The highly visible campaign to repeal Anchorage's labor law on Nov. 4 has hinged on one key theme: public safety.
"Keep Anchorage Safe" is the slogan for the coalition of unions opposing the law's changes to collective bargaining. A campaign mailer sent recently to Anchorage households lays out some of the campaign's more drastic predictions about the law's effects.
The mailer, which went out starting Oct. 17, was the first in a series of three being sent to Anchorage households in the two-and-a-half weeks before the election. The referendum on Anchorage's labor law is Ballot Measure 1, the last item on the general election ballot.
The two-sided mailer, which a union representative said cost approximately $20,000 to produce and distribute, features two images, one of an electrical worker climbing a tower, the other of a uniformed firefighter, identified as Mike Hermes of the Anchorage Fire Department. It makes four specific claims about equipment, staffing and response times that "could result" if voters uphold Anchorage Ordinance 37, also known as AO 37.
But the word "could" is important: Union officials acknowledged they can't say for sure if the claims related to staffing and response times will materialize.
Alaska Dispatch News asked both sides of the AO 37 debate to further explain and respond to the claims made in the mailer.
Claim 1: "Politicians -- not trained, experienced professionals -- deciding the right equipment."
This claim is rooted in language that was added to the "management rights" section of city code. The rewritten law says the municipality reserves the right to decide the "methods, means, equipment and personnel by which government operations are to be conducted, including staffing and scheduling."
The law also states that the municipality has "complete control and discretion" over the scheduling of its employees "and the technology and/or equipment" they need to perform their work. And, it says the municipality has the right to determine personnel, equipment and supplies in the event of an emergency declaration.
Unions are currently able to weigh in on equipment decisions during the negotiating process. Firefighters, whose gear includes safety items including breathing apparatuses, have said they're worried about not being able to advocate for certain types of gear and that the shift is more about money than safety.
"To them, our equipment is a line item on the budget," said Brian Murphy, spokesman for the local firefighters union.
While unions would indeed lose bargaining power over equipment, it's not strictly true that politicians, such as the mayor or city manager, would be making decisions about equipment. "Management" includes the police and fire chiefs, who typically come to the post after serving years in their respective departments. The chiefs report to the city manager, who reports to the mayor.
Fire Chief John Fullenwider said he has not yet read AO 37, but he said he strongly disagreed with the suggestion that only politicians would be making equipment decisions.
"First of all, politicians are not going to run the fire department; the fire chief is," Fullenwider said.
Claim 2: "Understaffed fire crews and police shifts."
Under the current municipal contract with the local firefighters union, negotiated in 2008, at least three firefighters must make up each fire company. In addition, the contracts stipulate that four-person companies will staff a citywide minimum of eight fire trucks or engines per shift.
Union representatives differ with Mayor Dan Sullivan on what is the "industry standard" for the number of firefighters on a rig. At a recent forum, Tom Wescott, president of the Alaska Firefighters Association and a captain in the Anchorage Fire Department, said the standard is four firefighters; Sullivan, in a phone interview, said the standard is three.
Murphy emailed a link to pair of 2010 federally funded studies linking firefighter safety and results to resources and crew size, to support arguments that there should never be fewer than three firefighters on a company.
One study concluded that crews with three or four first-responders complete the removal of patients 1.2 to 1.5 minutes faster than crews with two first-responders. Among the findings of the second study was that, for example, four-person firefighting crews deliver water 6 percent faster than three-person crews.
Other cities in Alaska, including Fairbanks, operate fire trucks staffed with fewer than three firefighters, Wescott said in an interview.
But there's nothing to suggest that will happen anytime soon in Anchorage. The city and the police and fire unions are currently undergoing contract negotiations, and Sullivan said his administration -- which he claims is negotiating under the provisions of AO 37, though the law is suspended -- has not sought to change the minimum staffing requirements.
"We have not brought that up as an item we'd want to negotiate," Sullivan said, calling the assertion "hyperbole."
Both Fullenwider and Sullivan said staffing decisions are tied to budget constraints. Sullivan did acknowledge that if a budget crisis were to hit, it would be up to the city manager and the mayor to decide how to find savings. He said he didn't know what a different mayor would do if faced with tough budget decisions.
"I can't predict the future," he said. "All I know is, we're looking to enter into three-year contracts with the fire department. That's not one of the things we're looking to change in the current contract."
In any case, when it comes to police staffing, the municipality can't use AO 37 to change minimum police staffing levels, because they don't exist. Chief Mark Mew has said in the past that his target number of sworn officers is 375, but there is no contractual obligation for minimum staffing for the Anchorage Police Department.
For the last several years, the department has weathered a well-publicized staffing shortfall, dropping to 321 sworn officers in July 2014, the lowest in almost a decade. That number is now up to 374, including recent graduates of one academy and those enlisted in a second academy that just began.
Gerard Asselin, president of the Anchorage Coalition of Unions and an Anchorage police sergeant, said staffing volatility is one looming concern with letting management set schedules and hours without employee input.
Sullivan and Chris Birch, chair of the "Yes on 1" campaign, argue that it's normal practice for management to control staffing and schedules.
Supporters of the law also say that limiting future compensation and shifting more power to management will help in reallocation of resources to avoid cuts in the city's public safety departments -- although unions counter those changes will hurt recruitment and retention.
Claim 3: "Dangerously slow emergency response times."
This assertion is an extension of the fear that AO 37 could lead to reduced staffing levels.
In the fire department, the size of an emergency response is based on the number of personnel needed to work a scene, Murphy said. If fewer firefighters are working on an engine, more engines would be required to respond to a call. Murphy said that would open up holes across Anchorage when it comes to emergency response.
Fullenwider said that even if a budget crisis led to recommendations to reduce four-man rigs to three-man rigs, he "certainly would not support that as chief." He said there would also likely be a public backlash.
Claim 4: "Long waits on 911 calls."
This claim is similar to warnings of slower emergency response times and is tied to fears about staffing levels. The current contract with Anchorage's fire union stipulates a minimum of four dispatchers per shift. Bargaining units can currently negotiate that minimum number, but they would lose that ability if AO 37 is upheld.
Union officials say fewer dispatchers on shift would lead to longer waits on 911 calls.
Again, Sullivan said his administration is not seeking to alter or negotiate minimum emergency dispatch staffing in contract negotiations.