13. An Ordinance Rescinding Ordinance No. 2022-0025 and Adopting a Military Equipment Use Policy [In Lieu of Pass for Publication Ordinance to be Published in its Entirety] File ID: 2023-01027
Unacceptable that pd would claim not to know how to account for equipment, and claim that the process is too complex to be done accurately. greatest training but don't know how to keep track of their equipment. leo departments are notorious hoarders of weapons, salute to the mayor and council members for finally holding pd accountable and having them justify their equipment requests and budgets. Don't know actually how much equipment they currently have, but always need more of everything....
Our city much like others that have defunded police departments Seattle,San Francisco and now Austin referring the public to use 311 when in danger is under attack by criminals posing as advocates for safety of the public.
Their emotional displays of compassion and empathy are all false! Our city is experiencing the worst crime wave in history.
It’s riddled with crime, shoplifting and drugs and multiple shootings and auto thefts and attacks on the public in stopped traffic.
I’ve lived here my entire life and I’ve never witnessed anything like this and it’s not getting any better,
The criminals and the service resistant people have been raised to a pedestal of hierarchy so far up they have more right than the people who actually contribute to our communities and taxes.
It’s almost unsafe to shop in certain places and without a doubt these stores will close down creating a food and service desert throughout our city!
The criminals are carrying military gear and weapons and equipment and to say to our police officers that they cannot protect themselves or our citizens is unjust and will put the public more at risk
Instead of worrying about looking good for the people who hold city council meetings hostage. How about listening to the constituents who are contributing members of society who have worked hard for the few things we have and try to protect!
Taking away police safety will no doubt result in the public taking matters into their own hands as we are already starting to witness from store clerks who feel like they have to protect themselves because the police won’t be there in time.
Sac PD needs the right tools to do their job. I saw the aftermath of the 2020 riots in downtown Sacramento. Small businesses destroyed, monuments vandalized and broken. That's not "protesting" that's mob rule. Riot control should have been deployed. And if the next country's election is anything like last time, our city should be prepared. I approve of less lethal weapons like Super-Sock Bean Bags, Pepperballs and smoke canisters. I also approve of any tools that support the protection and safe return of hostages. I believe these items cost money and should not be used lightly, but they should be available. Crime is up, organized violence is up and Sacramento should lead as California's State Capitol when it comes to preserving the health and safety of the innocent. No more excuses for violence. Bring back clean, safe and friendly streets!
I am a resident of District 5, and a public health professional, and implore you to oppose adoption of the MEU policy and report in their current form and instead take the Sacramento Community Police Review Commission’s (SCPRC) recommendations seriously and implement them in full. It is high time City Council acknowledge that the continued militarization of police is a threat to public health and health equity. Adoption of the MEU Policy and Report as they stand will perpetuate Sac PD’s excessive, unchecked power and allow for greater, more excessive use of force, all of which will do nothing to reduce crime and only worsen existing health inequities, economic inequality, homelessness and housing crisis, specifically for your Black, Latine/x, Hawaiian and Pacific Islander, Indigenous, and Asian American constituents. Adopting Agenda item 13 as is will be counterproductive to all of the City’s existing, and admittedly insufficient, efforts to advance health and racial equity. Do more, do better, and start by opposing the adoption of this policy and report.
Please vote no on Agenda Item 13. It requires much more thorough review and discussion before any vote should be taken. The Police Department already appears to have a large inventory of military weapons and still they are wanting to purchase more.
Weapons of war like armored vehicles, robots, drones, and grenades do not belong in civilian settings and should not be used on civilian populations. The Police Department needs to build community trust and having and deploying these sorts of weapons destroys any possibility of such trust. Many residents are already afraid to call the police when they are victims of crimes and this military equipment will make them even more hesitant to call. This is particularly true in poorer neighborhoods and neighborhoods where many people do not speak English and these are the neighborhoods where I am afraid this military equipment is more likely to be deployed. The very large amount of money spent on this equipment could be better used for community based violence prevention efforts and on deploying culturally competent mental health professionals on calls where someone is in psychiatric crisis.
I do not see anything in the report submitted by the Police Department that talks about independent, civilian oversight of the use of this equipment. Such oversight is absolutely necessary and must be part of reports that are available to the public. It is my understanding that the Sacramento Community Police Review Commission (SCPRC) has made a number of recommendations which have not been adopted and these need to be incorporated into Police Department policies.
