The Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) is responsible for the competency level of law enforcement officers in California. It sets minimum selection and training standards, fosters better management practices and provides financial assistance to local agencies for law enforcement training. The commission is a balanced group of city and county administrators, law enforcement professionals, educators and public members. The governor appoints 15 of the commissioners, with the advice and consent of the Senate, for three-year overlapping terms. The attorney general is an ex-officio member and serves as the 16th POST commissioner. The commission meets three times a year. 

Gov. Edmund G. “Pat” Brown signed legislation on July 11, 1959, establishing the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training as a special-fund agency. The legislation was developed by members of the California Peace Officers’ Association, the California State Sheriffs’ Association, the California Police Chiefs’ Association and the Peace Officers’ Research Association of California. The POST program is voluntary and incentive-based. California POST was the first U.S. organization of its kind. Since then, all states have created similar organizations.

Folsom Police Department became the first agency to enter the POST training program in 1960. By the end of the decade, 341 agencies were participating. The POST had 22 staff members and its budget was $5 million. In 1972, the commission required arrest and firearms training for all California peace officers. Sexual assault training was required in 1977. By the end of the ‘70s, POST had a budget of $24 million, a staff of 72 and 426 participating agencies.

In 2005, the commission established SWAT guidelines and training procedures, and a terrorism awareness course. By the end of the decade, 614 agencies were participating in POST.

POST Celebrates the First 50 Years (Slideshow)

Commission

The commission meets three times a year to establish standards, regulations and to give direction to POST staff. Commissioners serve without pay, but are reimbursed for their expenses for attending meetings. All commission meetings are open to the public.

Standards

POST’s standards program establishes selection and training standards for peace officers and dispatchers, provides management consultation to local law enforcement agencies, develops job examinations and counsels local law enforcement agencies on management practices. The standards program conducts research on topics including peace officer selection and training, operational procedures, program evaluation to meet statutory requirements, and management guidance to local law forces. It helps to develop and implement new programs for local agencies by serving as a clearinghouse of successful program information. Job-related selection and training standards for peace officers and dispatchers, established by the standards program, are enforced through POST inspections of local agencies that get state aid, to ensure adherence to state standards.

Post also conducts accreditation and peace officer feasibility studies.

Training

POST’s training program develops and certifies law enforcement courses, schedules the courses and monitors the quality of the courses. Curricula regularly are updated. POST’s Command College and the Supervisory Leadership Institute offer advanced executive and supervisory training. Trainers are educated in the Basic Academy Instructor Certificate Program and the Instructor Development Institute. The Institute of Criminal Investigation offers specialty training. The Peace Officer Training Program provides financial assistance to all 58 of the state’s counties, approximately 346 cities, and many districts and local agencies that have agreed to meet POST standards.

Publications

POST produces a variety of publications for law enforcement professionals. Its most recent publications involve the duties of coroners, “California Coroner Occupational Analysis Report” (Aug. 1, 2010); the handling of emergency medical services during critical incidents, “Tactical Medicine: Operational Programs and Standardized Training Recommendations’’ (March 1, 2010); and police forces’ efforts to recruit and retain high-quality officers, “Recruitment Strategic Planning Guide, POST: Finding and Keeping the Right People” (Nov. 1, 2009).

POST’s $61.1 million budget is a 1.3% increase over the year before and is allocated

as follows: $5.8 million for standards; $34.3 million for training; and $21 million for

financial assistance for peace officer training. POST is a special-fund agency, with all its money coming from the Peace Officers Training Fund; its money comes from fines and penalties "for all criminal offenses, including all offenses, except parking offenses." POST uses no tax money.

3-Year Budget (pdf)

Orange County Reservists

Orange County Sheriff Michael S. Carona deputized 86 people as reservists in 1999, including political allies and friends of the sheriff and his top assistant, shortly after he took office and just before the state toughened up training requirements. But all 86 were eliminated from the state's peace officer database three years later, after the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training found that background checks and training were still incomplete. The commission concluded that the appointments were rushed to avoid tougher training standards. Carona argued that the reserves were volunteers and thus not subject to pre-employment background checks. He let the reserves keep their badges and, in some cases, their department-issued guns.

The sheriff's reserve program was plagued by controversy. Critics contended that appointments were political favors and that badges had been misused by reservists. In one incident, a reserve deputy was arrested after allegedly waving his badge and gun at a group of golfers he believed was playing too slowly. Carona maintained that the appointments were not political favors and that there was never a public safety risk.

Carona fought to have all 86 reservists reinstated, but by November 2005 only 15 members of the original group said they planned to attend the academy and participate in its 162-hour training program. Seventeen other reservists agreed to be demoted to a rank that does not carry police powers; 11 quit, and seven didn’t responded to the department's invitation to attend the academy. Six more lacked a prerequisite course for the academy. The rest had dropped out or been demoted earlier.

Carona, his wife and his mistress were indicted in 2007 by a grand jury for activities not connected to the reservists and he resigned the next year. He was found guilty of witness tampering in 2009, but acquitted of five other counts. Carona was sentenced to 66 months in jail and fined $125,000.

Few Want to Stay O.C. Reservists (by Christine Hanley, Los Angeles Times)

America’s Sheriff Carona Gets 5-1/2 Years in Federal Prison (Liberal OC)

False Documents

Seven current and former San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department employees were indicted in March 2011 for allegedly falsifying training documents used by POST that allowed them to receive unjustified pay raises and retirement benefits. The alleged thefts dated back to 2001 and ranged between $2,000 and $100,000. Certificates are awarded for several levels of peace officer training, from basic to executive. An agreement with the union representing safety employees promises deputies 8% pay increases when they move up in certification level

Former training specialist Angela Gray faced the most serious charge with six felony counts, including grand theft, attempted grand theft and conspiracy to commit a crime. She faced the possibility of five years, eight months in prison if convicted. Gray and training specialist Sallyann Christian were accused of having the names of deputies of various ranks placed on attendance rosters for classes at a sheriff's training academy although the deputies weren’t taking the courses. Certificates showing they had completed the classes were reportedly then sent to POST, allowing the deputies to receive pay raises.

