POST presents statewide data showing backlog, long agency response times and few decertifications

The Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) accountability division on July 16 told its advisory board that the agency has processed more than 37,000 agency misconduct reports through June 30, 2025, and is now averaging about 2,500 reports per quarter after a one-time retroactive surge.

The data presentation from analyst Chelsea Wajaya and bureau chiefs Sarah Wallace and Rob Guyton framed the volume and handling of serious-misconduct reports and public complaints, and addressed changes to POST’s review process to clear a backlog.

The presentation matters because it spells out how many allegations POST receives, how long it takes agencies to furnish their findings, and why a large share of cases are closed without POST action — information that bears on public confidence in oversight of peace officers.

POST officials said intake rose sharply in the months before the retroactive reporting deadline created by Senate Bill 2, with a quarterly peak of about 6,800 reports prior to the July 1, 2023, deadline. Since that deadline, intake has settled to roughly 2,500 reports per quarter. As of June 30, 2025, the division reported processing more than 37,000 agency misconduct reports and receiving more than 42,000 individual allegations covering about 21,000 unique officers statewide.

Wajaya described the composition of those allegations and the division’s workload. POST has received more than 31,000 supplemental agency reports — documents agencies send with updated findings or evidence — and the division reported an average lapse of 241 days between receipt of an initial agency misconduct report and the agency’s supplemental report containing findings. POST said retroactive reports (incident date prior to Jan. 1, 2023) averaged 177 days; newer reports averaged about 260 days.

The division said that approximately 2,300 public complaints have been filed with POST by roughly 1,200 complainants. Of public complaints sent to agencies for a response, about 500 produced agency misconduct reports; roughly 631 public complaints required additional agency documentation. The division reported that 10 public complaints have so far resulted in certification action.

POST also explained changes to its review process. To manage the volume, the division said it has used a limited “abbreviated review” for agency findings that are exonerations, unfounded or not sustained — except in use-of-force cases, which are reviewed by law enforcement consultants. Under abbreviated review, staff review the agency’s finding and evidence and issue a closure statement without the full law-enforcement-consultant review used for sustained findings; POST said it is auditing a sample of those abbreviated closures.

That procedural change helped produce a spike in case closures in late fiscal 2024–25. POST reported that roughly 76% of ITS (immediate temporary suspension), public-complaint and priority cases are closed; about 21% remain open with POST for its review and 3% are awaiting agency findings. The division told the board that most closed cases fall within priority 3 and 4 categories — non‑sustained findings and retroactive matters that are often non‑actionable under statutory limits.

On outcomes, POST reported that about 95% of closed cases end with no further action; roughly 2% of closed cases resulted in disciplinary action by POST. The division said the most common reasons for no further action were that the conduct did not meet the statutory definition of serious misconduct, the matter was nonactionable because of dates of agency findings, or the division could not meet the clear-and-convincing evidentiary standard it applies.

POST compared its disciplinary actions to other California licensing boards and said its annual action rate — about 0.2% of its licensee population — is on par with the Medical Board of California and above the Board of Registered Nursing and State Bar when measured the way the division did.

The division gave a breakdown of the allegations that led to POST action: acts that violate the law, dishonesty and sexual assault were the top categories. It described immediate temporary suspensions (ITS) that often are based on arrest or indictment for a Government Code section 1029 crime (a statutory basis cited in the presentation), and said ITSs have led to a number of revocations and voluntary surrenders; in the ITS category POST reported 30 revocations, including 17 based on Government Code 1029 grounds and 13 default revocations.

The presentation also covered POST’s case-tracking through notices of intent, appeals and hearings. As of June 30, 2025, the division said it had mailed 56 notices of intent; 36 produced default decisions, 21 notices were appealed and 15 had been heard by the board and commission. The board has moved to revoke in 12 of those 15 hearing decisions; the commission has moved to revoke in 8 of 15.

Board members asked for additional breakdowns and clarifications: which agencies had not reported (POST identified the University of California San Francisco Police Department and the Department of Health Care Services as two moderately sized nonreporting agencies), how many officers remain employed while cases are open, and median response times (POST reported a median near 240 days for agency findings). Members asked POST to clarify outreach and training plans for both chiefs and line officers and to provide community-facing materials that explain what types of conduct qualify as serious misconduct under SB 2 and how to file public complaints.

POST staff said they have provided training with PORAC and at local forums and will continue outreach, and that the division is considering whether its general audit authority could be broadened to allow audits of agency reporting in the future.

The presentation concluded with an appendix and glossary of terms POST provided to the board for reference.

The division’s report, as presented to the board on July 16, is the authoritative source for the counts, timeframes and categorizations described above; board members requested additional detail in follow-up reporting and recommended continued outreach to communities and nonreporting agencies.