San Leandro renews military-equipment policy and approves purchase of kinetic breaching tools under AB 481 review

The San Leandro City Council voted 7-0 March 3 to renew the city’s military equipment policy required under California Assembly Bill 481 and to approve the department’s requested acquisitions, including kinetic breaching tools to replace breaching shotguns.

Assistant Police Chief Luis Torres presented the department’s annual inventory and use report required by AB 481, saying the department holds equipment in nine of the statute’s 15 categories, including unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), an armored vehicle, a tactical robot and 40-millimeter launchers. Torres reported that UAVs were deployed 62 times in 2024 for barricades, warrant services, scene mapping, missing-person searches and evidence retrieval; the armored vehicle was deployed 31 times in tactical operations and twice at community events.

Torres told the council that a 40-millimeter launcher was used in a barricade incident and that no injuries were reported; the department said it seeks medical clearance where there is any hint of injury after deployments. He added the department had no reported policy violations or complaints about military equipment use as of that afternoon, and that the Community Police Review Board (CPRB) reviewed the annual report February 19 and made no further recommendations.

For 2025 the department asked to purchase hand-held kinetic breaching tools—battering ram–style devices that the department described as reducing risks associated with breaching shotguns by avoiding ricochets and overpenetration. Torres said each device costs $14,000 and that staff plans to use grant funds for the purchase so there would be no general-fund impact. If approved, the department said it would retire four breaching shotguns from inventory.

The CPRB’s chair, Bob Bailey, spoke during public comment and confirmed the board offered no new recommendations but urged more routine public detail on deployments. Other public commenters raised policy questions about use-of-force language, the number of rifles and munitions in inventory, and the potential for crowd-control deployments. One commenter asked that the department formally prohibit use of officers’ personally owned firearms; another urged attention to language in the policy that had previously excluded “destruction of property” as an exigent circumstance.

Council members clarified a few policy points on the record. Staff confirmed the policy in the meeting packet already excludes destruction of property from the exigent-circumstances definition; council also directed that an instance in the policy where a brand name was used be replaced with the generic device name. Councilmember Yvette Viveiros Walton and others asked how often UAVs are used during warrant service; staff said they provide aerial overview and interior small drones are also used for in-residence clearance to reduce risk.

Vice Mayor Bowen moved to approve staff’s recommendation with the clarifications reflected in the meeting record; the motion was seconded and passed 7-0. The department will proceed with the inventory, policy renewal and planned use of grant funds to acquire kinetic breaching tools.