I am alarmed to see that one of the described uses for this military equipment is crowd control. The First Amendment grants the right to peacefully protest and people often do that in crowds. The use of military equipment to manage such situations is inappropriate. I have participated in many peaceful demonstrations over the years and the presence of military equipment would make me feel less safe, not more safe. 'Crowd control needs to be removed from the list of 'appropriate uses' of military equipment.
I am writing to urge you to vote NO on the Sacramento Police Department’s Military Equipment Use (MEU) policy. Before approving the policy, the public and City Council need more time to review the accompanying annual report and the implementation of the Sacramento Community Police Review Commission’s MEU recommendations.
SacPD’s MEU policy itself complies with the barest interpretation of AB-481, and I am deeply concerned about the harmful outcomes that will result from a policy that asks for additional funding with virtually no justification. The policy does not have tighter limits on when or where military equipment can be used. It does not designate oversight authority to an independent oversight body. It does not detail any legally enforceable sanctions in place for misuses of military equipment.
In addition to the policy, the accompanying annual report does not include complete comparative or demographic data about the Department’s military equipment usage. The report does not track all military equipment deployments and only provides “reportable uses of force.” It does not include the cost for personnel time, transportation, storage, upgrades and other ongoing costs in assessing the fiscal impact of this military equipment. And neither the report nor the policy provides any written justifications for how or why this military equipment is necessary to ensure both officer and civilian safety.
The SCPRC has provided 13 specific recommendations for the MEU policy, and the community input has led to 9 additional recommendations that support the Commission. To address these concerns, I request for the Mayor and City Council to do the following:
Reject all new military equipment requests and re-invest funds into community-based violence prevention organizations and/or the Department of Community Response (DCR). Overall the SacPD is requesting approval to spend $361,692 in acquisitions. While their report tries to diminish this spending by comparing it to the entire budget of the department, it is still a large amount of funding that could be reallocated to departments or organizations that address immediate community needs, like the DCR. This request for approval also seems especially absurd considering how much money SacPD is requesting in relation to the small numbers of times the various types of equipment were used. For example, according to their own report SacPD used their rifles and rifle ammunition twice in the past year, but are requesting an additional $200k be spent on new acquisitions. Surely they have enough already if they only use them twice in a year.
Designate independent oversight of SacPD’s MEU compliance to the Office of Public Safety Accountability, the Inspector General, and Sacramento Community Police Review Commission. This will allow for greater transparency and public trust. Allowing the Police Department to investigate itself is ethically questionable at best and they have demonstrated a reluctance to cooperate with OPSA, the IG, or SCPRC. They do not regularly attend SCRPC meetings and have ignored their thoughtful recommendations for years. OPSA, when presenting their Fourth Amendment violations report in June at City Council, stated that trying to work with SacPD was like “talking to a brick wall” and has been trying for two years to get SacPD to write a policy about search and seizure/Fourth Amendment. This indicates that the SCPRC, IG, and OPSA are not able to offer any sort of meaningful engagement with the SacPD unless they have actual power to oversee the department.
Remove all language in the MEU policy that allows SacPD to use military equipment for “crowd control” and add specific restrictions for when and where military equipment cannot be used. AB-481 requires that “the proposed military equipment use policy will safeguard the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties.” Sacramento residents and victims of police violence have repeatedly declared they feel less safe with the presence of heavily armed law enforcement. In addition, studies confirm that law enforcement officer’s possession of military weapons have actually escalated situations rather than mitigated harm, often resulting in serious preventable injuries, most notably during the George Floyd protests of 2020. Disallowing the use of military equipment as crowd control will prevent similar situations from recurring. Adding further restrictions such as when dealing with a minor, when dealing with a person with known or suspected physical disabilities, or when dealing with a person with known or suspected mental disabilities will also further protect the public.
Review and approve all MEU-related recommendations from Sacramento Community Police Review Commission before approving any of the MEU policy updates or equipment requests being made by SacPD. The MEU-related recommendations are easy to implement and very reasonable. They were also thoughtfully developed by a group of dedicated community members with expertise and experience. They have been part of the broader platform of recommendations made by the SCPRC for two years and SacPD continues to either ignore them or refuse to engage with them in good faith.
Even as SacPD appears to agree with some SCPRC recommendations, the general attitude during the entire process to develop this MEU policy has shown an ignorance to AB 481’s purpose and intent, a dismissiveness for public concerns and safety, and a lack of respect for community input and civilian oversight outside the Department. Meeting AB 481’s bare minimum requirements is not the same as safeguarding people’s welfare, safety, civil rights and civil liberties. As Sacramento Police Department cannot be trusted to do more than the bare minimum, the Mayor and City Council have a duty to direct them to adhere to a higher standard the community expects from its government. Anything less is a gross abdication of leadership and responsibility.
