Caity Maple told Sacramento that she was progressive. Then she voted for a tank | Opinion

In her bid for elected office, Sacramento City Council newcomer Caity Maple presented herself as a young, progressive voice from Oak Park and South Sacramento. The hope was that she would join Councilwomen Mai Vang and Katie Valenzuela in providing more skeptical oversight of an increasingly militarized Sacramento Police Department.

That’s why Maple’s vote at Tuesday’s city council meeting to approve the Sacramento Police Department’s acquisition of a third military armored vehicle for $498,894 comes as a shock, and an infuriating betrayal.

While we hoped the other two newly elected city council members, Lisa Kaplan and Karina Talamantes would also help counteract a reflexively pro-police majority on the council, both women made no secret that they too could join the give-the-cops-whatever-they-want chorus of Sacramento city leaders. Talamantes was the protege of Angelique Ashby, who was arguably the biggest police apologist during her years on the council.

But Maple presented herself differently.

Opinion

In the run-up to her election last year, Maple was speaking out against police militarization as far back as April of 2021. That month, she tweeted this: “It’s time to demilitarize Sacramento’s police force.” Just two days later, Maple publicly announced her candidacy for the city council.

“We are not at war with our communities, why do we need war equipment?” Maple tweeted. “We can sell these incredibly expensive pieces of equipment and use the funds to diversify our police force and improve training.”

With three new voices on the city council making the governing body majority female, we believed the city could move beyond platitudes and toward real oversight of the city police department. Specifically, with Maple, we thought we had an ally: someone who would genuinely represent the interests of Gen Z and young millennials like us who have watched police reform movements get derailed by police unions and cop-backed legislators stoking public fear.

At the very least, we believed Maple would live up to her promises and stand by her beliefs. We were wrong.

In a statement released to The Bee on Wednesday, Maple seemed to contradict her vote, writing: “I do not support the purchase or use of any offensive military equipment by the police force and made the decision to support this piece of equipment due to its ability to act as a shield to protect individuals with the commitment that it is used only during very specific incidents involving gunfire.”

What? Maple can’t claim she’s unequivocally against militarizing the police less than 24 hours after she voted in support of giving Sac PD half a million dollars worth of military equipment.

We approached Maple on Tuesday night for comment regarding her shocking vote. She deflected our questions and made us wait until 3 p.m. on Wednesday before releasing her disingenuous public statement. In her first real test on the council, she hid behind a press release that said nothing meaningful.

Further down in her statement, Maple appears to voice some regret for her vote.

“I know that I could — and should — have done better outreach to the community leading up to this vote, and for that, I am sorry,” she wrote. “I voted in support of this item after reviewing all of the information provided and did so because I believed this tool will help both the community and law enforcement stay safe. I also acknowledge and understand that some residents do not agree and feel hurt by this decision, particularly in Black and Brown communities that have been historically overpoliced. It was my responsibility to do proactive outreach, and I failed.”

But Maple didn’t only deceive her constituents, she deceived her colleagues, too.

“I was surprised (by the vote) because at least one of my new colleagues, (Maple), has critiqued the militarization of police,” Councilwoman Katie Valenzuela said. “As for my other two new colleagues, I hoped they would think critically.”

Betrayal

On Monday night, Kaplan and Maple attended a vigil honoring Tyre Nichols, an unarmed Black man killed by Memphis police earlier this month. Both women tweeted about their attendance at the event.

“Tonight, we prayed with the family of #TyreNichols and echoed calls for justice,” Maple posted.

Less than 24 hours later, at Tuesday night’s City Council meeting, both Kaplan and Maple approved the half-million dollar armored vehicle for Sacramento PD. Granted, the money for the vehicle, called a Rook, came from federal funds, not city money. But these funds weren’t specifically earmarked for military equipment and could have been used for a wide variety of purposes, including additional law enforcement training.

To honor a victim of police violence one night and then vote to further militarize our law enforcement the next is the height of hypocrisy.

The only two council members who voted against further militarizing our police force were Valenzuela and Mayor Pro Tem Vang, both of whom have taken a more critical view of the city police department. Last June, Valenzuela cast the sole dissenting vote against the Sacramento City budget due to concerns over a $17 million increase to the police budget.

Valenzuela expressed frustrations not only with the council’s vote but also with “contradictory” messaging from Mayor Darrell Steinberg and Chief of Police Kathy Lester ahead of Tuesday’s vote. While Lester said the Rook would be used much more than Sac PD’s other armored vehicles, Steinberg said the city would put a limit on how often the military vehicle could be used.

Valenzuela also said law enforcement officials advocated for the Rook by making, “thinly veiled references” to Sacramento resident Alexander Francis Hoch, who harassed and threatened Steinberg, Vang, Talamantes and Valenzuela last year. Valenzuela felt the officers’ references to Hoch were meant to stir up fear in the threatened council members to get their votes of approval.

“It felt incredibly manipulative and unrelated to the conversation at hand, (and appeared to be) an attempt to target people who have already been targeted,” Valenzuela said. “Why did they bring up that example if not to pressure the four members of the council?”

The councilwoman does, however, express hope that her colleagues will learn from this vote and be open to changing their minds down the line.

“Things are changing in our city, the public perception of law enforcement is changing,” she said. “I had an email from a constituent this morning who was completely exasperated and said she didn’t know what to tell her elementary school-aged daughter about why we have a tank roaming our streets.”

It’s a good question, and one the city council should be prepared to answer.

We are furious with city leaders who show up to the vigils for victims of police violence — Stephon Clark, Joseph Mann, George Floyd and so many others — only to turn around and prop up a law enforcement system that unjustly targets and sometimes kills our neighbors of color.

With a single vote, Maple has demolished our idealistic version of her. She proved herself to be yet another politician who will say and do whatever it takes to get elected and then retreat to the status quo.