|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 24, 2004 :: SB 1400 - OPPOSE/UNLESS AMENDEDThe Honorable Gloria Romero State Capitol, Room 5051 Sacramento, CA 95814 Re: SB 1400 - OPPOSE/UNLESS AMENDED Dear Senator Romero: On behalf of the California Correctional Peace Officers Association, I am writing to inform you of our opposition to SB 1400 (Romero and Speier), unless amended as discussed below. We appreciate the authors’ interest in improving the investigation and disciplinary processes to promote fairness and integrity within the Department of Corrections. Because of the need and our desire to investigate all complaints against our members, whether inmate initiated or not, it is essential that employees receive representation and other due process rights. If a disciplinary matrix is required, the constitutional due process safeguards provided by Skelly v. State Personnel Board (1975) 15Cal.3d 194 and its progeny, in determining the appropriateness of a penalty in employee discipline must be followed. That is, the process must encompass considerations of the length of state service, the severity of the misconduct, the likelihood of its reoccurrence, and the potential harm to the public. We do have an additional concern, though, that a schedule of sanctions will curtail some settlements of appeals with the State Personnel Board. This will predictably result in more cases going to full evidentiary hearing with the State Personnel Board and the associated increased costs to the Department and the California State Personnel Board. Our final concern is in regard to the intent of the language dealing with Skelly hearing requirements. Until there is further clarification, we would oppose including this portion in the bill. With the inclusion of our suggested amendments, we would be pleased to support your measure. Thank you for considering our views. Sincerely, Debra Heusel, Chair CCPOA Legislative Committee |
