California Assembly Bill AB481

California 2021-2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/8/21
• Refer: 2/18/21
• Report Pass: 3/25/21
• Refer: 3/25/21
• Report Pass: 4/28/21
• Refer: 4/28/21
• Refer: 5/12/21
• Report Pass: 5/20/21
• Engrossed: 6/1/21
• Refer: 6/2/21
• Refer: 6/9/21
• Report Pass: 6/30/21
• Refer: 6/30/21
• Report Pass: 7/12/21
• Refer: 7/13/21
• Refer: 8/16/21
• Report Pass: 8/26/21
• Enrolled: 9/9/21
• Chaptered: 9/30/21
• Passed: 9/30/21

Caption

Law enforcement and state agencies: military equipment: funding, acquisition, and use.

Impact

AB 481 will significantly amend existing protocols governing how military equipment is managed by local law enforcement. It requires comprehensive public scrutiny and transparency regarding the acquisition and deployment of the military equipment, tackling public concerns about militarization of police forces, especially in marginalized communities. Furthermore, the bill highlights a statewide concern over police conduct and community relations, making it obligatory for all cities, including charter cities, to adhere to its provisions, thus superseding any local ordinances that conflict with it.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 481, introduced by Assemblymember Chiu, addresses the funding, acquisition, and use of military equipment by law enforcement agencies and state agencies in California. The bill mandates that any law enforcement agency wishing to acquire or utilize military equipment must first adopt a military equipment use policy, which requires approval from the governing body. This policy must answer specific criteria, including the necessity of the equipment for ensuring officer and civilian safety, compliance with previous regulations, and the need for public participation in the decision-making process.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding AB 481 is mixed. Supporters argue that the bill is a necessary measure to safeguard civil liberties and to bring accountability and transparency to policing practices. They point out that it gives the community a voice in discussions about military-grade equipment use. Detractors, however, may view it as an unnecessary constraint on law enforcement agencies that need access to advanced resources to ensure public safety, arguing that it could compromise their operational efficiency.

Contention

Notable points of contention related to AB 481 include the concerns from law enforcement regarding the bill's potential to impede timely responses to crises where military-grade equipment might be required. There is also anxiety about the bureaucratic processes involved in gaining approval for military equipment usage, which some argue could delay appropriate actions during critical situations. Furthermore, the bill stipulates no reimbursement will be required from local agencies for costs incurred as a result of these changes, which may raise concerns about unfunded mandates during implementation.