25
Susana Barrios
From:Bulmaro Vicente <boomer@chispaoc.org>
Sent:Tuesday, October 28, 2025 2:04 PM
To:Public Comment
Subject:\[EXTERNAL\] 10.28.25 Public Comment - Chispa Letter of Opposition Item 25
Attachments:10.28.25 Chispa Opposition Letter Item 25.pdf
Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message.
Hi,
Please find Chispa's Letter of Opposition for Item 25.
In Solidarity,
Boomer
Policy and Political Director | Chispa
e: boomer@chispaoc.org c:
1505 E 17th Street Suite 117 Santa Ana, CA 92705
Chispa is building a political home for young Latinxs in Orange County! Please consider making a
donation to help us build our casita. Chispa is a project of Tides Advocacy, a 501c4 non-profit
organization.
1
October 28, 2025
Mayor Ashleigh Aitken and Members of the City Council
City of Anaheim
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Anaheim, CA 92805
RE: Opposition to Item 25 – ANNUAL MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT AND
ORDINANCE RENEWING THE ANAHEIM POLICE DEPARTMENT’S MILITARY
EQUIPMENT USE POLICY
Dear Mayor Aitken and Members of the Anaheim City Council,
On behalf of Chispa, we write in strong opposition to Item 25, the Anaheim Police Department’s (APD)
2024 Military Equipment Report and the renewal of its Military Equipment Use Policy. The City of
Anaheim (City) must reject the further militarization of local police and ensure transparency and
accountability.
We appreciate that APD has complied with Assembly Bill 481 (AB 481) and prepared a well-detailed
report outlining its inventory, costs, and policy framework. However, we are concerned that the
public-engagement process did not meet the spirit or intent of the law. The staff report notes that the
Department presented its inventory and policy at the Anaheim Police Review Board’s October 23, 2025
meeting. Although this was technically a public meeting, it was not well-publicized, nor did it provide an
opportunity for members of the general public to ask questions, engage in discussion, or provide input as
AB 481 requires.
This procedural gap undermines both transparency and community trust—the very principles AB 481 was
intended to uphold. Military-grade equipment in local policing carries significant implications for
community safety, civil rights, and public accountability. The City Council should not move forward with
approving or renewing the Police Department’s Military Equipment Use Policy until a meaningful public
forum is held, where residents can directly engage, ask questions, and provide feedback.
Furthermore, the Department’s report seeks justification for the proposed acquisition of 50 Geissele
Automatics Super Duty Mod 1 SBR 11.4" rifles, at a cost of $1,504.78 per unit. Anaheim residents
deserve a clear and transparent explanation for why additional tactical weaponry is necessary, especially
when there is no demonstrated public safety justification for such purchases.
Our communities are already living with heightened fear due to ongoing ICE raids and the reality that
federal immigration enforcement holds the largest militarized police budget in U.S. history. Adding more
tactical weapons to our local police department only deepens that fear and raises the risk of these tools
being used against vulnerable residents, particularly immigrant families who already experience
disproportionate surveillance and harm.
Anaheim residents have consistently called for investments in housing, youth programs, and mental
health—not more militarization. True public safety comes from meeting community needs, not expanding
police arsenals.
For these reasons, Chispa strongly urges the City Council to vote NO on Item 25.
Sincerely,
Bulmaro Vicente
Policy and Political Director
Chispa