [the police] go outside the townsite,” Scott said. “I’m afraid we’re going to have a disaster if that’s the case. It puts the police in a terrible situation. They believe they have an ethical responsibility to take care of all of us no matter where we are.”

Many residents who live outside the townsite are resistant to increasing their property taxes to pay for police. They say they already pay for police service through sales tax, a portion of which funds the police department. Assembly member Scott disagrees with that argument.

“People say they pay for it because they’re paying sales tax,” Stephanie Scott said. “That’s not accurate, really. They pay the sales tax for the police in town. The police do not have any authorization to operate outside of the townsite, period.”

According to borough charter and code, the police are funded to operate within the townsite service area. Local police officers are state certified, however, and have the authority to police statewide.

Assembly member Sean Maidy said if people vote against creating a police service area, he’d vote against any potential directive that restricts the police to the townsite, he said. “I can’t direct police to not respond to emergencies,” Maidy said. “I know it’s an unfunded requirement. In good conscience, I can’t say no to somebody who is immediate danger. Granted, what the police do is a different story altogether.”

Assembly member Brenda Josephson said it’s a mistake to assume people who vote no are saying they don’t want police service. She said the assembly needs to make a different plan to pay for defined emergency services. “We need to come up with a plan that involves a funding mechanism and we need to give guidance for the service that’s provided,” Josephson said. “A no vote doesn’t mean [police] don’t go out there, it just means [voters are] disapproving the funding mechanism.”

Assembly member Tom Morphet, along with Josephson, is an adamant opponent of expanding police service beyond the townsite. Morphet said if people vote no, he expects the status quo—police responding to emergency calls—to continue. “Sales tax income from residents outside the townsite is sufficient to pay for emergency, on-call service,” Morphet said.

Mosquito Lake resident and borough assembly candidate Paul Rogers said he plans to vote for an on-call service area. Rogers has attended meetings on the issue for more than a year. He suggested changes to the ordinance, which the assembly approved by amendment last week, that further restricted the definition of “on-call services” to eliminate police patrols in the area. He also proposed that the on-call service areas be eliminated should the Alaska State Troopers bring a trooper back to Haines, another amendment the assembly approved.

“I think if it’s voted down out the highway I think it’s going to be because they don’t want to pay for services they think they’re already paying for,” Rogers said. “I am going to vote in favor of the ordinance as it stands…because I believe some police services are necessary and the ordinance will provide that until we can get the state trooper back.”

Upper valley resident Adrian Bochart plans to vote against the on-call service. She wants to see citizens lobby the state to return the Alaska State Trooper position to Haines. “I feel as though the upper valley does deserve attention. Stuff happens out here,” Bochart said. “But I really don’t believe we need to expand our local city police department. I think it’s going to end up with very dissatisfied citizens and a frustrated police department.”

A spokesperson with the Alaska State Troopers said the result of October’s ballot question won’t influence their position—that the Haines Borough Police Department is the agency responsible for policing the borough—an unflinching position the department has taken since they moved the trooper to western Alaska in the winter of 2017.

“We will continue to assist Haines Borough Police Department as needed and as appropriate,” AST spokesperson Megan Peters said. “A local vote on HBPD’s service area does not impact our position.”

The assembly earlier this month unanimously postponed indefinitely an ordinance that would ask all borough voters to expand the townsite service area boroughwide. Maidy said he would vote against such an ordinance, but would be willing to change his mind if enough people supported it. Morphet and Josephson also said they’d oppose the ordinance if it was brought forward again. Scott said she’d ratherlet people see what life was like without police before taking further action.

Assembly member Heather Lende was unavailable to comment for this story by press time.

Author