I hope that this Council will take their responsibility seriously and approve their appointed commissioners’ recommendations.
RE: Item 13: An Ordinance Rescinding Ordinance No. 2022-0025 and Adopting a Military Equipment Use Policy [In Lieu of Pass for Publication Ordinance to be Published in its Entirety] File ID: 2023-01027 DO NOT APPROVE
Dear City Council Members:
As has been well documented, military equipment is more frequently deployed in low-income Black and Brown communities, meaning the risks and impacts of police militarization are experienced most acutely in marginalized communities. Given the concentration of deployments in communities of color, where trust in law enforcement and government at large is already depressed, the routine use of militarized police tactics by local agencies threatens to increase the historic tensions between marginalized groups with no detectable public safety benefit. SacPD has not shown that the military equipment will safeguard the public’s civil rights or human rights, further increasing the tension in communities of color.
Thus, I strongly oppose item 13. The proposed plan doesn’t identify the independent entity that will exercise independent oversight on uses of military equipment and I urge you as elected officials to:
• heed widespread community calls for demilitarization, and
• not approve the Military Equipment Policy and Report in its current form.
As a Sacramento resident, I am deeply concerned about the harmful outcomes that will result from this military equipment use policy. It does not require tight enough restrictions for such dangerous equipment and it is critical that more detailed research be conducted into safer and effective alternatives to using military equipment by the City and SPD.
A process for evaluating the effectiveness of the military equipment stock is also needed. Evaluations or assessments should include analyses of cost-effective alternatives to military equipment.
In addition, the Military Equipment Use Policy should not include the phrase “crowd control” for dangerous items, especially projectiles and chemicals that can be shot into a crowd. In many cases, the phrase “crowd control” is listed as a vendor description This policy should only list authorized uses for the Sac PD, not suggested uses of an equipment vendor. A “crowd” is not in itself a danger and is covered in First Amendment rights. Remove this phrase from all approved uses.
And finally, I also urge you to take the Sacramento Community Police Review Commission’s (SCPRC) recommendations seriously and implement them in full. They will help strengthen SacPD’s reporting standards, clarify the funding process and use, and ensure meaningful transparency for the military equipment.
If City Council chooses to approve SPD’s MEU policy and annual report without requiring significant changes, City Council will lose the opportunity to provide for real and critically needed reforms.
I am concerned about the Military Equipment Use Policy and Report that is being submitted by the Sacramento Police Department to fulfill requirements of California Law AB 481.
The report itself is deficient; lacking in transparency and relevant data. It does not list how and when the equipment was deployed as required by law. There is insufficient information about the type of equipment, who was targeted as well as where and when it was used. A more comprehensive report that meets legal requirements is necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the vast arsenal of military-type equipment that has been accumulated by Sacramento Police.
What is evident from reading the current version of the report is that police have stockpiled an outrageous amount of sophisticated military equipment and ammunition. No justification has been offered for continuing to reorder guns and rounds in quantities that far outnumber past use or projected needs. The drones, robots, armored vehicles and grenades that Sacramento Police already have or propose to purchase are tools of war that should not be a part of local law enforcement operations. Such militarization of the police poses a threat to the safety, confidence and civil rights of our community. I urge you to scrutinize the new Military Equipment Use Policy and Report and to send it back for needed revisions. The recent buying spree of weaponry by police is not justified and should be curtailed.
The leading cause of crime is poverty and lack of resources. Unless the military equipment can some how build houses, provide safe transportation, pay people well or provide food then what is this for? I keep hearing about not having enough money for improving transit or helping the homeless, right here is your money.
Not too long ago a council member stated that defunding the police has been tried and failed. This is either malice on their part or blatant ignorance as it is simply not true. Either way it shows that they are not qualified for this position. This is just one example of some of those on the council not being qualified for their jobs by say ignorant or malicious statements.
Can the council and city manager please educate themselves before making decisions that actively harm those in the city. Here are a few recommendations for resources that connect to the Agenda Item above:
Poverty, by America - Mathew Desmond
The End of Policing - Alex S. Vitale
Becoming Abolitionists - Derecka Purnell
Prison by Any Other Name - Maya Schenwar, Victoria Law
Unacceptable that pd would claim not to know how to account for equipment, and claim that the process is too complex to be done accurately. greatest training but don't know how to keep track of their equipment. leo departments are notorious hoarders of weapons, salute to the mayor and council members for finally holding pd accountable and having them justify their equipment requests and budgets. Don't know actually how much equipment they currently have, but always need more of everything....
