Commission takes no action in Theresa Perez case after agency declines to participate

Tennessee Federal Commission · December 12, 2025

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The commission voted to take no action on the Theresa Perez matter after the Metro Nashville Police Department declined to appear and the respondent’s counsel said criminal and civil-service processes were pending; commissioners debated suspension versus waiting for evidence before voting no action.

The Tennessee Federal Commission voted to take no action on the decertification matter involving Theresa Perez after the Metro Nashville Police Department declined to appear and the respondent’s counsel said criminal proceedings and civil-service processes remain pending.

At the hearing commissioners noted the department’s repeated absence; staff said Metro Nashville had responded that it had no additional information to provide and would not attend. Counsel for Perez told the commission that criminal charges are pending and that the respondent has been indicted and continues to have scheduled court dates.

Perez’s counsel argued the agency’s refusal to cooperate deprived the respondent of an adequate opportunity to present exculpatory evidence and asked the commission to dismiss the matter or defer action until the county’s civil-service hearing and ongoing litigation were resolved. Counsel also said some potentially relevant evidence (work email, device data) had been wiped or removed during the agency’s handling of the matter and that the defense was seeking production.

Commissioners discussed options, including an agreed suspension while criminal matters proceeded. One commissioner raised concerns that declining action could allow the respondent to apply for other law-enforcement jobs without disclosing ongoing proceedings, but staff said Perez’s POST certification is inactive because she is not currently employed; re-employment would require full pre-employment checks and a background review.

After debate a motion for no action was made and carried (recorded in the transcript as the motion carrying by a vote recorded as two ayes and one no). The commission instructed staff and counsel to confer about procedural next steps.

The commission did not adopt an interim suspension or agreed order at this informal hearing and emphasized the matter could return for a formal hearing if circumstances changed. Counsel for Perez said the respondent intends to be truthful in future employment disclosures and is not seeking immediate re-employment while proceedings are pending.