Proposed policy for bodycams could make Anchorage police video public within 45 days

The Anchorage Police Department is proposing policy changes that would call for body-worn camera footage of officer shootings to be released within 45 days and allow for families to view it even sooner.

Police Chief Sean Case released a draft version of the policy Friday, several days after three Anchorage Assembly members announced they also intended to push for faster release of footage following a series of recent shootings.

On Tuesday, in a 9-1 vote, the Anchorage Assembly approved a resolution urging the police department to publicly release footage of several recent police shootings within 30 days. The Assembly also called for the department to immediately provide footage to the family of Kristopher Handy, who police fatally shot outside his West Anchorage apartment in mid-May.

Anchorage police have shot five people since May, killing three and wounding two. The shootings are the first in the city to be captured on body cameras since officers began wearing them in March. Anchorage voters in 2021 approved the technology and associated technology upgrades through a $1.8 million tax increase.

The department has not released footage of any of the shootings, despite public pressure to do so. The policy that would be replaced should the draft become final states the chief “may proactively release” footage prior to the conclusion of an active criminal investigation or court proceeding.

It wasn’t immediately clear why Case chose 45 days as the timeframe for release. The department did not make him available for an interview.

During an online community meeting Sunday with the Alaska Black Caucus — an organization that’s advocated for timely and automatic release of the footage — Case called the 45-day timeframe “a starting point” he’d like to see reduced. But he also described concerns over releasing footage in cases that involve criminal charges because of the potential to complicate prosecution.

“I think the sooner we can release the body camera footage, the better it is for the community,” Case said. “Forty-five days is still a long time to wait. It allows a lot of time for the public to let that anxiety grow as they get limited information.”

Previous police chief designee Bianca Cross cited a position from the Office of Special Prosecutions as a driving factor in her decision not to release footage from the recent spate of shootings. A spokeswoman for the state office that determines whether police should be criminally charged in shootings has said they have advised law enforcement agencies not to release such footage because it could jeopardize investigations.

Police department spokeswoman Renee Oistad did not answer questions about the draft policy this week, including where the 45-day schedule came from and how the draft policy addresses the state’s position.

“The policy is a draft,” she said in an email. “Please reach back out to us with your request once the policy has been signed. I do not have a date for you, but I anticipate next week sometime.”

[In a moment, an emotional night turned deadly: June Anchorage police shooting was 6th death since 2020]

According to the draft policy, the chief may withhold footage for more than 45 days if it’s deemed necessary to protect the people involved, the integrity of an investigation, confidential sources, or the constitutional rights of those accused in any crime. Any delay must be explained in a detailed public statement, and the footage must be released as soon as the reason for the delay is resolved, it says.

The publicly released footage also may not show “all the shots fired or moments immediately following shots fired,” the draft policy states.

In addition, the department’s revised draft creates a new, “streamlined” process for up to six family members or representatives of someone shot by police to request a viewing of the footage starting 14 days after the incident. Under the policy, the viewing is private and the content of the video and audio must remain confidential.

Case, during a media briefing last week, said the draft policy will retroactively apply to the latest shooting. Officers shot and wounded a 51-year-old man who police said fired at them first in an East Anchorage parking lot earlier this month.

Assembly members Meg Zaletel, Felix Rivera and Daniel Volland last week proposed a resolution calling for changes, including a 30-day release window for the most recent shootings and a provision to give Handy’s family video footage immediately.

Handy’s shooting was the first in a series involving police officers. Surveillance footage from a nearby apartment raised questions about the department’s description of the encounter. Police initially said Handy “raised a long gun” at officers before he was fatally shot. It isn’t clear from the video whether he raised the weapon.

Case said during the Alaska Black Caucus meeting Sunday that he plans to allow the Handy family to view the body camera footage before the Office of Special Prosecutions investigation is complete. He did not provide a specific date for when the footage could be publicly available.

The Assembly resolution was updated on Tuesday to reflect the draft policy released Friday.

In an interview prior to Tuesday’s meeting, Zaletel said her questions about the draft policy include the lack of specifics when a request is denied and the footage is not released after 45 days. She also said 45 days is a long time for initial release, noting that the Alaska Black Caucus has pushed for a 10-day automatic release of footage.

In addition to calling for the release of recent footage in 30 days, the Assembly resolution calls for the administration and police department to further reconsider the new draft policy. It should review the American Civil Liberties Union’s model act for body-worn camera regulations and the draft policy proposed last year by the Alaska Black Caucus, NAACP Anchorage and the Northern Justice Project, and the Los Angeles Police Department’s policy. The resolution asks APD to include in its bodycam policy the creation of a public group that would determine whether to release footage in the event that APD doesn’t release it “at the first opportunity available under the policy.”

LAPD’s policy includes an oversight review board, Zaletel said during Assembly discussion before the vote. Such a board would increase public transparency and allow for an “off ramp” where anyone seeking footage who is denied by APD could seek recourse in court, she said.

“There can be very legitimate reasons why APD may not choose to release footage, but we need to know a couple of things,” Zaletel said. “One is time certain when the next decision will be made. If it’s not released on this day, when will we hear again when it might be released? And if there’s an update and that needs to keep happening? Additionally, we need the public to have clear information and expectations so they can make informed choices.”

Assembly member Zac Johnson voted against the resolution, citing concerns about releasing footage before investigations by the Office of Special Prosecutions are complete. Assembly members Randy Sulte and Scott Myers were not present.

An Assembly work session on the body-worn camera policy is planned for Friday. Case said during Sunday’s Black Caucus meeting that the policy will remain in draft form until after the session to allow for Assembly questions and public input.

The three Assembly members introduced the ordinance Tuesday that would require officers to use body camera technology in accordance with department policy.

“Body-worn cameras are something that we have due to a tax-levy decision, but they’re not codified anywhere that they have to exist,” Zaletel said. “So that’s what the ordinance does, it says, ‘We have this thing and it exists and it has to be operated per the policy.’”

A public hearing for the ordinance is scheduled for July 30.

The Assembly on Tuesday unanimously voted to confirm Case as chief of police.

“My job is not to look at the community and tell them that I’m being transparent, it’s the community’s job to look at me and tell me whether or not,” he told Assembly members. “My approach to it is open communication.”

Written policies are the department’s “commitment to the community to follow through,” he said.

“I fully expect that the community, the municipality and this body will hold me accountable if we don’t hit that 45-day mark,” Case said.

[Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly reported that a proposed ordinance would add new body-worn camera standards to municipal code. The proposed ordinance would add no new policies but includes language that camera usage must comply with existing policy.]