Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Law Enforcement Training topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers hear POST overview and discuss proposed advanced investigator qualifications (HJR 32)
Summary
The committee heard an overview from the Public Safety Officer Standards and Training Council and testimony on HJR 32 proposing advanced investigator qualifications; law-enforcement and training officials discussed gaps in current certification and implementation questions.
The Law and Justice Interim Committee on Sept. 10 heard an overview of the Public Safety Officer Standards and Training (POST) Council and took testimony on House Joint Resolution 32, which would establish or clarify advanced investigator qualifications for law enforcement.
Timothy Allred, executive director of POST, summarized the council’s current training programs and responsibilities and described how POST works with local academies and agencies to set baseline standards. Joel Wendland, executive director of the Montana Law Enforcement Academy, and Sgt. Bill Pandis of the Lewis and Clark County Sheriff’s Office described operational training needs and areas where additional investigator-specific curriculum or certification could improve case work.
Committee members pressed witnesses on implementation details. Representative Ed Stafman asked about how advanced qualifications would be verified and maintained; Lee Johnson, administrator of the Division of Criminal Investigation at the Department of Justice, addressed recordkeeping and credentialing processes and noted constraints on statewide enforcement of locally administered standards. Senators and representatives also raised questions about costs and whether smaller agencies could meet any new training requirements.
Public commenters, including Nanette Gilbertson of the Montana Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association and May Simmons of Lake County, provided perspectives on whether the proposed standards would be practicable for rural agencies and stressed the need for funding or flexible pathways for smaller jurisdictions.
The committee did not vote on HJR 32 at this meeting; members requested additional information on statutory authority, funding implications, and model curricula before considering next steps.
