Home>Articles>Why the Push to Lower Standards For Becoming A District Attorney Investigator?

POST Commission logo. (Photo: post.ca.gov?

Why the Push to Lower Standards For Becoming A District Attorney Investigator?

‘We really shouldn’t be lowering standards just to line the pockets of some retired state employees’

By Katy Grimes, May 14, 2022 9:00 am

“At a time when Californians are demanding more and better training for law enforcement professionals, the Commission on Peace Officers Standards and Training has voted to decrease the minimum qualifications to become a District Attorney Investigator,” Joe Del Guidice, Chief of the Bureau of Investigation for the Riverside County District Attorney and chief Investigator association president told the Globe in an recent interview.

Why is the Commission on Police Officer Standards and Training (POST) pushing to lower the qualifications for becoming a DA Investigator?

“After impassioned testimony from many chief investigators and elected district attorneys, hundreds of letters and other correspondence from our investigators and peace officer associations, and dozens of phone calls voicing our collective opposition to changing Regulation 1005, the Commission voted unanimously (only one abstention) to proceed with the lowering of District Attorney Investigator minimum qualifications,” Del Guidice said. “I found their indifference to these communiques and their ensuing discussion on the matter to be appalling. Commission Chairperson, Santa Barbara County District Attorney Joyce Dudley led the charge to disregard the wisdom of 48 out of the 51 California DA Bureau Chiefs and dozens of other elected District Attorneys as ‘blatantly absurd’ and ‘absolutely insulting.'”

You can hear Chair Dudley’s prepared remarks at the 49-minute mark in this video POST meeting.


“While I concede there may be limited legitimate arguments in favor of changing Regulation 1005(a), I am dumbfounded at the hubris displayed by this Commission,”Del Guidice continued. “I had anticipated the commissioners would state their disagreement with our opposition, then defer to the almost unanimous primary stakeholders who made our feelings known. Instead, this Commission, whose members have precisely no experience leading a Bureau of Investigation, acknowledged the overwhelming disapproval, then proceeded to flippantly disregard this testimony in favor of their personal opinions. These commissioners of diverse backgrounds are entrusted with the responsibility of representing the varied interests of all law enforcement disciplines. By ignoring the wishes of 95% of the state’s Chief DA Investigators and dozens of elected District Attorneys in favor of their own personal agenda, this Commission has failed to fulfill its fundamental obligation to represent us.”

  1. The CCI letter to the POST commission objecting to their proposed change and asking for a hearing
  2. A letter from me as CCIA President to the Chair with our renewed objection and laying them out for their disingenuousness.
  3. The PRA asking them for record of their alleged multiple inquiries about changing this regulation. In their Addendum – Initial Statement of Reasons states that, “POST has received numerous inquiries to allow individuals who qualify for law enforcement investigators positions to become DAIs.”  But, when they receive a PRA to support this, all they have (so far) is one e-mail.
  4. The addendum to the reasons the commission made its decision, which triggered the 15 day reopening because they did not properly disclose.
  5. Notice of additional documents dated (Jan 21, 2022) giving the public a 15-day notice to respond (expired Feb 8, 2022) this was the document buried in the website that took a significant amount of digging to find. It was also placed in an area dated July 2021.  Since this was brought to POST’s attention, they reposted the notice on March 28, 2022, with an expiration date of April 11, 2022 (15 days).
  6. Letter to the Chair from LA Peace Officer Association outlining POST’s failure to disclose properly and try and hurry this change through.
  7. The one letter that was provided as a result of our PRA.

It is stunning that the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training unanimously voted to lower the District Attorney Investigator minimum qualifications at a time when law enforcement is under a microscope of scrutiny, and the state has made clear “Double dipping” is prohibited.

The investigators sent Joyce Dudly a letter arguing that the “proposed regulation undermines POST’s purported goal of enhancing professionalism in California law enforcement, which is why it is opposed by 49 of the 52 California District Attorney Bureau Chiefs. POST has simply ignored the reasoned thoughts and feedback from the experts in this field.”

“Hubris” indeed. What’s the motive for the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training for lowering these important standards? What do they get out of it?

Here are two letters to the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training from the California Chief Investigators:

Ltr to Joyce Dudley POST Commission March 21 2022 from PPOA
CCI LETTER – SIGNED (Final ver 2)


Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Spread the news:


8 thoughts on “Why the Push to Lower Standards For Becoming A District Attorney Investigator?

  1. It’s clearly time to get rid of these know-nothing, double-dipping, money-grubbing, unelected-bureaucrat commissions —- who could conceivably even be lining their pockets with a li’l-somethin’-extra from the let ’em all out crowd —- if all they can come up with is to lay waste to every tool we have to maybe, just maybe, go in the direction of reducing skyrocketing crime and maybe, just maybe, make California’s counties safer and more livable for its residents. These commissioners ignored the pleas, evidence, and expertise of 48 of the 51 state D.A. bureaus and dozens of D.A.s and voted to cripple this important tool for D.A.s? What’s next, passing a law that only non-citizen illegal aliens should be allowed to apply for the job of District Attorney Investigator?

    SOMETHING is obviously up and SOMEONE obviously sees the handwriting on the wall, with recalls of S.F. and L.A. D.A.s afoot and a public sentiment that smells like a rapidly growing desire to toss out our pro-lawless Atty General Rob Bonta. I’m no brain surgeon but I do have eyes and ears and a nose and to me this stinks to high heaven of an attempt to make an end run around the public’s desire for a return to law and order if certain interests can no longer directly install D.A.s that act like the worst of the WORST of public defenders. ENOUGH!

    1. right? I figure they will attract more bodies to train if they lower the standards a little. Nothing out of hand but maybe 10 pull ups instead of 15 or100 crunches instead of 150. Do they have to have a bachelors degree? Why? An AA will give someone the necessary knowledge, they just arent majoring in anything. An AA would be much better than a degree in photography or underwater basket weaving.

  2. If a retired person out of Cal Pers is getting their pension, they earned that. If they are also getting paid for actually working, they are earning that too. So, why is there a problem with this ‘double-dipping”? They arent just being handed money.
    It also occurs to me that becoming a peace officer is a lot of physical work. We need more and there arent enough going thru the academy. This article doesnt mention (or I didnt see it) what portion of the MQ’s are they lowering.

    1. Double and triple dipping is exclusively a government employee thing. They end up with huge retirements at a young age that are not available to the general public that slaves away to pay their bloated pensions and salaries. Their pals in the system make sure these jobs go to their buddies to keep it all in the family so to speak. No where else can you retire at a very young age with full pension and be back on the job tomorrow with a second salary + retirement but I see it all the time in government jobs.

  3. The reality is that each respective DAs office can still hire the most qualified candidate for the job. This rule change also allows a path for federal investigators to be hired which they didn’t have before. The article also fails to note that many of these investigator positions are held by double dipping local law enforcement. Competition is normally a good thing right?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *