During a public question-and-answer session, officials from the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) described how the agency handles allegations that could lead to officer decertification and explained procedural safeguards for officers and agencies.

The discussion matters because POST decisions affect officer licensing and public trust: POST can suspend or revoke a peace officer's certificate independently of an employer's internal findings, and the agency applies a higher administrative standard than typical employment proceedings before seeking decertification.

POST officials said the agency receives a large volume of complaints but pursues a small share for formal regulatory action. "Post has received approximately 35,000 reports of serious misconduct... Post is engaged in approximately 400 regulatory actions," said Kevin Sherburne, law enforcement consultant, Professional Conduct Central Bureau, who added that roughly "somewhere less than 5%" of incoming reports have led to decertification actions to date. Sherburne also summarized the legal standard: "The statute sets forth that the standard is, clear and convincing evidence," meaning the allegation must be highly probable to be true.

Panelists identified where allegations must be reported and how POST evaluates them. Brandon Kiley, law enforcement consultant, Professional Conduct Northern Bureau, said: "Yes. If it's a matter related to serious misconduct," and noted that the categories of serious misconduct are set out in "commission regulation 1205." Agencies must file allegations that could render an officer subject to revocation; POST staff review the agency's completed investigation and may request additional materials.

On timing and tolling, panelists said POST generally pauses its investigative steps when a parallel criminal prosecution or internal investigation could be compromised. "Generally speaking, we will toll our investigation pending an internal investigation or during a criminal investigation," Sherburne said, adding that POST does not want to interfere with criminal processes.

Panelists made clear that agencies are not uniformly required to notify officers before submitting a case to POST. "There is no language in SB2 that requires an agency to notify that their case has been submitted to POST," said Marcus Gregory, law enforcement consultant, Professional Conduct Southern Bureau. Agencies sometimes notify officers voluntarily, but notification practice varies by employer.

POST described formal notices and interim actions. Brandon Kiley explained the notice of investigation letter, saying it is mailed when "there's a case that may have merit," and that it includes contact information for the assigned law enforcement consultant and may include a voluntary surrender form. In cases POST believes pose an immediate public-safety risk, POST can issue an immediate temporary suspension: the agency, the subject officer and the district attorney's office receive notice when a certificate is temporarily suspended while an investigation continues.

The panel addressed officers' cooperation obligations and rights. Kiley explained that regulation 1205(8) requires cooperation in matters related to serious misconduct but does not override constitutional rights: "it doesn't supersede an officer's constitutional right, acting under advice of counsel." Sherburne recommended officers obtain representation early and confirmed that officers are entitled to representation at investigatory interviews and may bring a representative so long as that person is not also a witness to the same allegation.

On whether POST can act when an employing agency later overturns a finding, Sherburne said POST operates independently: even if an internal finding is reversed by arbitration or a court, "post has an independent relationship with that officer based upon the license that post is issued to that officer, and post can, seek the revocation or suspension of that through the decertification process." Panelists reiterated that POST makes its own evidentiary determinations based on the administrative standard.

Use-of-force reviews were described as case-by-case inquiries that may involve consulting experts. "Post does consult with use of force experts... We do not always consult with the use of force expert. So case by case basis," Gregory said. Panelists said they assess reasonableness under governing case law, review training and service records, and consider aggravating or mitigating factors set out in POST regulation 1213 when deciding whether to pursue action.

The panel clarified what appears on a POST public profile and how hearings work. Michelle Wyler, bureau chief, Certification Bureau, said: "The POST profile actually only shows the peace officer's current certification status," such as active, suspended or revoked; it does not list allegations of misconduct. If POST decides to proceed to a full administrative case, the Attorney General's office prepares an accusation and an administrative law hearing follows with formal testimony and discovery. Toby Darden, Legal Affairs Bureau, summarized that evidentiary hearings "are more like a proceeding that you would have in court" while initial Board and Commission reviews are not evidentiary trials and do not allow cross-examination.

Operational and procedural details discussed included: the SB2 10-day reporting obligation for agencies to notify POST of allegations that could lead to revocation; the agency requirement to provide completed internal investigations (submitted via MARC 43/Mark43); handling of anonymous or vague public complaints via an agency supplemental; the ability for POST to consider previously closed matters as aggravating factors in future cases; and practical notices such as the notice of intent to revoke, which POST has in practice provided to officers when a case moves forward.

Panelists urged officers to keep contact information current. Sherburne and others said POST's address-of-record requirement is important to ensure officers receive timely notices; panelists said compliance has been low and urged officers to designate an address of record and an alternate email. Marcus Gregory said that an injury or failure to meet physical requirements does not constitute serious misconduct and is not a basis for decertification.

The session closed with panelists directing listeners to post.ca.gov for resources, the decertification section of the website, and contact information for regional law enforcement consultants.