By SUZANNE DOWNING
Jan. 23, 2026
Gov. Mike Dunleavy used his final State of the State address to draw a contrast between statewide crime trends and the concentration of crime in Alaska’s largest city. While Alaska has made major progress on public safety, Anchorage remains the state’s central crime hotspot, and is the next major focus of enforcement efforts.
Dunleavy said Alaska’s overall crime picture has fundamentally changed since he took office, crediting a combination of policy shifts, staffing increases, and enforcement reforms. He pointed to the repeal of catch-and-release policies, expanded trooper hiring, and major investments in the Village Public Safety Officer (VPSO) program, which has grown from 42 communities and 49 officers in 2018 to 62 communities and 84 officers today, with improved retention and new regional public safety officers now deployed across the state. That’s a 71% increase in VPSOs during his tenure.
Those changes have produced measurable results, he said. Since he took office:
- Alaska’s overall crime rate is down 41.8%.
- Violent crime is down nearly 19%.
- Property crime has fallen 48%.
- Burglary is down 56%.
- Robbery is down 33%,
- Motor vehicle theft is down 55%.
- Aggravated assault is down 14%.
- Rape and sexual assault is down 25%.
Provisional CDC data also show overdose deaths in Alaska declining nearly 19% between August 2024 and August 2025, following expanded fentanyl enforcement, tougher penalties, and major drug seizures by state and federal partners.
But Dunleavy said those statewide gains mask a stark geographic reality: Crime in Alaska is increasingly concentrated in Anchorage.
“If you take Anchorage out of the mix, our state’s overall crime rate is well below the national average,” he said, repeating the point for emphasis.
Anchorage represents about 38% of Alaska’s population, but in 2024 accounted for 55% of the state’s murders, 51% of sexual assaults, 67% of car thefts, and more than 78% of robberies.
The city’s property crime rate is nearly 60% higher than the national average and 74% of Alaska’s overdose or poisoning deaths occurred in Anchorage.
Dunleavy said Anchorage’s violent crime rate is nearly three times the national average, higher than Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, New York, and Chicago.
“This is far outside the norm,” he said. “We don’t have to accept this, and we’re not going to.”
Dunleavy said the state is now shifting resources to where the data shows they are most needed, with Anchorage as the central focus. Under the leadership of Attorney General designee Stephen Cox, the state has entered into a coordinated partnership with the Municipality of Anchorage to directly target crime in the city.
The joint strategy begins with a multi-phase :Quality of Life: initiative already underway. The first phase focuses on retail theft and public nuisance crimes such as illegal camping, drug activity, and disorderly behavior. The second phase will target drug interdiction, and the final phase will focus on violent crime, including assault, rape, and murder.
“The goal is to put the resources where the data says the resources are needed,” Dunleavy said, adding that while enforcement continues statewide, Anchorage is now the primary concentration point.
Dunleavy credited Anchorage’s mayor for aligning with the state’s approach, saying city leadership recognizes the severity of the problem and he said she agrees it cannot be ignored. The joint state-municipal effort, he said, is designed to drive sustained reductions in crime rather than temporary enforcement spikes.
On the same day as the governor’s remarks, Anchorage Assemblyman Keith McCormick warned residents to stay out of Town Square in downtown Anchorage due to the rise in violent crime:
Public safety, Dunleavy said, has been his administration’s top priority, and he framed the Anchorage initiative as the next major phase of that agenda. While he emphasized the progress Alaska has made, he also warned that those gains are not permanent and can be reversed by policy shifts and weakened enforcement.
“We’ve proven this works when it comes to public safety,” he said. “Policies must come with focus and an objective, followed by execution to achieve that objective.”
The message from the governor’s podium was clear: Alaska’s crime trend is moving in the right direction, but Anchorage now stands apart as the state’s most urgent public safety challenge and will be the focus of the administration’s final push to reduce crime before the end of his term.
11 thoughts on “Dunleavy says Anchorage violent crime rate is higher than Los Angeles, New York City, and Chicago”
What does anyone expect when 9 of 12 assembly members are far left Liberal Marxists? Unleashing lawless policies and telling the Chief of Police to stand down the department on anything but DV and murder. Even children are unprotected in the city. The homeless? They’re just a side benefit of those policies; dead in the streets & on the streets gets money for the muni coffers.
Sweet Jesus and you just heard about this, Guv?
Why the sudden worry about Anchorage crime, Guv? Somebody needs a campaign issue or another tax or both?
.
Alaska’s judicial and grand jury systems were allowed to fail on your watch, Guv, so why waste your time, or more importantly, the time of your adoring public with true crime stories?
