Fresno council approves police military-equipment report after public demands for clearer accounting

The Fresno City Council on March 26 approved the Fresno Police Department’s annual military-equipment inventory and use report, following hours of public comment demanding more transparency about when and where equipment is used and how much it costs to deploy.

At a contested-consent hearing that drew residents and advocacy groups, the department described a community meeting it held the prior evening and said it would take steps to expand outreach next year and to itemize personnel and training costs connected with specific equipment. Deputy Chief Burke Farah said the meeting included technical staff and lasted until 8 p.m., and that volunteers from the public have offered to work with the department to plan next year’s outreach.

"We wanted a discussion and transparency," Farah said, adding that the session included a review of each type of equipment and the number of recorded uses. He told the council the department would do a better job on public notice and community engagement next year and welcomed volunteer help in planning the forum.

Community speakers pressed the department for more granular disclosures. "There is not a full accounting of the personnel cost for the equipment," said Ari, a local mental-health professional who spoke during public comment, calling that information "a requirement of the law" under AB481 and urging the council to delay approval until revisions were made. Bob McCluskey asked whether equipment use is concentrated in West Fresno and other communities of color, calling the current report "deficient." Cynthia Sterling and other speakers tied broader concerns about trust and racial equity to demands for itemized reporting.

Council members pushed for practical changes rather than legal reinterpretation. "We should put the same level of communicating this opportunity as we do when we make an arrest or have a significant incident," Council Member Aras said, urging press conferences, community notifications and better district-level outreach so more residents know about the public meeting.

Council Member Arius praised the department for listening to the public and emphasized that elected officials can do site visits and other oversight. The department said some items (for example, drones) are classified as "military equipment" under state law even where the drones are unweaponized consumer or domestically produced models used for night vision and observation.

The council vote to accept the report was 7–0. The department said it will work to (a) improve timing and notice for next year’s report, (b) invite and incorporate community volunteers in planning, (c) provide clearer explanations of training and vendor roles, and (d) explore including personnel and training costs tied to specific equipment in future reports.

The report and the public meeting resolved some procedural questions but left substantive demands from residents intact. Several speakers asked the council to require the department to publish more detailed, location-tagged incident accounting; the department said the state report format does not currently require per-incident disclosures but that it is open to providing additional detail where feasible. The council did not direct formal policy changes in the hearing beyond requests for improved transparency and community involvement.

Next steps: the department will revise its outreach plan for next year’s meeting and told the council it will attempt to include personnel-cost breakdowns in future reporting. The item passed on the consent calendar as a contested item with direction from the council to expand public notice and reporting detail.