The majority of so-called 'transphobia' right now is women wanting a say in whether their sex-based rights are removed or women not wanting to be categorised into a 'cis' gender stereotype by default, or simply stating they have the right to same sex attraction.
This ^ exactly.
The statement itself is uncontroversial, all gender-critical people want is for everyone including trans people to be able to get on with their lives happily and to live with respect.... but the problematic issue is with the subtext to this kind of statement- and that it is signed by the police no less. 
The problematic subtext to this type of statement is that it is effectively asserting that: There is no clash of rights here, Women who complain about the issues presented for them are being hateful. They should face legal consequences.
The problem is that in the debate around this issue, at the level that councils, universities, police forces and public bodies are being asked to be signatories to these statements- it’s all being presented in very simple terms ‘#no debate’ and the debate being presented as though there are hateful feminist people out there physically attacking vulnerable transwomen.
For the avoidance of any doubt: this is a crime that has never once been recorded ever as perpetrated by any woman or feminist that I have ever heard of.
Would be pleased to be corrected, if I have got that important statistic wrong.
Feminists or anyone else disagreeing or not sharing views with other people- especially when disagreeing with an orthodoxy which disadvantages women...
are not people conducting a hate crime. They are people peacefully presenting a different political viewpoint, which is an essential part of a healthy democracy.
Another part of a healthy democracy is that our public institutions, who are there to serve all of us: and in particular, the police for obvious reasons, need to stay well out of weighing in on peaceful differences of public opinion except where these issues are relevant to issues of eg policing criminal activity.
Unless of course these public bodies ARE trying to set themselves up as the thought police over women?
Because (referring back to statistics above) there hasn’t been even one relevant crime committed by a dissenting woman connected to the issues set out on the collective statement.
So this all now starts to look a bit like transactivist groups creating a climate where dissent from women as a class, about issues that affect them and their kids, cannot be tolerated, just because those few hyper-individualistic lobby groups take the authoritarian and narcissistic view, that dissent or debate is exactly the same as attack.
So actually a denial of a clash of rights and an active silencing of women’s concerns is what public bodies are signing up to in these innocuous-seeming statements of support.
We should pull public bodies up on this (because public bodies need to be very wary of getting involved in issues of politics unless there is actual crimes, arising from prejudice involved).
As taxpayers we can also point to the vast hypocrisy that where long-standing large-scale actual crimes are involved- like with domestic violence, as PP have said- similar statements of solidarity have not been issued by these same public bodies.