Council approves annual AB 481 military‑equipment report and additional acquisitions after split votes

Chief Billy Aldridge presented the Chico Police Department’s Assembly Bill 481 annual military‑equipment use report, describing changes to reporting practices (switch to calendar‑year reporting), improved inspection/QR tracking for deployments, and proposed equipment requests for 2025 including a 40mm multi‑shot launcher, additional drones, smaller modular command vehicles (sprinter vans), and technology such as a mobile agile robot. Aldridge said total costs for acquisition, maintenance and munitions in the prior year totaled $131,126 (about 0.3% of a $39 million police budget).

Aldridge described procedural violations found in the inspection process (testing at the station rather than field use) and said the department implemented a QR code process to capture deployments accurately. He also explained that some items (robot dog/"Spot") would be pursued via grant funding; the department would not ask the city to purchase that system without grant support.

Public commenters urged restraint and greater transparency. Margaret Swick asked whether the department does business with a local training facility and whether any military‑equipment dollars flow to that vendor. Diane Suzuki, Anne Polivka (Concerned Community for Justice) and others asked for clearer policies governing kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents (for crowd control) and for public assurances that AB 481’s reporting and use restrictions will be followed.

Council debate centered on the balance between officer/community safety and the perception of militarization. Several council members praised the increased transparency AB 481 requires; others expressed concern about costs and the prospect of normalizing military equipment. Council considered a substitute motion to approve the policy and most acquisitions but exclude one command vehicle, patrol rifles and the Boston Dynamics robot; the substitute failed 3–4. The original motion to receive the report, review and adopt the military equipment use policy and approve the proposed 2025 acquisitions carried on the subsequent vote 4–3.

Council directed staff to continue community engagement and to ensure required use policies for items classified as military equipment are detailed and accessible. Where public speakers asked for item‑level use policies (for kinetic projectiles and chemical agents), staff pointed to portions of the report and said the department would provide additional specifics as requested.