California Law Enforcement Accountability Reform Act.
Summary
Existing law requires that a candidate for a peace officer position be of good moral character, as determined by a thorough background investigation. This bill would require that background investigation to include an inquiry into whether a candidate for specified peace officer positions has engaged in membership in a hate group, participation in any hate group activity, or advocacy of public expressions of hate, as specified, and as those terms are defined. The bill would provide that certain findings would disqualify a person from employment. Existing law requires a public agency that employs peace officers to have a procedure to investigate complaints by members of the public against peace officers. This bill would require an agency to investigate, as specified, any internal complaint or complaint made by the public that alleges, as specified, that a peace officer engaged in membership in a hate group, participation in any hate group activity, or advocacy of public expressions of hate. The bill would provide that certain findings would require the employing agency to remove that peace officer from appointment as a peace officer. This bill would also require the Department of Justice to adopt and promulgate guidelines for the investigation and adjudication of these complaints by local agencies. Existing law makes the personnel records of peace officers, as specified, confidential and not subject to disclosure as public records. This bill would exempt from confidentiality the record of any sustained complaint that a peace officer has engaged in membership in a hate group, participation in any hate group activity, or advocacy of public expressions of hate. By requiring local agencies to investigate certain complaints, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2021
Committee Review
Aug 2022
Assembly Passage
Jan 2022
Senate Passage
Aug 2022
Signed into Law
Sep 2022
Introduced Feb 12, 2021
Signed Sep 30, 2022
Floor votes · Senate Aug 25, 2022 · Assembly Jan 31, 2022
How they voted
28–0
Passed · 9 other
Total votes 37
Aug 25, 2022
D
Democratic29
93% Yea
R
Republican8
12% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
29
Key actions
11
Committee
11
Amendments
7
Sep 30, 2022
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Aug 25, 2022
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 53. Noes 14.).
lower
Aug 25, 2022
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 27 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
lower
Aug 25, 2022
Upper · Passed
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 30. Noes 0. Page 5129.).
upper
Aug 18, 2022
Upper · Passed
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
upper
Aug 11, 2022
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (August 11).
upper
Aug 2, 2022
Committee
In committee: Referred to suspense file.
upper
Jun 22, 2022
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 0.) (June 21). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
May 4, 2022
Committee
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
upper
Jan 31, 2022
Lower · Passed
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 48. Noes 18. Page 3437.)
lower
Jan 24, 2022
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
lower
Jan 20, 2022
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 12. Noes 3.) (January 20).
lower
May 20, 2021
Lower · Passed
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
lower
Apr 28, 2021
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Apr 7, 2021
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 3.) (April 6). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Mar 26, 2021
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.
lower
Mar 25, 2021
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. Read second time and amended.
lower
Mar 3, 2021
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.
lower
Mar 2, 2021
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. Read second time and amended.
lower
Feb 25, 2021
Committee
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
lower
Feb 13, 2021
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 15.
lower
1 primary · 2 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Ash Kalra
DDemocratic
Co
Marc Levine
DDemocratic
Co
Mark Stone
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 655
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 655. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline