HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-14-2022 Community Police Review BoardMEMORANDUM
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
A Board of the City of Iowa City
DATE: June 10, 2022
TO: CPRB Members
FROM: Tammy Neumann
RE: Board Packet for meeting on TUESDAY, JUNE 14, 2022
Enclosed please find the following documents for your review and comment at the next board meeting:
• [Revised] Agenda for 06/14/22
• Minutes of the meeting on 05/10/22
• ICPD Use of Force Review/Report February
• Community Forum Summary Letter— Draft
• Community Forum Transcription
• Memo to CPRB Board of May 11, 2022 re: Proposed Revision to Ordinance 8-8
• Memo to City Council of June 2, 2022 re: Proposed Amendments to Ordinance 8-8
• Office Contacts — May 2022
• Complaint Deadlines
• CPRB Contacts
AGENDA
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
TUESDAY JUNE 14, 2022 — 5:30 P.M.
EMMA J HARVAT HALL
410 E. Washington Street
ITEM NO. 1 CALL TO ORDER and ROLL CALL
ITEM NO. 2 CONSIDER MOTION ADOPTING CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR
AMENDED
• Minutes of the meeting on 05/10/22
• ICPD Use of Force Review/Report February
ITEM NO. 3 NEW BUSINESS
• None
ITEM NO. 4 OLD BUSINESS
• Community Forum
Proposed revisions to Ordinance 8-8
ITEM NO. 5 PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA (Commentators shall
address the Board for no more than 5 minutes. The Board shall not engage in
discussion with the public concerning said items).
ITEM NO. 6 BOARD INFORMATION
ITEM NO. 7 STAFF INFORMATION
ITEM NO. 8 MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS
• July 12, 2022, 5:30 PM, Hailing Conference Room
• August 9, 2022, 5:30 PM, Emma J. Harvat Hall
• September 13, 2022, 5:30 PM, Emma J. Harvat Hall
ITEM NO. 9 CONSIDER MOTION TO ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION based on Section
21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or
authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a
condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds,
and 21.5(1)(i) to evaluate the professional competency of an individual whose
appointment, hiring, performance or discharge is being considered when necessary to
prevent needless and irreparable injury to that individual's reputation and that individual
requests a closed session and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel
records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and
school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure
is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law,
rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by
identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body
receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could
reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that
government body if they were available for general public examination.
ITEM NO. 10 ADJOURNMENT
Ifyou will need disability -related accommodations to participate in this programlevent, please contact Tammy
Neumann at 319-356-5043, Tmmy-neumann@iowa-city.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow
sufficient time to meet your access needs.
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES — MAY10, 2022
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Amanda Nichols called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ricky Downing, Melissa Jensen, Jerri MacConnell, Saul Mekies, Orville
Townsend
MEMBERS ABSENT: Stuart Vander Vegte
STAFF PRESENT: Staff Kellie Fruehling, Tammy Neumann, Legal Counsel Patrick Ford
OTHERS PRESENT: Iowa City Police Captain Scott Gaarde, CPRB Liaison — Councilor Laura
Bergus
RECOMMENATIONS TO COUNCIL
(1) Accept CPRB #22-01 Report
(2) Accept CPRB #22-02 Report
(3) Accept CPRB #22-03 Report
(4) Accept CPRB #22-05 Report
CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion by Townsend, seconded by Jensen, to adopt the consent calendar as presented.
• Minutes of the meeting on 04/12/2022
• Minutes of the Community Forum on 04/20/2022
• ICPD General Order 00-01 (Search and Seizure)
• ICPD Policy Manual — (306 Firearms)
• ICPD Quarterly Summary Report IAIR/CPRB, 1 st Quarter 2022
Motion carried 6/0, Vander Vegte absent.
NEW BUSINESS
Discussion of Draft Ordinance 8-8 Amendment
Legal Counsel for the CPRB, Pat Ford, presented his proposed amendments to the Community Police
Review Board ordinance. These amendments are to sections 8-8-5(B)(6), 8-8-7(B)(1), 8-8-7(13)(2),
8-8-7(B)(3), and 8-8-7(B)(4). The board discussed the proposed changes which are included in a memo
from Pat Ford to the Board dated April 6, 2022 and is included in the CPRB meeting packet of May 10,
2022.
Motion by Mekies, seconded by Nichols, to accept the proposed amendments to the Community Police
Review Board ordinance as presented.
Motion carried 6/0, Vander Vegte absent.
OLD BUSINESS
Community Forum:
Nichols asked for a volunteer from the Board to write a summary of the Community Forum held on April
20, 2022. Mekies volunteered to write the meeting summary.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION
None
BOARD INFORMATION
MacConnell shared that there was recently a negative article written about police review boards and
asked if the board would like to respond. Board members agreed that no response will be written.
MacConnell asked for clarification regarding the Boards title, stating that while it is referred to as the
Community Police Review Board, it is also referred to as the "Advisory Board. Nichols responded that
the Board's title is the Community Police Review Board, and it reviews complaints and advises council
on their recommendation, therefore, it is both.
