Police executives and scholars assert the complexity of 21st century policing demands a college degree.CalMatters. Mandate Higher Education for California Peace Officers. March 26, 2021.Links to an external site.California Assembly Bill 89: Existing law requires the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) to establish a certification program for specified peace officers, including officers of the Department of the California Highway Patrol. Existing law requires the commission to establish basic, intermediate, advanced, supervisory, management, and executive certificates for the purpose of fostering the education and experience necessary to perform general police service duties. Existing law requires certificates to be awarded on the basis of a combination of training, education, experience, and other prerequisites, as determined by the commission. This bill would require the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges to develop a modern policing degree program, with the commission and other stakeholders to serve as advisors, as specified, and to submit a report on recommendations to the Legislature outlining a plan to implement the program on or before June 1, 2023. The bill would require the report to include, among other things, recommendations to adopt financial assistance for students of historically underserved and disadvantaged communities with barriers to higher education access, as specified. The bill would require the commission to adopt the recommended criteria within 2 years of when the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges submits its report to the Legislature. Existing law requires peace officers in this state to meet specified minimum standards, including age and education requirements. This bill would increase the minimum qualifying age from 18 to 21 years of age for specified peace officers.California Senate Bill 387Existing law, contingent on an appropriation made for these purposes, requires the State Department of Education, on or before January 1, 2023, to recommend best practices and identify training programs for use by local educational agencies to address youth behavioral health, including, but not necessarily limited to, staff and pupil training, as specified. Existing law requires the department to ensure that each identified training program, among other requirements, provides instruction on how school staff can best provide referrals to youth behavioral health services or other support to individuals in the early stages of developing a youth behavioral health disorder. Existing law defines a local educational agency for purposes of these provisions to mean a county office of education, school district, state special school, or charter school that serves pupils in any of grades 7 to 12, inclusive. This bill would include referrals to special education services in that instruction requirement for identified training programs. The bill would require, on or before January 1, 2025, those local educational agencies to certify to the department that 75% of both its classified and certificated employees have received that youth behavioral health training, as specified. The bill would prohibit the training in youth behavioral health to be a condition of employment or hiring. By imposing training certification duties on local educational agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

1. What are the key points, terms, claims, and/or ideas?
2. What is the purpose of this information?
3. Why is this important?

Question

stsfrost6020 stsfrost6020

14-05-2024
Law

Answered

Police executives and scholars assert the complexity of 21st century policing demands a college degree.CalMatters. Mandate Higher Education for California Peace Officers. March 26, 2021.Links to an external site.California Assembly Bill 89: Existing law requires the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) to establish a certification program for specified peace officers, including officers of the Department of the California Highway Patrol. Existing law requires the commission to establish basic, intermediate, advanced, supervisory, management, and executive certificates for the purpose of fostering the education and experience necessary to perform general police service duties. Existing law requires certificates to be awarded on the basis of a combination of training, education, experience, and other prerequisites, as determined by the commission. This bill would require the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges to develop a modern policing degree program, with the commission and other stakeholders to serve as advisors, as specified, and to submit a report on recommendations to the Legislature outlining a plan to implement the program on or before June 1, 2023. The bill would require the report to include, among other things, recommendations to adopt financial assistance for students of historically underserved and disadvantaged communities with barriers to higher education access, as specified. The bill would require the commission to adopt the recommended criteria within 2 years of when the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges submits its report to the Legislature. Existing law requires peace officers in this state to meet specified minimum standards, including age and education requirements. This bill would increase the minimum qualifying age from 18 to 21 years of age for specified peace officers.California Senate Bill 387Existing law, contingent on an appropriation made for these purposes, requires the State Department of Education, on or before January 1, 2023, to recommend best practices and identify training programs for use by local educational agencies to address youth behavioral health, including, but not necessarily limited to, staff and pupil training, as specified. Existing law requires the department to ensure that each identified training program, among other requirements, provides instruction on how school staff can best provide referrals to youth behavioral health services or other support to individuals in the early stages of developing a youth behavioral health disorder. Existing law defines a local educational agency for purposes of these provisions to mean a county office of education, school district, state special school, or charter school that serves pupils in any of grades 7 to 12, inclusive. This bill would include referrals to special education services in that instruction requirement for identified training programs. The bill would require, on or before January 1, 2025, those local educational agencies to certify to the department that 75% of both its classified and certificated employees have received that youth behavioral health training, as specified. The bill would prohibit the training in youth behavioral health to be a condition of employment or hiring. By imposing training certification duties on local educational agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

1. What are the key points, terms, claims, and/or ideas?
2. What is the purpose of this information?
3. Why is this important?

Answer :

Other Questions