2.-O. ID 26-308 Approve the renewal of the Fresno Police Department Annual Military Equipment Use Report as originally required by Assembly Bill 481, codified under Government Code sections 7070-7075.
Council,
I asked that you show respect and good faith to our community, and also follow the intention of AB 481 by tabling this item until after the Fresno Police Department holds their community meeting and that when it is brough back, that it be placed in the 3s as far as an action item to allow the public who is present to hear and speak during the item. It is important to note that, in addition to item 2-O being placed on the agenda for approval of renewal is happening before the community meeting on the March 25, that the public announcement and materials haven't been posted in Spanish and other languages in order to inform and allow the portion of our community who are not English speaking to be properly notified.
Hello, my name is Kristen, and I am a resident in District 6 of the City of Fresno. I am writing regarding agenda item 2.-O on Fresno PD's use of military equipment. Fresno PD has not held a community meeting as required by state law. Fresno PD is planning to hold the meeting on March 25th, 2026. I urge the City Council to table agenda item 2.-O until after the community meeting is held. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Hili hili, I'm commenting on city council item 2.0 on the Police Department’s use of military equipment, and to request your leadership in City Council complying with state law by continuing the item to a future meeting. The public needs time to review the annual report and elected officials need to consider community input as part of their annual renewal.
Hi, I live in tower
I respectfully urge Council to CONTINUE Item 2.-O (two - oh), and to consider the item fully, NOT on Consent.Reasons for not on consent
State law requires City Councils to review the AB481 ordinance it made, and to make several determinations as outlined by state law - including cost effectiveness, and how policy may or may not protect public welfare and safety, civil rights and liberties. Being on consent makes it impossible for the City Council to fulfill these obligations.
Reasons for continuing:
Fresno PD has not held the community meeting required by state law, and should have the opportunity to comply with state law before the City Council hears the matter. Because agenda item 2.-O is on calendar on 3/19, before a community engagement meeting has been held, such a review is not possible and it’s preemptive for the city council to consider this. This means they are working against the intent of state law and are outliers among other police departments who do hold separate community engagement meetings before elected officials consider the item. The law specifies a meeting where the community can discuss and ask questions which is not possible at a Brown Acted Meeting. FPD can provide the community meeting required within 30 days of publishing its annual report before having the military equipment agenda item considered by the city council.
I respectfully urge Council to CONTINUE Item 2.-O.
I write regarding City Council Item 2.O, to request your leadership in City Council comply with state law by continuing the item to a future meeting.
State law AB 481 states that “Decisions regarding whether and how military equipment is funded, acquired, or used … should be based on meaningful public input.
I respectfully urge the city council to take item 2-O off of the consent calendar and continue the item until the Fresno Police Department holds a well publicized and conveniently located meeting as required by CA state law. The decision to put the item on the consent agenda undermines the purpose of the law, to create transparency and allow community the opportunity to ask questions directly to the local police. Furthermore, placing the item on the consent agenda is inherently problematic as consent should be reserved for non-controversial items. This item IS controversial. Item 2-O should be continued until the PD plans a meeting with time to ensure it is "well-publicized"and is conveniently located so that community members can engage in the conversation about Fresno's military equipment use report.
State law requires a properly noticed community meeting where questions can be asked prior to any city council meeting where a vote is taken. This item is premature and must be removed from the agenda until a community meeting is held.
Council,
I asked that you show respect and good faith to our community, and also follow the intention of AB 481 by tabling this item until after the Fresno Police Department holds their community meeting and that when it is brough back, that it be placed in the 3s as far as an action item to allow the public who is present to hear and speak during the item. It is important to note that, in addition to item 2-O being placed on the agenda for approval of renewal is happening before the community meeting on the March 25, that the public announcement and materials haven't been posted in Spanish and other languages in order to inform and allow the portion of our community who are not English speaking to be properly notified.
Hello, my name is Kristen, and I am a resident in District 6 of the City of Fresno. I am writing regarding agenda item 2.-O on Fresno PD's use of military equipment. Fresno PD has not held a community meeting as required by state law. Fresno PD is planning to hold the meeting on March 25th, 2026. I urge the City Council to table agenda item 2.-O until after the community meeting is held. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Hili hili, I'm commenting on city council item 2.0 on the Police Department’s use of military equipment, and to request your leadership in City Council complying with state law by continuing the item to a future meeting. The public needs time to review the annual report and elected officials need to consider community input as part of their annual renewal.
Hi, I live in tower
I respectfully urge Council to CONTINUE Item 2.-O (two - oh), and to consider the item fully, NOT on Consent.Reasons for not on consent
State law requires City Councils to review the AB481 ordinance it made, and to make several determinations as outlined by state law - including cost effectiveness, and how policy may or may not protect public welfare and safety, civil rights and liberties. Being on consent makes it impossible for the City Council to fulfill these obligations.
Reasons for continuing:
Fresno PD has not held the community meeting required by state law, and should have the opportunity to comply with state law before the City Council hears the matter. Because agenda item 2.-O is on calendar on 3/19, before a community engagement meeting has been held, such a review is not possible and it’s preemptive for the city council to consider this. This means they are working against the intent of state law and are outliers among other police departments who do hold separate community engagement meetings before elected officials consider the item. The law specifies a meeting where the community can discuss and ask questions which is not possible at a Brown Acted Meeting. FPD can provide the community meeting required within 30 days of publishing its annual report before having the military equipment agenda item considered by the city council.
I respectfully urge Council to CONTINUE Item 2.-O.
I write regarding City Council Item 2.O, to request your leadership in City Council comply with state law by continuing the item to a future meeting.
State law AB 481 states that “Decisions regarding whether and how military equipment is funded, acquired, or used … should be based on meaningful public input.
Hello,
I respectfully urge the city council to take item 2-O off of the consent calendar and continue the item until the Fresno Police Department holds a well publicized and conveniently located meeting as required by CA state law. The decision to put the item on the consent agenda undermines the purpose of the law, to create transparency and allow community the opportunity to ask questions directly to the local police. Furthermore, placing the item on the consent agenda is inherently problematic as consent should be reserved for non-controversial items. This item IS controversial. Item 2-O should be continued until the PD plans a meeting with time to ensure it is "well-publicized"and is conveniently located so that community members can engage in the conversation about Fresno's military equipment use report.
State law requires a properly noticed community meeting where questions can be asked prior to any city council meeting where a vote is taken. This item is premature and must be removed from the agenda until a community meeting is held.