STAFF INFORMATION
Townsend noted that there are times when a report is handwritten, and it is illegible. He asked what the
Board's options are in these cases. Nichols suggested that the board would set the level of review at 8-
8-7(B)(1)(b), Interview/meet with the Complainant. Legal Counsel Pat Ford will draft this in a memo and
send to the Board.
Townsend suggested that there be a rotation schedule set for board members to write complaint
reports. After some discussion, the board decided to table this suggestion.
MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS
• June 14, 2022, 5:30 p.m., Emma J. Harvat Hall
• July 12, 2022, 5:30 p.m., Dale Helling Conference Room
• August 9, 2022, 5:30 p.m., Emma J. Harvat Hall
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Motion by Jensen, seconded by MacConnell, to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section
21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or
federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's
possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential
personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school
districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized
elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are
made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to
the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of
government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to
that government body if they were available for general public examination.
Motion carried 6t0, Vander Vegte absent. Open session adjourned at 5:53 p.m.
CPRB
May 10, 2022
DRAFT
REGULAR SESSION
Returned to open session at 7:03 p.m.
Motion by Townsend, seconded by Jensen to accept the Public Report as amended for CPRB
Complaint #22-01 and forward to City Council.
Motion Carried 5/0, Nichols abstained, Vander Vegte absent.
Motion by Townsend, seconded by Downing, to accept the Public Report as amended for CPRB
Complaint #22-02 and forward to City Council.
Motion Carried 5/0, Nichols abstained, Vander Vegte absent.
Motion by MacConnell, seconded by Jensen, to accept the Public Report as amended for CPRB
Complaint #22-03 and forward to City Council.
Motion Carried 5/0, Nichols abstained, Vander Vegte absent.
Motion by Townsend, seconded by Jensen, to accept the Public Report as amended for CPRB
Complaint #22-05 and forward to City Council.
Motion Carried 5/0, Nichols abstained, Vander Vegte absent.
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Townsend, seconded by Jensen, to adjourn the meeting at 7:05.
Motion carried 6/0, Vander Vegte absent.
0
1.
7.
j
N
N
(�
e
N
Na
x
x
k
i
x
x
j
j
x
x
e0
N
N
o
x
x
X
I
x
o
j
I
x
x
e
N
O
N
o
ry
e
ry
0
j
j
x
j
x
x
o
j
k
9
w
H
j
j
k
j
X
x
O
j
x
j
O
P
j
x
j
x
x
x
M
j
j
x
j
x
x
x
j
x
i
j
j
x
j
j
x
j
x
X
j
b
ti
v
c
of
�>
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
A Board of the City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-1826
(319) 356-5041
Date: May 10, 2022
To. City Council
Complainant
City Manager
Chief of Police
Officer(s) involved in complaint
From: Community Police Review Board
Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint # 22 - 01
This is the Report of the Community Police Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of
Complaint CPRB # 22-01 (the "Complaint").
BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY:
Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, the Board's responsibilities are as follows:
1. The Board forwards all complaints to the Police Chief, who completes an investigation. (Iowa
City Code Section 8-8-7(A).)
2. When the Board receives the Police Chiefs report, the Board must select one or more of the
following levels of review, in accordance with Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(13)(1):
a. On the record with no additional investigation.
b. Interview /meet with complainant.
c. Interview /meet with named officer(s) and other officers.
d. Request additional investigation by the police chief, or request police assistance in the
board's own investigation.
e. Perform its own investigation with the authority to subpoena witnesses. o
f. Hire independent investigators.
3. In reviewing the Police Chiefs report, the Board must apply a "reasonable basis" standard of
review. This means that the Board must give deference to the Police Chiefs repoiK because of
the Police Chiefs professional expertise. (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(-2)).)
4. According to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2), the Board can recommend-that.the Police
Chief reverse or modify the Chiefs findings only if:
a. The findings are not supported by substantial evidence; or
b. The findings are unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious; or
c. The findings are contrary to a police department policy or practice, or any federal, state
or local law.
5. When the Board has completed its review of the Police Chiefs report, the Board issues a public
report to the city council. The public report must include: (1) detailed findings of fact; and (2) a
clearly articulated conclusion explaining why and the extent to which the complaint is either
"sustained" or "not sustained ". (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(3)).)
6. Even if the Board finds that the complaint is sustained, the Board has no authority to discipline
the officer involved.
BOARD'S PROCEDURE:
The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on January 18, 2022. As required by Section
8-8-5(B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation.
The Chiefs Report was filed with the City Clerk on March 11, 2022. As per Section 8-8-6(D) of the City
Code, the Complainant was given the opportunity to respond to the Chiefs report and did not do so.
The Board voted on April 12, 2021 to apply the following Level of Review to the Chiefs Report: on the
record with no additional investigation, pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1)(a).
The Board met to consider the Report on April 12, 2022 and May 10, 2022.
Prior to the May 10, 2022 meeting, the Board had the opportunity to review the complaint and the
Police Chiefs report, and to watch and listen to body worn camera and/or in -car camera footage
showing the interaction between the officers and complainant.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
On January 18, 2022, the following complaint numbered 22 — 01 was received. The individual
submitted a complaint that the police department neglected their duty to protect the complainant's child.
