A recent audit of the Anchorage Police Department has revealed higher-than-average use-of-force rates compared to other major Northwest agencies. The report, conducted by 21CP Solutions, highlights disproportionate involvement of Alaska Native and Indigenous populations and a small subset of officers in many encounters.
A 20% concentration of force incidents among a small officer group
A small subset of Anchorage officers is responsible for a disproportionate share of use-of-force encounters. According to the audit, this group of officers accounts for approximately 20% of all reported incidents.. The firm reviewed more than 5,700 use-of-force incidents occurring between January 2021 and June 2025 to reach this conclusion.
Anchorage Police Department (APD) Chief Sean Case defended the department's practices, suggesting that these officers are often assigned to high-risk roles that necessitate more frequent contact. Chief Case noted that these encounters typically involve lower-level methods that do not result in physical injury. Furthermore, the department maintains that its reporting standards are more inclusive of force than many other agencies, which may inflate per-capita comparisons.
Disproportionate force against Alaska Native and Indigenous residents
Alaska Native and Indigenous populations are disproportionately represented in the use-of-force incidents reported by the Anchorage Police Department. This demographic finding has intensified calls from community members for more direct civilian involvement in police governance. During a recent meeting at the Fairview Community Recreation Center, community member Mercedes Arciniega testified that the city needs more direct community input regarding APD operations.
The organization Stand Up Alaska has also voiced significant concern regarding these findings. Executive Director Erin Jackson-Hill stated that the community is looking for "real consequences" rather than the issuance of another policy memo. This sentiment reflects a growing tension between the municipality and residents who feel that current oversight mechanisms are insufficient to protect marginalized groups.
Three policy violations identified in recent officer-involved shootings
Former LAPD Chief Michel Moore, acting as a senior adviser for 21CP Solutions, revealed that three officer-involved shootings violated department policy. These incidents occurred across 2024, 2025, and the current year. While the audit reviewed 11 of the 13 officer-involved shootings from 2024, it did not investigate the potential criminal implications of these events.
The findings come despite previous investigations by the state Office of Special Prosecutions, which had found prior shootings to be justified. the audit's focus on policy violations rather than criminal conduct highlights a distinction that remains a point of contention for those seeking deeper accountability within the Anchorage Police Department.
The $120,000 price tag for 21CP Solutions' findings
The municipality of Anchorage expects the total cost of the 21CP Solutions audit to reach approximately $120,000. This expenditure follows a failed attempt in July to establish a public safety advisory commission, a move that faced widespread criticism for lacking sufficient power. The administration of Mayor Suzanne LaFrance hired the consulting firm to review the department's training protocols and use-of-force policies.
The 21CP Solutions team includes several high-profile law enforcement veterans, such as retired commissioner Charles H. Ramsey, who has served in major departments like Chicago and Washington, D.C. this level of expertise is intended to provide a professional lens on the department's urban policing challenges, even as the municipality works to implement dozens of recommended changes.
Who will bridge the gap between policy and criminal accountability?
Significant questions remain regarding how the Anchorage Police Department will address the gap between policy compliance and criminal investigations.. While the audit identified three specific policy violations, it did not address whether those actions warranted criminal charges. This leaves the community wondering if the current oversight structures are capable of handling more than just administrative errors.
Furthermore, it remains unverified whether the "real consequences" demanded by groups like Stand Up Alaska will materialize, or if the department's response will be limited to the adoption of the audit's recommended policy changes. As the Anchorage Assembly's Health & Public Safety Committee digests these findings, the effectiveness of the Mayor's administration in implementing meaningful oversight remains the central unanswered question.
Comments 0