Retired Assistant Sheriff Michael Stodelle was accused of lying to POST about his qualifications and unlawfully taking money from the Sheriff's Department. Retired Sheriff’s Capt. Hobart Gray and his wife Angela were accused of conspiring to have Hobart Gray's name placed on attendance rosters for five courses he never attended but received credit for, allowing him to apply for intermediate and advanced POST certificates.

Darla Engler, bureau chief of POST's administrative services division, said the agency knew of no other fraud or investigation involving falsifying of credentials. She said Hobart Gray's intermediate and advanced certificates were canceled.

Sheriff’s Employees Accused of Illegally Boosting Pay (by Imran Ghori, Press-Enterprise)

Seven Indicted in Thefts (by Joe Nelson, Students Against Corruption)

Grand Jury Indictment (pdf)

Test Questions Leaked

The Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training suspended classes in October 2010 for 122 trainees at Rio Hondo academy in Whittier when it was discovered that questions from its statewide tests were somehow incorporated into the school’s study guides. “The test questions have gotten out of the secure environment, compromising the tests,” said Karen Lozito, a senior consultant for the commission. “It means the questions are going to have to be rewritten.”

On March 15, 2011, POST authorized Rio Hondo to resume presentation of the 664-hour basic Police Academy course. This was not “recertification,” however, just limited authorization to offer the basic class. The Police Academy was put on one-year probation by the commission, which said it would make regular site visits and review academy performance while the school fulfilled other stipulated requirements.   

Classes at College Police Academy Suspended After Breach of Test Security (by Richard Winton, Los Angeles Times)

Standards

There are approximately 200,000 law enforcement officers in California and they are not required to obtain a specific state license or certification for employment. That includes the CHP, correctional departments and local police. State law does require that in order to hold a law enforcement position, however, one must meet certain minimum eligibility standards, such as a specified level of education. While state and local agencies are given latitude in establishing their own criteria, many choose to follow the standards set by POST.

In December 2008, a ballot initiative was proposed that would establish a new statewide board responsible for licensing and regulating certain law enforcement officers and require certain state, county and city agencies to provide specified training to these officers. The Office of Legislative Analyst did not suggest that the new board would supplant the activities of POST, but did note that some of the training costs required by the new board might be offset by elimination of duplicative requirements by the commission.

The initiative failed to gather the 659,637 signatures necessary to qualify for the 2009 ballot.

The California Public Safety and Law Enforcement Act (Office of the Legislative Analyst)

Initiative 1348: Related to Law Enforcement (California Secretary of State) (pdf)

Access to Information

The struggle between the press and government over access to information is an ongoing one. In 2006, the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training clashed with the Los Angeles Times over the release of information regarding the appointment, promotion and termination histories of various police officers. The newspaper wanted the information about peace officers leaving one agency in order to serve in another to determine whether particular agencies are better able to retain more experienced officers and whether officers who are dismissed from one or more agencies nonetheless are hired by another. When POST denied the newspaper’s request, it sued and the trial court granted it access to some of the material it sought. But the Court of Appeal reversed that decision and it went to the state Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court ruled 4-3 in 2007 that the information in a state database is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act. The decision greatly expanded the right of public disclosure. The ruling exempted medical and other records that would constitute an unwarranted invasion of peace officers’ personal privacy.

Pro Access

The Supreme Court said there is nothing confidential about police officer names, where they work, when they were hired or when they left their public jobs. Chief Justice Ronald George ruled that, “We find no well-established social norm that recognizes a need to protect the identity of all peace officers. Peace officers operate in the public realm on a daily basis and identify themselves to the members of the public with whom they deal.” The high court did differentiate between certain kinds of information and sent the case back to the Superior Court to consider how certain officers, such as those who work in an undercover capacity, might argue that they would be harmed by release of their information.

Against Access

The commission argued to the court that releasing officers' names to the media could enable people hostile toward law enforcement to find their homes and harass them. Justice Ming Chin agreed with that argument and said he believes officers and their families could be threatened by release of the information. He was joined in dissent by Justice Marvin Baxter. Chief Justice George had argued that the commission “offered no evidence that such a scenario is more than speculative, or even that it is feasible.” Justices Chin and Baxter argued that the court was substituting its judgment for that of the legislature, which had ruled such information private. They further objected to the court’s determination that certain officers (e.g., those undercover) could have their privacy shielded and that POST was a suitable agency to make that decision. “The Commission, which is not the officers' employing department but is merely an agency that collects information from numerous employing departments, is poorly suited to identify and assert the privacy and safety interests of the individual officers identified in its records,” Justice Chin wrote.

Justice Joyce Kennard said while she agreed that the names of officers should be released, she believed that their employing agencies and dates of hiring and termination were confidential under state law.

POST v. Superior Court of Sacramento County (California Supreme Court ruling)

Legal Decisions Clarify Questions (League of California Cities) (pdf)

State Supreme Court Rules Police Officers' Names, Salaries Public (by Henry K. Lee, San Francisco Chronicle)

Kenneth O’Brien, 1997

Norman Boehm, 1979

Brad Koch, 1978

William Garlington, 1976

Gene Muehleisen, 1969

George Puddy, 1965

Gene Muehleisen, 1959