Officers provided multiple resources to the complainant to provide assistance in dealing with ongoing
problems with the minor child and other minors in the neighborhood. ICPD's victim services coordinator
and mental health liaison have both contacted the complainant. Members of the. Iowa bity Community
School District were contacted to assist with the issues as well.
ALLEGATION 1 — Violation of Rules and Regulations 315 Duty and Responsibilifies --
Chief's Conclusion — Not Sustained -°
Board's Conclusion — Not Sustained o
«i
Basis for the Board's conclusion:
CPRB felt that the findings of the Police Chiefs investigation were accurate and well documented.
The officers did their duty as well as making efforts to be helpful to the Complainant's situation.
After reviewing incidents involving the complainant and the child there is no cause to show adequate
services were not provided. Issues were investigated and handled properly. Additional support and
nonpolice resources were recommended to the family.
ALLEGATION 2 — Violation of GO 01-01 Bias -Based Policing
Chief's Conclusion — Not Sustained
Board's Conclusion — Not Sustained
Basis for the Board's conclusion:
There is no evidence that the officer showing bias towards the complainant or the family based on race,
religion, national origin, or cultural group.
The information provided by the complainant was inconsistent with the evidence captured on video.
COMMENTS:
None.
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
A Board of the City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-1826
(319) 356-5041
Date: May 10, 2022
To: City Council
Complainant
City Manager
Chief of Police
Officers) involved in complaint
From: Community Police Review Board
Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint #22-02
This is the Report of the Community Police Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of
Complaint CPRB #22-02 (the "Complaint").
BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY:
Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, the Board's responsibilities are as follows:
1. The Board forwards all complaints to the Police Chief, who completes an investigation. (Iowa City
Code Section 8-8-7(A).)
2. When the Board receives the Police Chiefs report, the Board must select one or more of the
following levels of review, in accordance with Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1):
a. On the record with no additional investigation.
b. Interview (meet with complainant.
c. Interviewlmeet with named officer(s) and other officers.
d. Request additional investigation by the police chief, or request police assistance in the
board's own investigation.
e. Perform its own investigation with the authority to subpoena witnesses.
f. Hire independent investigators. _
3. In reviewing the Police Chiefs report, the Board must apply a "reasonable basis" standard of
review. This means that the Board must give deference to the Police Chiefs report, f7LbCause of the
Police Chiefs professional expertise. (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2)).)- "-
-: j
4. According to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2), the Board can recommend that the Police Chief
reverse or modify the Chiefs findings only if:
cJ
a. The findings are not supported by substantial evidence; or
b. The findings are unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious; or
c. The findings are contrary to a police department policy or practice, or any federal, state,
or local law.
5. When the Board has completed its review of the Police Chiefs report, the Board issues a public
report to the city council. The public report must Include: (1) detailed findings of fact; and (2) a
clearly articulated conclusion explaining why and the extent to which the complaint is either
"sustained" or "not sustained ". (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(3)).)
6. Even if the Board finds that the complaint is sustained, the Board has no authority to discipline the
officer involved.
BOARD'S PROCEDURE:
The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on January 20, 2022. As required by Section
8-8-5(B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation.
The Chiefs Report was filed with the City Clerk on March 11, 2022. As per Section 8-8-6(D) of the City
Code, the Complainant was given the opportunity to respond to the Chiefs report and did not do so.
The Board voted on April 12, 2022 to apply the following Level of Review to the Chiefs Report: On the
record with no additional investigation, pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1)(a).
The Board met to consider the Report on April 12, 2022 and May 10, 2022.
Prior to the April 12, 2022 meeting, the Board had the opportunity to review the complaint, the Police
Chiefs report, and to watch and listen to body worn camera and/or in -car camera footage showing the
interaction between the officers and the complainant and the complainant's child.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
On December 2, 2021, officers received a report of a subject armed with a knife threatening people at
the neighborhood center. Upon officers arrival, the subject had left the area. Officers then observed a
person running with a knife, and this person appeared to be following another individual. The officer
ordered the person to stop, and realizing this was a child, he pulled his taser as opposed to his
weapon. The officer ordered the child to drop the knife and lay on the ground. Further investigation led
officers to the complainant's residence, where it was determined the complainant had threatened
individuals at the neighborhood center, and after leaving, gave the knife to the child. ThVcomplainant
was arrested, and custody of the child turned over to the other parent. The child,was notSharged as it
was later believed the child was not running after anyone, and was running away, with t6d knife, while
others were running away.
COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION #1 — Excessive use of force. 77
Chief's conclusion: Not sustained
Board's conclusion: Not sustained
Basis for the Board's Conclusion:
The complainant alleges excessive force was used on the minor child, and that officers slammed the
child down, sprayed the child with pepper spray, and took the knife from the child. The officer who
encountered the child followed department policy when he pointed his taser at the child and did not
slam or touch the child while the child was laying on the ground, nor did the officer use pepper spray.
The officers also did not take the knife from the child's pocket. A review of the video from responding
officers supports this conclusion.
COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION #2 — False arrest.
Chiefs conclusion: Not sustained
Board's conclusion: Not sustained
Basis for the Board's Conclusion.