.
Anyway, isn’t Anchorage Co-Governor Giessel’s turf?
.
Just get on with your bloody damned sales tax because, after all, this is your chance to shine, to rescue the bast…. oops! who spent the state into oblivion and reward them with even more money, no?
.
Just tack on another five or six percent for schools and crime and anything else your sponsors want …problem solved, no?
.
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
Considering that Anchorage is a smaller town than those cities: LA, Chicago that we shouldn’t have high number of crime
See! This is what I’m saying when I spoken on when leaders of the court and towns are refusing to enforce the laws of our land they are being negligent in the duties they were sworn into office to uphold. Our local and state leaders negligence results in our vulnerable residents being hurt and harmed or even killed by stronger more aggressive people.
Yesterday afternoon (11-12) I drove through downtown streets and its sight made me sad because everything but the offices were closed up and I remember even in 2011 Anchorage was still busy with a flurry of shopping and dining activities. That’s not what I saw yesterday. In commerce speaking it was Dead district.
The only surprise here is that, after 7 years in office, our governor has awaken. Anchorage’s leadership in criminal activity is old news.
Only a fathead would blame Dunleavy for Anchorage’s crime problem, and we have plenty of fatheads around.
The Governor’s words sound noble but specifics are required. Fact is that State law enforcement in Anchorage is almost non-existent. The activities of Anchorage Police Department are paid for by Anchorage alone. Many, if not most, misdemeanor offenses are prosecuted by the Municipality. Exalted State prosecutors do prosecute felony offenses. The incarceration costs are split. If the Governor were serious about this problem he would direct a significant increase in funding for the actual law enforcement function in Anchorage. Instead he complains and throws rocks. Recognition that Anchorage is a part of Alaska would be a good place to start.
I’ve found that sometimes people who hold the views they hold do not have all the facts to support them. Blaming the governor for the responsibilities of the local government is one such instance. Being informed about how our levels of government in Alaska work is a good place for someone who does not understand how our levels of government function is a good place to start. Article X of the Alaska Constitution states “The purpose of this article is to provide for maximum local self-government with a minimum of local government units, and to prevent duplication of tax-levying jurisdictions. A liberal construction shall be given to the powers of local government units.” Further, Alaska Statute Title 29 defines the responsibilities of the local governments.
Blaming the governor, any Alaskan governor, for the faults of your local government is incorrectly placed blame that does not correct the issue or even properly address it, it simply allows your local government representatives to get away with their own failures.
Steve-O, what do you make of Alaska’s Constitution, Article III, Section 16?
.
“The governor shall be responsible for the faithful execution of the laws. He may, by appropriate court action or proceeding brought in the name of the State, enforce compliance with any constitutional or legislative mandate, or restrain violation of any constitutional or legislative power, duty, or right by any officer, department, or agency of the State or any of its political subdivisions.”
.
Looks like the governor has authority to intervene, but chooses not to do so.
.
Then there’s 18 U.S. Code § 241, “Conspiracy against rights”, all about the right to equal protection under the laws.
.
Sure and proving conspiracy, intent, and purpose may be a heavy lift but, if Governor D has authority to do so, why would he not have been looking into the situation before Anchorage began sliding into the terminally ill version of Minneapolis?
.
Hard to believe he only just found out, no?
Since the AK Constitution, Article III, Section 16 is similar to the US Constitution Article II, Section 3 Faithful Execution Clause, or Take Care Clause, I’m not sure how it pertains here to this discussion.
Article III, Section 16 grants the governor the ability to engage the courts in order to ensure compliance with constitutional and legislative mandates by state agencies, that has precious little to do with local elected officials allowing lawlessness on the streets of Anchorage.
Respectfully disagree.
.
The Alaska Statute §11.56.850 (a)(2) (2025) says: “A public servant commits the crime of official misconduct if, with intent to obtain a benefit or to injure or deprive another person of a benefit, the public servant knowingly refrains from performing a duty which is imposed upon the public servant by law or is clearly inherent in the nature of the public servant’s office.”
.
Seems like the statute applies both to local elected officials allowing lawlessness on the streets of Anchorage and to state elected officials who know about it, but do nothing.
Still seems like you’d need to show that the local official “knowingly refrains from performing a duty which is imposed upon the public servant by law or is clearly inherent in the nature of the public servant’s office” and that they did so “with intent to obtain a benefit or to injure or deprive another person of a benefit” before you could charge another official with someone else doing or not doing something else. I’m not disagreeing with you that Anchorage is virtually lawless, but you are barking up the wrong tree.