New Bill Clarifies POBAR’s One-Year Notice Rule

January 12, 2011 by Beeson Tayer & Bodine

AB 955, which became effective January 1, 2010, abrogates an anti-worker decision issued by the California Supreme Court, and requires that a public agency complete its investigation of a public safety officer and notify the officer of its proposed disciplinary action within one year of the discovery of the alleged misconduct.

In 2008, the California Supreme Court decided that, while Section 3304(d) of the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (POBAR) requires that an officer be notified of potential discipline within one year of the discovery of alleged misconduct, POBAR does not require the public agency to specify the type or severity of the discipline. It was a decision that went against years of precedent and weakened the one-year statute of limitation contained in POBAR.

PORAC, one of the bill’s sponsors, argued the Supreme Court’s decision defeated the original intent of 3304(d) to have the investigation and notice or proposed discipline be provided within one year of the discovery of the alleged misconduct.

As amended by AB 955, the statute now requires the public agency to tell the officer what discipline is contemplated, and must do so within one year.

Notably, however, AB 955 also specifies that the public agency is not required to impose the discipline within the same one-year period.

Also of note, the tolling provisions of §3304(d) remain even after AB 955, including tolling for such circumstances as the alleged misconduct also being subject to a criminal investigation, the officer’s waiver of the time limitations, or if the investigation involves more than one officer and reasonable extension of the time limits are required.

The material on this website is provided by Beeson, Tayer & Bodine for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult with their own legal counsel before acting on any of the information presented. Some of the articles are updated periodically, and are marked with the date of the last update. Again, readers should consult with their own legal counsel for the most current information and to obtain professional advice before acting on any of the information presented.