The complainant alleges being arrested for something the complainant did not do. The arrest was
based on multiple victim and witness statements, the complainant's statements, and observations from
the officers. Officers were accommodating to the complainant and family, and there was no force used
during the arrest. A review of the video from responding officers supports this conclusion.
COMMENTS:
None
Q
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
A Board of the City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-1826
(319)356-5041
Date: May 10, 2022
To: City Council
Complainant _
City Manager t
Chief of Police — '-
Officer(s) involved in complaint
From: Community Police Review Board,
Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint #22-03 �' n
This is the Report of the Community Police Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of
Complaint CPRB #22-03 (the "Complaint").
BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY:
Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, the Board's responsibilities are as follows:
1. The Board forwards all complaints to the Police Chief, who completes an investigation. (Iowa City Code
Section 8-8-7(A).)
2. When the Board receives the Police Chiefs report, the Board must select one or more of the following
levels of review, in accordance with Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1):
a On the record with no additional investigation.
b. Interview /meet with complainant.
c. Interview /meet with named officer(s) and other officers.
d. Request additional investigation by the police chief, or request police assistance in the board's own
investigation.
e. Perform its own investigation with the authority to subpoena witnesses.
f. Hire independent investigators.
3. In reviewing the Police Chiefs report, the Board must apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review. This
means that the Board must give deference to the Police Chiefs report, because of the Police Chiefs
professional expertise. (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2)).)
4. According to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2), the Board can recommend that the Police Chief reverse
or modify the Chiefs findings only if:
a. The findings are not supported by substantial evidence; or
b. The findings are unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious; or
c. The findings are contrary to a police department policy or practice, or any federal, state, or local law.
5. When the Board has completed its review of the Police Chiefs report, the Board issues a public report to
the city council. The public report must include: (1) detailed findings of fact: and (2) a clearly articulated
conclusion explaining why and the extent to which the complaint is either "sustained" or "not sustained ".
(Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(13)(3)).)
6. PEven if the Board finds that the complaint is sustained, the Board has no authority to discipline the officer
involved.
BOARD'S PROCEDURE:
The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on January 25, 2022. As required by Section
8-8-5(B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation.
The Chiefs Report was filed with the City Clerk on April 1, 2022, As per Section 8-8-6(D) of the City Code, the
Complainant was given the opportunity to respond to the Chiefs report. The Board voted on April 12, 2022 to
apply the following Level of Review to the Chiefs Report: On the record with no additional investigation,
pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1)(a).
The Board met to consider the Report on April 12, 2022 and May 10, 2022.
Prior to the April 12, 2022 meeting, the Board had the opportunity to review the complaint, the Police Chiefs
report, and to watch and listen to body worn camera and/or in -car camera footage showing the interaction
between the officers and the complainant.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
On 12/28/2021 Police responded to a possible break-in and property damage. From several police body
camera views, and the officer explaining to the complainant that the evidence that the corridor provided was
not consistent with a break-in and property damage. The police advised complainant to talk with the landlord
regarding differences with neighbors.
COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION #1 — Neglect of duty .
Chief's conclusion: Not sustained
Board's conclusion: Not sustained
Basis for the Board's conclusion:
Upon review of video, the Board determined that the officer followed departmental policy and procedure in
investigating the incident. The officer responded to the complainant's request for assistance, conducted a
proper investigation, was professional in the officer's interactions, and took a report. The officer could not
determine who broke into the apartment and did not have probable cause to arrest complainant's neighbor. If
the officer believed there were indications that complainant could have caused the damage to his own door,
there is nothing in policy/procedure or law that prevents the officer from confronting complainant with this as
part of the investigation.
Q
!.fI
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
A Board of the City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-1826
(319)356-5041
May 3, 2022
To: City Council
Complainant
City Manager
Chief of
Police
Officer(s) involved in complaint
From: Community Police Review Board
Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint#22-05
This is the Report of the Community Police Review Board's (the 'Board") review of the investigation
of Complaint CPRB #22-05 (the "Complaint").
BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY:
Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, the Board's responsibilities are as follows:
1. The Board forwards all complaints to the Police Chief, who completes an investigation.
(Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(A).)
2. When the Board receives the Police Chiefs report, the Board must select one or more of
the following levels of review, in accordance with Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(8)(1):
a. On the record with no additional investigation." a. No additional investigation.*
b. Interview /meet with complainant.
c. Interview /meet with named officer(s) and otherofficers.
d. Request additional investigation by the police chief, or request police assistance
in the board's own investigation.
e. Perform its own investigation with the authority to subpoena witnesses..-.--.
f. Hire independent investigators. T
3. In reviewing the Police Chiefs report, the Board ?111 ill. apply a "reasonable basis" standard
of review. This means that the Board must give deference to the Police Chiefs report,
because of the Police Chiefs professional expertise. (Iowa City Code Section 8-S 7(8)(2)).)
CD
4. According to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(8X2), the Board can recommend that1he
Police Chief reverse or modify the Chiefs findings Q11 & if:
a. The findings are not supported by substantial evidence; or
b. The findings are unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious; or
c. The findings are contrary to a police department policy or practice, or any federal,
state, or local law.
