WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2923

To place rumble strips on all double-yellow lined roads and highways.

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Michael Amos and 10 co-sponsors

The bill requires rapid reporting and central tracking of sustained police misconduct, with certification consequences for agency leaders that fail to report.

To House Energy and Public Works
#roadsandtransportation
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2923

HB 2923 — Summary (REPORTING POLICE MISCONDUCT)

Note: The materials provided include two different HB 2923 texts from different states (an Arizona parenting-time bill and an Illinois police-misconduct bill). This summary focuses on the Illinois version titled “REPORTING POLICE MISCONDUCT” (amendment to the Illinois Police Training Act, 50 ILCS 705/9.2).

Purpose

To strengthen reporting, tracking, and accountability for police misconduct in Illinois by (1) requiring prompt reporting of certain sustained misconduct to the Illinois Law Enforcement Training Standards Board (the Board), (2) creating/expanding a searchable Officer Professional Conduct Database, and (3) imposing certification consequences on chief administrators of agencies that fail to report.

Key provisions

  • Reporting obligations:

    • Law enforcement agencies and the Illinois State Police must notify the Board within 10 days of any final determination of a willful violation that:
    • results in a suspension of at least 10 days; or
    • would trigger an official/formal investigation under agency policy; or
    • involves allegations affecting truthfulness, bias, or integrity; or
    • involves an officer who resigns/retires while under investigation after being served notice.
    • Agencies may also report other conduct they deem relevant.

  • Officer notice and response:

    • The Board must notify the officer within 14 days and the officer has 14 days to submit a written objection contesting reported information; the objection is retained with the record.

  • Officer Professional Conduct Database:

    • The Board must maintain a searchable database showing for each officer: certification dates/status, sustained misconduct (including nature and resulting discipline), separation dates/reasons, and related statements.
    • Access is restricted to law enforcement agencies, the Board, designated hiring officials, and State’s Attorneys/Attorney General for Brady/Giglio compliance — not generally public.
    • Records obtained by the Board remain confidential, privileged, not subject to subpoena, and generally not admissible in private civil suits (but usable by the Board in regulatory/legal actions).

  • Hiring checks and record retention:

    • Agencies must check the database before appointing an officer or certifying an applicant.
    • Employing agencies must retain relevant documentation for at least five years after separation.

  • Enforcement for noncompliance:

    • If an agency fails to comply with reporting requirements, the chief administrator may be brought before the Certification Review Panel.
    • Upon Panel recommendation, the Board may suspend the chief administrator’s law-enforcement certification for at least 30 days.
    • For second or subsequent violations the Board may pursue discretionary decertification under Section 6.3.

  • Effective date: immediate (as introduced).

Who is affected

  • Local law enforcement agencies and the Illinois State Police
  • Individual sworn officers (records and notice/response rights)
  • Chief administrators (potential suspension/decertification for agency noncompliance)
  • Illinois Law Enforcement Training Standards Board and Certification Review Panel
  • Hiring agencies, State’s Attorneys, and Attorney General (for hiring and Brady/Giglio compliance)

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Improves centralized tracking of misconduct and supports prosecutors’ disclosure obligations (Brady/Giglio).
  • Raises administrative reporting and recordkeeping burdens on agencies.
  • Limits public access to records (confidentiality provisions), which could reduce transparency but protect investigatory integrity and privacy.
  • Introduces accountability for agency leadership via certification sanctions, potentially incentivizing compliance.
  • Raises due-process and privacy questions for officers about database entries and confidentiality exceptions.

If you want, I can draft a shorter one-page brief or a comparison of this bill with current law.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.