HCS HB 673 -- DISCIPLINE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS (Kissell)

This substitute revises the law concerning discipline of law
enforcement officers.  The substitute:

(1)  Requires a written statement and citations from the
employing law enforcement agency documenting the reasons for any
punitive action;

(2)  Establishes conditions for the interrogation of a law
enforcement officer under investigation;

(3)  Establishes law enforcement agency hearing or grievance
committee procedures for notifying the law enforcement officer
subject to discipline, setting the date of the hearing, voting
by the committee, and the format and distribution of the results
of the hearing;

(4)  Grants subpoena powers to the hearing or grievance
committee;

(5)  Sets the requirements of decisions made and the level of
punitive action recommended by a hearing or grievance committee
in relation to the finding of the law enforcement agency; and

(6)  Suspends these disciplinary procedures in the event
criminal charges have been filed against the officer.

FISCAL NOTE:  No impact on state funds.

HCS HB 673 -- DISCIPLINE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS

SPONSOR:  Kissell

COMMITTEE ACTION:  Voted "do pass" by the Committee on Public
Safety and Law Enforcement by a vote of 16 to 0.

This substitute sets guidelines for hearings by grievance
committees relating to the discipline of certain law enforcement
officers, with which law enforcement agencies must comply in the
absence of similar procedures that are already in effect.

The substitute:

(1)  Requires just cause in any punitive action taken against a
certified peace officer;

(2)  Requires a written statement and citations from the
associated department documenting the reasons for the punitive
action;

(3)  Establishes conditions for the interrogation of a law
enforcement officer under investigation;

(4)  Establishes law enforcement agency and grievance committee
procedures for notifying the law enforcement officer subject to
a discipline, setting the date of the hearing, the voting by the
committee, and the format and distribution of the results of the
hearing;

(5)  Grants subpoena powers to the hearing committee;

(6)  Sets the requirements of decisions made and the level of
punitive action recommended by a hearing committee in relation
to the finding of the law enforcement agency; and

(7)  Suspends these disciplinary procedures in the event
criminal charges have been filed against the officer.

FISCAL NOTE:  No impact on state funds.

PROPONENTS:  Supporters say that the bill provides necessary due
process to certain officers who are subject to punitive
actions.  Supporters say that there is inconsistency among
departments as to what process is provided to law enforcement
officers, and this bill is to correct such variances and protect
those officers from at-will dismissals.

Testifying for the bill were Representative Kissell; Missouri
State Fraternal Order of Police; Missouri Union of Law
Enforcement; AFL-CIO IUPA; and Missouri AFL-CIO.

OPPONENTS:  Those who oppose the bill say that the bill deals
with issues best addressed at the local level, and provides for
procedures many departments already require.  Opponents also say
that the interrogation process provided for treats officers
subject to punitive actions differently than private citizens.

Testifying against the bill was Missouri Municipal League.

Sarah Madden, Legislative Analyst

HB 673 -- Discipline of Law Enforcement Officers

Sponsor:  Kissell

This bill sets guidelines for hearings by grievance committees
relating to the discipline of certified peace officers.

The bill:

(1)  Requires just cause in any punitive action taken against a
certified peace officer;

(2)  Requires a written statement and citations from the
associated department documenting the reasons for the punitive
action;

(3)  Establishes conditions for the interrogation of a law
enforcement officer under investigation;

(4)  Establishes law enforcement agency and grievance committee
procedures for notifying the law enforcement officer subject to
a discipline, setting the date of the hearing, the voting by the
committee, and the format and distribution of the results of the
hearing;

(5)  Grants subpoena powers to the hearing committee; and

(6)  Sets the requirements of decisions made and the level of
punitive action recommended by a hearing committee in relation
to the finding of the law enforcement agency.