5. When the Board has completed its review of the Police Chiefs report, the Board issues a
public report to the city council- The public report must include: (1) detailed findings of fact;
and (2) a clearly articulated conclusion explaining why and the extent to which the complaint is
either "sustained" or "not sustained". (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(8)(3)).)
6. Even if the Board finds that the complaint is sustained, the Board has no authority to discipline
the officer involved.
The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on February 16, 2022. As required by
Section 8-8-5(8) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for
investigation.
The Chiefs Report was filed with the City Clerk on March 11, 2022. As per Section 8-8-6(0) of
the City Code, the Complainant was given the opportunity to respond to the Chiefs report.
There was no response made by the individual who made the complaint. ,
The Board voted on April 12, 2022 to apply the following Level of Review to the Chiefs Report: On
the record with no additional investigation, pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(8)(1)(a).
The Board met to consider the Report on April 12, 2022 and May 10, 2022.
Prior to the April 12, 2022 meeting, the Board had the opportunity to review the complaint, the
Police Chiefs report, and to watch and listen to body worn camera and/or in -car camera footage
showing the interaction between the officers and the complainant.
The complainant alleged that the officer who stopped the complainant car for exceeding the speed limit
was rude and made the complainant cry. The complainant alleged that the officer was aggressive and
belittling. After viewing the body cam of the officer, it was observed that the officer was professional in
his manner and behavior. The complainant did not appear to be crying. The Police Review Board felt
that no further investigation was needed and did not sustain the complainants claim. The officer acted
professionally and was in compliance within the ICPD policy.
COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION: Discourtesy -
Chief's conclusion: Notsustained -
Board's conclusion: Not sustained
Baafs or the Bogird'sconclusion:
After viewing the officer's body cam, it was determined that actions reported in the complai6f were not
congruent with the video evidence. The body cam showed nothing of the description of the written
complaint.
COMMENT&
None.
TO:
Chief Dustin Liston
FROM:
Sgt. Andrew McKnight
RE:
February 2022 Use of Force Review
DATE:
May 12th, 2022
The Iowa City Police Department policy requires an employee to complete a written report for any reportable
use of force. Reportable use of force is defined in the Department's General Order 99-05, which is titled Use
of Force and available for public viewing on the department's website. This policy provides employees with
guidelines on the use of deadly and non -deadly force.
Upon receipt of the report, the supervisor is responsible for completing an administrative critique of the
force. This process includes interviews with involved employees, body worn and in -car camera review,
review of any additional available video, and review of written reports. The employee's use of force report
and the supervisor's critique is then forwarded to the Captain of Field Operations and the Chief of Police for
final review and critique.
On a monthly basis, the previous month's use of force reports and supervisor critiques are reviewed by an
administrative review committee consisting of a minimum of three sworn personnel. This Use of Force
Committee consists of two supervisors as designated by the Chief of Police and one officer, typically a
certified use of force instructor.
The Use of Force Review Committee met on May 12th, 2022. It was composed of Sgt. McKnight, Sgt.K.
Bailey, and Officer Niles Mercer.
For the review of submitted reports in February, the Review Committee documented the following:
• 30 individual officers were involved in 12 separate incidents requiring use of force.
• There were no documented cases of an officer exercising his/her duty to intervene and the review of the
incidents did not indicate that an officer failed their duty to intervene.
• Out of the 12 uses of force, 11 involved force being used against people. The other 1 was an animal being
euthanized by an officer.
Out of the 30 officers involved in the 11 uses of force against people, 1 superficial injury was sustte�to a c
suspect and 1 superficial injury was sustained by an officer. ,, a
• No violations of policy were noted during this review period.
• Out of the 11 uses of force against people, arrests were made 10 times (90%). tD¢ o
• Mental health was identified by officers as being a factor in five of the uses of force used againsts8fi; ro
(45%).
• Drugs and/or alcohol was identified by officers as being a factor in eight of the 11 uses of force against persons
(73%).
• Out of the 11 times force was used on a person, three were identified as white females (27%), three were
identified as white males (27%), one was identified as black female (10%), four were identified as black males
(36%).
• Out of the 12 uses of force, the average number of officers involved in the force was 2.5
• In total during this time, the ICPD had 4,453 calls for service with 12 calls for service resulting in force being
used. It is noted that one of the 12 uses of force involved animals and not humans.
The highest level of force in each incident is reflected below along with the year-to-date:
Force Used
February 2022 Occurrences
2022 Year -to -Date
Hands-on
6
19
Taser Display
I
1
Taser Discharge
1
1
OC Spray Deployment
0
0
Firearms Display
3
4
Firearms Discharge
0
0
ASP Striking
0
0
Officer Striking/Kicking
0
0
Animals Euthanized by Officer
1
4
Special Response Team Callouts
0
1
Vehicle Pursuits
0
0
Officer Injuries
I
1
Suspect Iniuries
1
3
Reports to U.S. DOJ
0
0
Total Use of Force incidents to date equal 33. Total calls for service in the same period equal 9265. This
results in a year-to-date use of force being deployed in .35% of our total year-to-date calls for service.
