Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Police Discipline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
POST adopts disciplinary guidelines and chooses statutory definition for ‘biased conduct’ required by AB 443
Summary
The commission voted to adopt new disciplinary guidelines and selected a statutory‑language definition (option A) for ‘biased conduct’ under Penal Code §13510.6. Staff updated guidelines to clarify that revocation can be appropriate based on a single egregious act and to address organizational coercion without removing revocation as an option.
The California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training adopted a set of disciplinary guidelines Thursday and selected a statutory definition for “biased conduct” required by Assembly Bill 443, commissioners and staff said.
Assistant Executive Director Ann Marie Del Munayo and Certification Bureau Chief Michelle Wyler described revisions made since a March draft. The changes included language clarifying that revocation of peace‑officer certification is not dependent on a pattern of prior misconduct; in other words, an isolated but sufficiently egregious act may justify revocation. Staff also added clarifying language about organizational coercion to make clear that coercion may be a factor in mitigation but does not automatically preclude revocation.
POST convened a multi‑disciplinary subject‑matter‑expert workshop in March to help craft a definition of biased conduct for use by agencies investigating bias‑related complaints under Penal Code §13510.6 (enacted by AB 443). Two options were presented to the commission: option A used statutory language only; option B included additional language suggested by subject matter experts that would have explicitly referenced actions and omissions (inaction) and on‑ or off‑duty conduct. After debate and public comment, the commission voted to adopt option A (the statutory language) as POST’s definition for agencies’ use when investigating bias allegations.
Legal staff said POST may provide implementation guidance and training to agencies on how to use the definition; staff noted that the law also requires POST to develop guidance for background checks and pre‑hire screening to identify potential bias indicators (for example, for social‑media reviews) and that work is underway.
Why it matters: POST’s disciplinary guidelines and the biased‑conduct definition will shape how local agencies investigate allegations of bias and how administrative penalties are recommended and reviewed by POST and Administrative Law Judges. Selecting the statutory text reduces the risk of over‑extension of the definition while staff work on practical guidance for investigators.
What’s next: POST staff will develop additional guidance and training for agencies that must investigate bias complaints, and staff will post and circulate the disciplinary guidelines and the adopted definition to stakeholders.