Our city much like others that have defunded police departments Seattle,San Francisco and now Austin referring the public to use 311 when in danger is under attack by criminals posing as advocates for safety of the public.
Their emotional displays of compassion and empathy are all false! Our city is experiencing the worst crime wave in history.
It’s riddled with crime, shoplifting and drugs and multiple shootings and auto thefts and attacks on the public in stopped traffic.
I’ve lived here my entire life and I’ve never witnessed anything like this and it’s not getting any better,
The criminals and the service resistant people have been raised to a pedestal of hierarchy so far up they have more right than the people who actually contribute to our communities and taxes.
It’s almost unsafe to shop in certain places and without a doubt these stores will close down creating a food and service desert throughout our city!
The criminals are carrying military gear and weapons and equipment and to say to our police officers that they cannot protect themselves or our citizens is unjust and will put the public more at risk
Instead of worrying about looking good for the people who hold city council meetings hostage. How about listening to the constituents who are contributing members of society who have worked hard for the few things we have and try to protect!
Taking away police safety will no doubt result in the public taking matters into their own hands as we are already starting to witness from store clerks who feel like they have to protect themselves because the police won’t be there in time.
Sac PD needs the right tools to do their job. I saw the aftermath of the 2020 riots in downtown Sacramento. Small businesses destroyed, monuments vandalized and broken. That's not "protesting" that's mob rule. Riot control should have been deployed. And if the next country's election is anything like last time, our city should be prepared. I approve of less lethal weapons like Super-Sock Bean Bags, Pepperballs and smoke canisters. I also approve of any tools that support the protection and safe return of hostages. I believe these items cost money and should not be used lightly, but they should be available. Crime is up, organized violence is up and Sacramento should lead as California's State Capitol when it comes to preserving the health and safety of the innocent. No more excuses for violence. Bring back clean, safe and friendly streets!
Sacramento City Council Members,
I urge you to vote no on agenda item 13.
I am a resident of District 5, and a public health professional, and implore you to oppose adoption of the MEU policy and report in their current form and instead take the Sacramento Community Police Review Commission’s (SCPRC) recommendations seriously and implement them in full. It is high time City Council acknowledge that the continued militarization of police is a threat to public health and health equity. Adoption of the MEU Policy and Report as they stand will perpetuate Sac PD’s excessive, unchecked power and allow for greater, more excessive use of force, all of which will do nothing to reduce crime and only worsen existing health inequities, economic inequality, homelessness and housing crisis, specifically for your Black, Latine/x, Hawaiian and Pacific Islander, Indigenous, and Asian American constituents. Adopting Agenda item 13 as is will be counterproductive to all of the City’s existing, and admittedly insufficient, efforts to advance health and racial equity. Do more, do better, and start by opposing the adoption of this policy and report.
Correspondence received by the City Clerk's Office
Please vote no on Agenda Item 13. It requires much more thorough review and discussion before any vote should be taken. The Police Department already appears to have a large inventory of military weapons and still they are wanting to purchase more.
Weapons of war like armored vehicles, robots, drones, and grenades do not belong in civilian settings and should not be used on civilian populations. The Police Department needs to build community trust and having and deploying these sorts of weapons destroys any possibility of such trust. Many residents are already afraid to call the police when they are victims of crimes and this military equipment will make them even more hesitant to call. This is particularly true in poorer neighborhoods and neighborhoods where many people do not speak English and these are the neighborhoods where I am afraid this military equipment is more likely to be deployed. The very large amount of money spent on this equipment could be better used for community based violence prevention efforts and on deploying culturally competent mental health professionals on calls where someone is in psychiatric crisis.
I do not see anything in the report submitted by the Police Department that talks about independent, civilian oversight of the use of this equipment. Such oversight is absolutely necessary and must be part of reports that are available to the public. It is my understanding that the Sacramento Community Police Review Commission (SCPRC) has made a number of recommendations which have not been adopted and these need to be incorporated into Police Department policies.
I am alarmed to see that one of the described uses for this military equipment is crowd control. The First Amendment grants the right to peacefully protest and people often do that in crowds. The use of military equipment to manage such situations is inappropriate. I have participated in many peaceful demonstrations over the years and the presence of military equipment would make me feel less safe, not more safe. 'Crowd control needs to be removed from the list of 'appropriate uses' of military equipment.
