This law section is officially named the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act. It establishes a set of guidelines specifically designed to protect the rights of public safety officers during the investigation and disciplinary proceedings.

This law section defines who is considered a public safety officer. It includes specific peace officers as described in various Penal Code sections, but excludes certain subdivisions. It goes on to emphasize the importance of the rights and protections granted to these officers, stating that they are essential for statewide concern due to their role in ensuring stable relationships between public safety employees and their employers. The law aims to guarantee these stable relationships to ensure effective law enforcement services throughout California.

This law states that public safety officers in California, such as police officers or firefighters, have the right to participate in political activities while off duty and out of uniform. They can't be forced to participate in politics either. Furthermore, they are allowed to run for and serve on a school district's governing board without any restrictions.

This law outlines how public safety officers should be treated during interrogations that could lead to disciplinary actions, like suspension or demotion. It specifies the conditions for when and how interrogations happen, such as doing them at reasonable times and compensating for off-duty hours if applicable. Officers must be informed about the investigation and personnel involved before starting. The questioning should be fair, without threats or inducements for answers, and officers should be allowed time for personal needs. Officers can record the session, access recordings, and have a representative present if facing possible disciplinary actions. If charges might be criminal, officers must be informed of their rights. Privacy protections include restrictions on media exposure and sensitive information. This section doesn't apply to normal routines like counseling or investigations into criminal activities. Also, officers can't be unfairly reassigned during these processes.

This law protects public safety officers from being unfairly punished, denied promotions, or threatened for exercising their rights. It ensures they must have a chance to appeal against any punitive actions. Officers cannot be removed or demoted without notice and a good reason. Investigations into misconduct must be completed within a year unless there are special circumstances like ongoing criminal investigations, multijurisdictional cases, or if significant new evidence arises. Chiefs of police must get written notice and reasons if removed, though it does not guarantee them employment rights beyond what the law or rules provide.

If a public safety officer in California starts an administrative appeal, the process must follow the rules and procedures set by their local public agency.

If there's a negative comment about a public safety officer that will go into their personnel file, the officer must read and sign it first to show they're aware of it. If the officer refuses to sign it, that refusal will be noted, and the officer must either sign or initial this note.

If a public safety officer's name is on a Brady list, they can't be punished or denied a promotion just because of that listing. However, if there are underlying actions that justify such decisions, those actions can be addressed according to agency rules.

Evidently, a name's presence on a Brady list can't be used in appeals against punitive actions except when the actual misconduct is proven during the appeal, and then only to decide the severity of the punishment.

A Brady list contains names of officers suspected of dishonesty or bias, maintained as a result of court rules from Brady v. Maryland.

If a public safety officer receives a negative comment in their personnel file, they have 30 days to write a response. This response must be attached to and accompany the negative comment in their file.

This law outlines a public safety officer's right to access and review their personnel files. Employers must allow officers to inspect these files during usual business hours, with no loss of pay, whenever requested. The files should include everything used to decide employment matters like promotions, raises, or disciplinary actions. If officers find incorrect or unlawful information in their files, they can submit a written request for removal or correction, detailing the issues and reasons. Employers have 30 days to respond, either agreeing to make changes or explaining in writing if they refuse, which also becomes part of the file.

This law protects public safety officers by ensuring they cannot be forced to take a lie detector test if they do not want to. If they refuse to take such a test, it cannot be used against them in terms of disciplinary action, nor can it be mentioned in any investigation records or court proceedings. The term 'lie detector' covers devices like polygraphs and similar technology that are used to assess honesty.

This law states that public safety officers cannot be forced to allow their photos or identities to be used online by their employers if they believe it might lead to threats or harm. If an officer thinks there's a risk, they can ask their department to stop using their image. If the department doesn't comply, the officer can seek a court order to prevent it, and the department may face penalties of up to $500 per day after being notified.

This law protects public safety officers from being forced to share details about their personal finances or property as part of their job, unless it's mandated by law or necessary to check for conflicts of interest. It could also be required if the officer is being considered for a specialized unit where there's a higher risk of bribery.

This law states that a public safety officer's locker or storage space at work can only be searched in specific circumstances: either the officer is present, has given consent, a valid search warrant is obtained, or the officer has been notified of the search. This applies only to lockers or storage spaces owned or rented by the agency employing the officer.

This law ensures that public safety departments cannot deny the rights or protections of public safety officers. If these rights are violated, the superior court can order the department to stop any unfair actions and prevent them from doing it again. The court can also penalize improper lawsuits if they are brought in bad faith or for improper reasons, covering the department's legal costs. Further, malicious violations by the department intending to harm an officer can lead to fines up to $25,000 and additional payments for actual damages and attorney fees to the affected officer. These penalties do not apply to contractors if there's a contract clause exempting the department from liability for the contractor's actions.

This section explains that if a public agency has its own set of procedures that give peace officers at least the same rights or protections as those outlined in this chapter, then the agency does not have to follow this chapter's rules for those procedures.

This law section makes it clear that it does not restrict public safety agencies or officers from participating in mutual aid agreements with other agencies or jurisdictions. It also doesn't limit cooperation between different areas or groups if they find it necessary or beneficial.

This law protects public safety officers from being punished by their employer for wearing or displaying items with the American flag. However, if there's an issue, the employer must provide written notice to the officer. This notice must explain why the item breaks any existing rules, pointing to the specific rule it violates and informing the officer of their right to appeal the action through proper grievance procedures.

This section mandates that during the 2005–06 fiscal year, the Commission on State Mandates must review and possibly modify its decision about the Peace Officer Procedural Bill of Rights. The aim is to ensure its decision aligns with relevant court decisions, including a specific case involving San Diego Unified School District. If changes are made, they will only affect local government peace officer activities that happen after these revisions are adopted.