By Robert J. Hansen | OBSERVER Staff Writer
The Sacramento County Board of Supervisors has approved an $8.9 billion budget for the 2025-26 fiscal year, providing more funding to the sheriff’s office and restoring previously proposed cuts to the district attorney’s office. The budget also includes reauthorization and expansion of military-style equipment, under state oversight, for the sheriff’s office, prompting sharp criticism from community advocates and a public clash between Supervisor Phil Serna and Sheriff Jim Cooper.
The budget includes $4 billion in general fund appropriations, with the remaining $4.9 billion distributed across enterprise, special revenue, and restricted funds. The sheriff’s office received a $2.1 million increase, bringing its total annual allocation to more than $700 million excluding federal grant funds. The additional funding will support three new deputy positions and expanded staffing for the office’s acute psychiatric unit.
In a separate vote, the board approved the sheriff’s 2025 Military Equipment Annual Report and acquisition plan under Assembly Bill 481, which requires law enforcement agencies to seek annual reauthorization and report on the use, purpose, and public safety impact of military-grade equipment.
The board approved approximately $155,000 in military equipment purchases, including 2,000 cases of rifle ammunition; the sheriff’s office requested more than $1 million. That larger request included at least two proposed acquisitions valued at more than $950,000 each, public records show.
The sheriff’s office also submitted additional requests totaling more than $160,000 for drones, firearms, less-lethal munitions, and other tactical gear. The office’s inventory currently includes drones, armored vehicles, robots, and two military-surplus Humvees.
In defense of the need for military equipment, the sheriff’s office told The OBSERVER in an email that military-style equipment plays a critical role in modern law enforcement. Drones, they said, allow deputies to gather real-time intelligence without putting personnel at risk, while armored vehicles provide life-saving protection during high-risk incidents, rescues, and threat containment. The email went on to say that such tools are used regularly and have contributed to peaceful outcomes.
Others pushed back on those justifications.
In an interview, Keyan Bliss, former chair of the Sacramento Community Police Review Commission, criticized the office’s request.
“They’re being patently dishonest about the necessity for the equipment request that they’re making,” Bliss said, expressing gall over the timing coinciding with cuts to some critical services.
He also noted a shift in the board’s approach this year: “For the first time, the county actually refused to just rubber stamp the military equipment purchases.”
According to the office’s report, 37% of military equipment deployments over the past year involved individuals ages 26-35. A similar $160,000 equipment package was approved in 2024 that included less-lethal munitions and surveillance tools. The sheriff’s office hosted a public engagement meeting May 29, as required by AB 481.
Tensions flared during budget deliberations when Cooper and Serna sparred over what qualifies as essential public safety spending.
“The core response is 9-1-1 response, period,” Cooper told Serna, emphasizing his office’s focus on emergency response readiness.
Serna challenged the prioritization of military equipment over preventative services, particularly youth programs. “I’m just perplexed how youth services is a ‘restoration,’ yet it is not a ‘core service,’” Serna said. He added that he had been told the previous day by a deputy at another meeting that some funds redirected from youth services are being used to outfit Humvees with Xboxes.
The exchange underscored growing debate within the county over how public funds should be used to balance intervention, enforcement, and community engagement.
The board also reversed proposed cuts to the district attorney’s office that would have significantly reduced the office’s ability to prosecute misdemeanors. A $1.7 million reduction, equal to the elimination of roughly six full-time staff, had been part of earlier drafts. District Attorney Thien Ho warned that the cut would effectively halt prosecution of low-level crimes.
Ho told supervisors that he never consented to approve or recommended any of the cuts. “If we cut by $1.7 million I won’t have the vacancies to fill the misdemeanor cases,” Ho said. “Because we are hanging together by duct tape and superglue.”
Following public pressure and board deliberations, full funding for the misdemeanor unit was restored.
While the county eliminated 73 vacant full-time positions across departments, several public safety programs in the sheriff’s office, including the homeless outreach team, problem-oriented policing units, the marine unit, and the concealed carry weapons program, also had their funding restored through a mix of one-time reserves and increased fee revenue.
AB 481, signed into law in 2021, requires law enforcement agencies to obtain public approval and submit detailed annual reports on military-grade equipment use. Sacramento County has approved more than $300,000 in related gear across two fiscal years.
The board will revisit the budget in September for final adjustments based on updated revenue projections and remaining sheriff’s office needs. That session may also include further scrutiny of military equipment acquisition and continued public discussion on the county’s spending priorities.