Dear Mayor Steinberg and Sacramento City Council,
I am writing to urge you to vote NO on the Sacramento Police Department’s Military Equipment Use (MEU) policy. Before approving the policy, the public and City Council need more time to review the accompanying annual report and the implementation of the Sacramento Community Police Review Commission’s MEU recommendations.
SacPD’s MEU policy itself complies with the barest interpretation of AB-481, and I am deeply concerned about the harmful outcomes that will result from a policy that asks for additional funding with virtually no justification. The policy does not have tighter limits on when or where military equipment can be used. It does not designate oversight authority to an independent oversight body. It does not detail any legally enforceable sanctions in place for misuses of military equipment.
In addition to the policy, the accompanying annual report does not include complete comparative or demographic data about the Department’s military equipment usage. The report does not track all military equipment deployments and only provides “reportable uses of force.” It does not include the cost for personnel time, transportation, storage, upgrades and other ongoing costs in assessing the fiscal impact of this military equipment. And neither the report nor the policy provides any written justifications for how or why this military equipment is necessary to ensure both officer and civilian safety.
The SCPRC has provided 13 specific recommendations for the MEU policy, and the community input has led to 9 additional recommendations that support the Commission. To address these concerns, I request for the Mayor and City Council to do the following:
Reject all new military equipment requests and re-invest funds into community-based violence prevention organizations and/or the Department of Community Response (DCR). Overall the SacPD is requesting approval to spend $361,692 in acquisitions. While their report tries to diminish this spending by comparing it to the entire budget of the department, it is still a large amount of funding that could be reallocated to departments or organizations that address immediate community needs, like the DCR. This request for approval also seems especially absurd considering how much money SacPD is requesting in relation to the small numbers of times the various types of equipment were used. For example, according to their own report SacPD used their rifles and rifle ammunition twice in the past year, but are requesting an additional $200k be spent on new acquisitions. Surely they have enough already if they only use them twice in a year.
Designate independent oversight of SacPD’s MEU compliance to the Office of Public Safety Accountability, the Inspector General, and Sacramento Community Police Review Commission. This will allow for greater transparency and public trust. Allowing the Police Department to investigate itself is ethically questionable at best and they have demonstrated a reluctance to cooperate with OPSA, the IG, or SCPRC. They do not regularly attend SCRPC meetings and have ignored their thoughtful recommendations for years. OPSA, when presenting their Fourth Amendment violations report in June at City Council, stated that trying to work with SacPD was like “talking to a brick wall” and has been trying for two years to get SacPD to write a policy about search and seizure/Fourth Amendment. This indicates that the SCPRC, IG, and OPSA are not able to offer any sort of meaningful engagement with the SacPD unless they have actual power to oversee the department.
Remove all language in the MEU policy that allows SacPD to use military equipment for “crowd control” and add specific restrictions for when and where military equipment cannot be used. AB-481 requires that “the proposed military equipment use policy will safeguard the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties.” Sacramento residents and victims of police violence have repeatedly declared they feel less safe with the presence of heavily armed law enforcement. In addition, studies confirm that law enforcement officer’s possession of military weapons have actually escalated situations rather than mitigated harm, often resulting in serious preventable injuries, most notably during the George Floyd protests of 2020. Disallowing the use of military equipment as crowd control will prevent similar situations from recurring. Adding further restrictions such as when dealing with a minor, when dealing with a person with known or suspected physical disabilities, or when dealing with a person with known or suspected mental disabilities will also further protect the public.
Review and approve all MEU-related recommendations from Sacramento Community Police Review Commission before approving any of the MEU policy updates or equipment requests being made by SacPD. The MEU-related recommendations are easy to implement and very reasonable. They were also thoughtfully developed by a group of dedicated community members with expertise and experience. They have been part of the broader platform of recommendations made by the SCPRC for two years and SacPD continues to either ignore them or refuse to engage with them in good faith.
Even as SacPD appears to agree with some SCPRC recommendations, the general attitude during the entire process to develop this MEU policy has shown an ignorance to AB 481’s purpose and intent, a dismissiveness for public concerns and safety, and a lack of respect for community input and civilian oversight outside the Department. Meeting AB 481’s bare minimum requirements is not the same as safeguarding people’s welfare, safety, civil rights and civil liberties. As Sacramento Police Department cannot be trusted to do more than the bare minimum, the Mayor and City Council have a duty to direct them to adhere to a higher standard the community expects from its government. Anything less is a gross abdication of leadership and responsibility.