IpWA CIy+Y
February
IOWA CITY '1 i '
Use 1 i Report
I
P6LICE
IpWA CITY
POLICE
Watch
Occurred
and
Officers
Involved
Date
Incident
Number
Incident
type
Arrest
Made
YIN
Force Used
Evening
2/3
2022000834
Domestic
Y
Officers responded to a
Watch —
Abuse
residence where a domestic
Two
assault was in progress. Upon
Officers
arrival, an officer heard a
female scream for help and
observed a male subject
actively punching a female in
the face. An officer drew their
taser and pointed it towards
the male subject commanding
them to stop and put their
hands up. He dropped to his
knees, put his hands up,
placed his hands behind his
back and an officer placed
handcuffs on each wrist.
Another officer worked with
the female half of the
altercation who became
belligerent and upset when
she realized that the male
subject was going to be taken
to jail. The female subject
squared up to officers
adopting a fighting stance,
making statements that she
was going to kill herself. It
was discovered that the
female subject had an active
arrest warrant and was told
that she would be transported
to jail. While at the jail a
decision was made to have
her medically evaluated and
the subject was taken to
City Clerk
Iowa City, Iowa February 2022 Use of Force Report
hospital. While at the hospital,
staff asked if the subject's
handcuffs could be removed
so that she could sign some
documents. Given that the
subject had been compliant,
the handcuffs were removed.
The subject signed some
documents then asked if she
was going to jail. Once this
was confirmed the subject
became belligerent, throwing a
covid mask at the officer,
pushing near their chest. The
subject was then told to put
her hands behind her back for
handcuffing. An officer took
hold of her arms, pulled them
behind her back and placed
handcuffs on both wrists. The
subject continued to pull away
and was told to sit down. One
officer took hold of the
subject's right elbow and told
them to sit in a nearby chair.
The subject continued to pull
away and an officer took hold
of the subject's right arm and
pulled the subject down into a
seated position. The subject
continued to thrash her body
around causing the officers
body worn camera to fly off,
breaking the camera's clip.
While the subject was seated,
an officer took hold of the
subject's right bicep with their
right hand and placed their
forearm across the shoulder
area, pushing on her torso to
the left, holding the subject
making it difficult for her to
continue resisting. The
medical evaluation was then
—
completed without injury to the
officer or subject.
City Clerk
Iowa City, Iowa February 2022 Use of Force Report
Evening
2t3
2022000838
Traffic
Y
An officer initiated a traffic stop
Watch —
Stop
on a vehicle that was driving
One Officer
the wrong way down a one
way. The driver of the vehicle
attempted to switch seats with
the passenger. When the
officer approached the vehicle,
the occupants were reaching
down towards the ground with
their hands in-between the
seats. An officer drew their
sidearm and pointed it towards
the driver of the vehicle
ordering them to exit the
vehicle. The driver exited the
vehicle. put her hands behind
her back and an officer placed
handcuffs on each wrist.
There were no injuries to the
subject or officers.
Late Night
2/9
2022000980
Warrant
Y
Officers located a subject who
Watch —
Service
had an active arrest warrant.
Three
The subject was placed into
Officers
handcuffs without issue. As
the subject was being
escorted to a nearby squad
car, he became upset that he
was not being allowed to make
a phone call at that precise
moment. The subject then
refused to enter the squad car
multiple times, instead pulling
away from officers. One officer
took hold of the subject's left
bicep with their right hand.
The subject continued to tense
his body and pull away from
the officer. Another officer took
hold of his sweatshirt and
pulled the subject towards the
squad car. One officer took
the palms of their hands and
pushed the subject in the
F I
chest, forcing them into the
vehicle. The subject
continued to kick out towards
JbN 0 6 2022
City Clerk February 2022 Use of Force Report
Iowa City, Iowa
the officers, refusing to sit in
the vehicle. The subject
refused to place his legs inside
the vehicle and an officer took
hold of the subject's belt, lifted
him out of the vehicle and
placed him on the ground.
The subject continued to kick
towards officers, so an officer
placed him into leg restraints
making it difficult for the
subject to continue to kick out.
One officer took hold of the
subject's hood with their right
hand and used their left hand
to hold on to the subject's
waist. Another officer took hold
of the subject's leg restraints
with their right arm and took
hold of the subject's sweatshirt
with their other hand, lifting the
subject off the ground and into
the squad car. An officer went
to the opposite end of the
vehicle, took hold of the
subject's shirt and pulled him
into the vehicle, closing the
door. There were no injuries
to the subject or officers.
Late Night
2/10
2022000983
Suspicious
Y
Officers were dispatched to a
Watch —
Activity
residence for reports of
One Officer
suspicious activity in the form
of an unknown male turning a
door handle asking for help.
An officer arrived and
observed a gun out of its
holster at the feet of the
unidentified male. Another
officer arrived on scene, drew
their sidearm and held it at the
low -ready while the male was
told to put his hands behind
his back. The male complied
and an officer placed and
secured handcuffs on each
JUN 0 Q 1012
City Clerk February 2022 Use of Force Report
Iowa City, Iowa
wrist. There were no injuries
to the officer or suspect.
