By Kapish Kalita
LOS ANGELES, CA – Los Angeles City Controller Kenneth Mejia this week released a performance audit of the Los Angeles Police Department’s (LAPD) in compliance with California state law AB 481, to “bring public oversight to the funding, acquisition, and use of military equipment by law enforcement agencies.”
According to Mejia’s audits, there were “significant areas of concern with the LAPD’s current AB 481 policy, including lack of full compliance with AB 481’s military equipment use policy and report requirements.”
Meija said, referencing millions of dollars paid by the city to people injured by the use of military equipment, “The Controller’s Office conducted the performance audit in response to calls from community members and organizations who requested more information about the LAPD’s military equipment use policy and reporting.”
AB 481’s importance has been highlighted by the LAPD’s use of military equipment, which according to Mejia “has caused harm to City residents and led to serious injury and millions of dollars each year in liability claims.”
An example of this, Meija described, was “the LAPD’s use of military equipment, including less-lethal projectile launchers, against protestors has led to serious injuries and multimillion-dollar jury awards and settlements.”
Meija noted a $3.75 million awarded by a jury to an individual shot twice by military projectiles during a protest; a $1.5 million City settlement with an individual who suffered testicular trauma when LAPD shot them in the groin with a 40-millimeter launcher…$1.25 million City settlement with a Marine Corps service member who suffered a traumatic brain injury and brain bleeding when LAPD shot them in the head with a beanbag shotgun during a protest.
The audit charged that “for the military equipment use policy requirements the LAPD did not fully meet five of 11 requirements and that it fully met the remaining requirement,” with the “LAPD’s published military equipment use policy failing to provide manufacturer product descriptions, to sufficiently detail information about military equipment LAPD intended to procure or to provide information about the estimated annual maintenance costs for some of its military equipment.”
The audit further noted, “For the military equipment report requirements, the audit found that the LAPD fully failed to meet two of the eight requirements, partially met three requirements, and fully met three requirements” with “the most concerning findings…that the LAPD’s report is difficult for the general public to locate and that the LAPD’s outreach and education efforts regarding military equipment are limited.”
The audit added because the LAPD’s bureaus and divisions are decentralized, “the self-reporting of military equipment information is also decentralized leading to the LAPD lacking sufficient controls and safeguards to ensure that information they published in AB 481 reports is accurate” with the audit finding “that the LAPD’s report does not disclose specific information about the use of military equipment (such as specific dates on when and why military equipment was used).”
The audit made “recommendations for (1) ensuring full compliance with AB 481, (2) boosting transparency into the use of military equipment (3) reducing the risk of reporting inaccuracies related to the LAPD’s military equipment and (4) improving the public’s ability to engage with and impact the LAPD’s military equipment policies.”
Controller Mejia said, “With this audit, members of the public and policymakers are empowered to demand the public oversight and transparency required by law and by our City’s values” and “While we are encouraged by the LAPD’s assurances that it has and will further implement the recommendations in the audit, those assurances alone fail to satisfy the requirements of AB 481.”
Meija added, “While AB 481 contains the legal minimums that a law enforcement agency must meet regarding military equipment, these minimums do not and should not foreclose the higher level of transparency and accountability the City of Los Angeles deserves.”