I hope that this Council will take their responsibility seriously and approve their appointed commissioners’ recommendations.
RE: Item 13: An Ordinance Rescinding Ordinance No. 2022-0025 and Adopting a Military Equipment Use Policy [In Lieu of Pass for Publication Ordinance to be Published in its Entirety] File ID: 2023-01027 DO NOT APPROVE
Dear City Council Members:
As has been well documented, military equipment is more frequently deployed in low-income Black and Brown communities, meaning the risks and impacts of police militarization are experienced most acutely in marginalized communities. Given the concentration of deployments in communities of color, where trust in law enforcement and government at large is already depressed, the routine use of militarized police tactics by local agencies threatens to increase the historic tensions between marginalized groups with no detectable public safety benefit. SacPD has not shown that the military equipment will safeguard the public’s civil rights or human rights, further increasing the tension in communities of color.
Thus, I strongly oppose item 13. The proposed plan doesn’t identify the independent entity that will exercise independent oversight on uses of military equipment and I urge you as elected officials to:
• heed widespread community calls for demilitarization, and
• not approve the Military Equipment Policy and Report in its current form.
As a Sacramento resident, I am deeply concerned about the harmful outcomes that will result from this military equipment use policy. It does not require tight enough restrictions for such dangerous equipment and it is critical that more detailed research be conducted into safer and effective alternatives to using military equipment by the City and SPD.
A process for evaluating the effectiveness of the military equipment stock is also needed. Evaluations or assessments should include analyses of cost-effective alternatives to military equipment.
In addition, the Military Equipment Use Policy should not include the phrase “crowd control” for dangerous items, especially projectiles and chemicals that can be shot into a crowd. In many cases, the phrase “crowd control” is listed as a vendor description This policy should only list authorized uses for the Sac PD, not suggested uses of an equipment vendor. A “crowd” is not in itself a danger and is covered in First Amendment rights. Remove this phrase from all approved uses.
And finally, I also urge you to take the Sacramento Community Police Review Commission’s (SCPRC) recommendations seriously and implement them in full. They will help strengthen SacPD’s reporting standards, clarify the funding process and use, and ensure meaningful transparency for the military equipment.
If City Council chooses to approve SPD’s MEU policy and annual report without requiring significant changes, City Council will lose the opportunity to provide for real and critically needed reforms.
Thank you for your time,
Sincerely, Rhonda Rios Kravitz District 7
Joined late , following Graciela's stance .
I am concerned about the Military Equipment Use Policy and Report that is being submitted by the Sacramento Police Department to fulfill requirements of California Law AB 481.
The report itself is deficient; lacking in transparency and relevant data. It does not list how and when the equipment was deployed as required by law. There is insufficient information about the type of equipment, who was targeted as well as where and when it was used. A more comprehensive report that meets legal requirements is necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the vast arsenal of military-type equipment that has been accumulated by Sacramento Police.
What is evident from reading the current version of the report is that police have stockpiled an outrageous amount of sophisticated military equipment and ammunition. No justification has been offered for continuing to reorder guns and rounds in quantities that far outnumber past use or projected needs. The drones, robots, armored vehicles and grenades that Sacramento Police already have or propose to purchase are tools of war that should not be a part of local law enforcement operations. Such militarization of the police poses a threat to the safety, confidence and civil rights of our community. I urge you to scrutinize the new Military Equipment Use Policy and Report and to send it back for needed revisions. The recent buying spree of weaponry by police is not justified and should be curtailed.
The leading cause of crime is poverty and lack of resources. Unless the military equipment can some how build houses, provide safe transportation, pay people well or provide food then what is this for? I keep hearing about not having enough money for improving transit or helping the homeless, right here is your money.
Not too long ago a council member stated that defunding the police has been tried and failed. This is either malice on their part or blatant ignorance as it is simply not true. Either way it shows that they are not qualified for this position. This is just one example of some of those on the council not being qualified for their jobs by say ignorant or malicious statements.
Can the council and city manager please educate themselves before making decisions that actively harm those in the city. Here are a few recommendations for resources that connect to the Agenda Item above:
Poverty, by America - Mathew Desmond
The End of Policing - Alex S. Vitale
Becoming Abolitionists - Derecka Purnell
Prison by Any Other Name - Maya Schenwar, Victoria Law