Late Night
2/14
2022001091
Weapons
Y
Officers responded near a
Watch —
Offense
residence for reports of an
One Officer
armed male subject who had
slammed his pistol against an
occupied vehicle. Upon
arrival, an officer heard two -
gun shots and immediately
deployed their patrol rifle and
went towards the gun fire. An
officer located a male subject
matching the description given
in an alley way and the male
subject began walking towards
the officer. The officer pointed
their weapon at the subject,
ordering the subject to stop
walking and to keep their
hands visible. At one point the
subject placed his hands near
his waistband and the officer
told the subject to put his
hands on his head. The
subject complied and another
officer arrived and placed
handcuffs on the subject's
wrists without incident. A
handgun was recovered from
the subject's person. There
were no injuries to officers or
the subject.
Late Night
2/16
2022001134
Mental
N
Officers encountered a male
Watch — Six
Crisis
who was having a mental
Officers
health crisis. The male
believed that his family had
been murdered and that there
was going to be a school
shooting at a local school.
None of this was true and the
individual was talking about
being from another dimension
and clearly needed psychiatric
stabilization. Officers told the
subject that he needed to go
to the hospital, and he walked
Jun U ti 7dfCL
City Clerk February 2022 Use of Force Report
Iowa Cify, Iowa
away. One officer took hold of
his left arm to prevent him
from walking away. Another
officer took hold of the
subject's backpack which was
on his back, holding the
subject in place. The subject
continued to pull away and
thrash around. Another officer
took hold of the subject's right
arm and placed their foot in
front of the subject's right leg,
tripping the subject and
guiding him to the ground.
Another officer assisted
guiding the subject to the
ground by holding the
subject's left leg with their right
hand as the subject was
placed on the ground. Once
on the ground the subject lay
on his stomach refusing to put
his arms behind his back.
Two officers pulled the
subject's left and right arms
from under the subject. At one
point the subject attempted to
bite an officer. The officer's
pulled the subject's arms from
underneath his body and
another officer completed the
handcuffing process. At the
paramedic's request, the
subject was held in place while
paramedics administered
chemical sedation. There
were no injuries to the subject
and one officer sustained
superficial iniuries.
Evening
2/16
2022001165
Fight in
Y
Officers responded to the
Watch —
Progress
winter shelter after staff
Two
reported that a verbal
Officers
altercation was escalating. An
intoxicated female was
located, and officers observed
her screaming at another
City �'lerl$ February 2022 Use of Force Report
'
10wa'C4ty, lam
individual attempting to punch
her. To prevent the assault
from continuing, an officer took
hold of her arms and pulled
them behind her back and
walked her to the exit. Once
outside, the subject fell to her
knees and an officer placed
handcuffs on each wrist. The
subject refused to walk so one
officer placed their left arm
under her right arm pit and
lifted her off the ground.
Another officer took hold of her
left arm and assisted with
lifting and placing her into the
vehicle. There were no
injuries to the officers or the
subject.
Evening
2t18
2022001222
Trespass
Y
Officers responded to a local
Watch —
business for reports of an
Four
intoxicated individual who was
Officers
trespassing refusing to leave
the business. Dispatch also
stated that the female had
assaulted staff. One officer
provided the option of having
the female go to the hospital
for an evaluation, but the
female refused, instead
electing to walk aggressively
to engage officers. The
subject was told she was
under arrest and one officer
took hold of her left hand with
both hands telling the subject
to put her hands behind her
back. The subject continued
to pull away from officers. An
officer pulled down on the
subject's wrist causing her to
lay on her stomach. Another
officer arrived and pushed
down on the subject's
e
shoulders to keep her on the
F I LEDround.
Officers ulled the
JUN 0 E 2022
February 2022 Use of Force Report
City Clerk
Iowa City, .lowa
subject's arms behind her
back and one officer placed a
handcuff on the subject's left
wrist and another officer
completed the handcuffing by
placing handcuffs on the
subject's right wrist. Another
officer had to straddle her right
leg to prevent her from kicking
out towards officers. The
subject was placed into a
standing position but refused
to walk, instead dropping to
the ground. Officers
positioned themselves on both
sides as they lifted the subject
under her arm pits towards
and inside the vehicle. The
subject's legs were outside the
vehicle and she kicked an
officer in the leg. Another
officer went to the opposite
side of the vehicle, took hold
of the subject's right arm and
left shoulder and pulled her
into the vehicle. The subject
continued to kick out at
officers so one officer applied
a pain control technique by
applying pressure under the
jaw line in order to gain
compliance. The subject's
legs were placed into the
vehicle, the door was closed,
and the subject was
transported to jail. There were
no injuries to the subject or
officers.
Evening
2/19
2022001251
Mental
Y
Officers responded to a
Watch — Six
Crisis
residence for reports of violent
Officers
subject who had ingested
psilocybin mushrooms.
Dispatch also advised that
there was broken glass
everywhere and that there was
L
�
lots of screamin comin from
JUN 0 6 2022
February 2022 Use of Force Report
City Clerk
Iowa City, Iowa
the residence. As officers
arrived, a female subject
reported that there was a
violent male in the household
fighting, and that her brother
was also in the household and
she believed that he may be
deceased. As officers entered
the residence, they
encountered a male subject
incoherently screaming, flailing
his arms around then
concealing his hands in the
pockets of his sweatshirt. The
subject then turned and hit an
officer in their chest. An
officer took hold of the
subject's left arm with both of
their hands, but the subject
continued his assaultive
behavior. In an attempt to
control the subject, and to
prevent further harm, an
officer rushed the subject in an
attempt to tackle him to the
ground. One officer took hold
of the subject's shirt, pulling
the subject onto a piece of
furniture, holding the subject
as other officers deployed their
tasers towards the subject as
he continued to fight. The
taser deployments had no
effect and the subject punched
two officers in the face. An
officer got up as another
officer deployed another taser
which had the desired effect
and incapacitated the subject.
Once on the ground the
subject refused to place his
hands behind his back and an
officer deployed a chemical
irritant to the subject's face.
An officer took hold of the
subject's right wrist, pulling his
JUN 0 fl 2022
City Clerk February 2022 Use of Force Report
Iowa City, Iowa
arm behind his back, holding it
in the small of his back where
an officer placed hand cuffs on
both wrists. The subject
attempted to stand so an
officer pushed on the subject's
lower back to keep him face
down on the ground. The
subject slipped out of his
handcuffs and one officer sat
on the subject's legs as he
attempted to kick out. One
officer grabbed the subject's
right wrist with both hands,
pulled his arm behind his back
while another officer pulled his
left arm behind his back and
placed the subject back into
handcuffs. The subject
continued to kick out and
attempt to stand so one officer
crossed his left calf over his
right shin and two officers held
his legs in place to prevent
him from kicking out. The
subject was then chemically
sedated by paramedics and
transported to hospital for
treatment for his overdose. An
officer encountered a second
subject who had also
overdosed. The male subject
was laying on the floor and an
officer attempted to assist him
to his feet, but he refused to
stand. An officer placed their
arms under his armpits and
pulled the subject to his feet.
An officer took hold of the
subject's wrist to assist him
out of the residence however
the subject would not comply
with instructions to walk out to
the ambulance. An officer
pulled the subject's wrist
behind his back and placed
.IUN 0 6 2022
City Clerk February 2022 Use of Force Report
Iowa City, Iowa
him into handcuffs. The
subject walked under his own
power to an ambulance and
was transported for an
evaluation. There were no
injuries sustained by officers
and one subject had
superficial injuries.
Late Night
2t23
2022001332
Injured
N
Injured Deer shot and killed by
Watch —
Animal
officer
One Officer
Day Watch
2/24
2022001363
Trespass
Y
Officers responded to a
— Two
business for reports of a
Officers
female refusing to leave.
Officers told the female that
she would be cited and
released for trespass, but the
female refused to sign the
ticket and began walking
away. One officer stood in
front of the subject to prevent
her from walking away. The
subject continued to walk
away, and an officer took hold
of the subject's right arm,
stating that she was under
arrest. The subject tensed her
body and pulled away from the
officer. Another officer took
hold of her left arm and placed
a handcuff on her left wrist,
pulling the subject's arm
behind her back. She
continued to pull away from
officers so the officer's used
their hands to push her and
hold her up against a nearby
window, pulling her hands
behind her back placing
handcuffs on her right wrist
completing the process. The
subject then refused to get into
a nearby squad car so one
=
officer pushed her into the
J
vehicle with their right hand on
HIM n
7n7s
her stomach and left hand on
City Clerk
Iowa City, Iowa February 2022 Use of Force Report
her chest. The other officer
pulled the subject's upper
body into the vehicle and the
subject placed their legs into
the vehicle and the door was
shut. There were no injuries
to the subject or officers.
Late Night
2125
2022001392
Fight in
Y
Officers were dispatched to a
Watch —
Progress
local bar for reports of a fight.
One Officer
Upon arrival, one officer
observed bar staff restraining
a subject on the ground. An
officer helped the subject off
the ground and the subject
began to walk away from the
officer. The subject then
began to step up towards the
officer in an aggressive
manner and the officer placed
their hand on his chest to
create distance. It was then
discovered that the subject
had an active arrest warrant,
and a decision was made to
arrest the subject. The officer
pulled the subject's arms
behind his back and placed
handcuffs on each wrist. The
subject continued to pull away
from the officer. The subject
refused to sit in the officer's
vehicle and so an officer
applied pressure to his upper
thigh with their right hand
causing the subject's legs to
buckle, causing him to remain
in a seated position. The
subject was transported to jail
without injury to the subject or
officer.
FILED
JUN 0 6 2022
February 2022 Use of Force Report
City Clerk
Iowa City, Iowa
Page I
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD (CPRB) COMMUNITY FORUM: SUMMARY
Wednesday, April 20, 2022 — 6:00 PM
Electronic Zoom Meeting Platform
CPRB Members Present: Ricky Downing, Melissa Jensen, Jerri MacConnell, Saul Mekies
Amanda Nichols, Orville Townsend, Stuart Vander Vegte.
Staff Present: Kellie Fruehling, Tammy Neumann
Others present: Patrick Ford, Legal Counsel, Laura Bergus, City Council Liaison,
Dustin Liston, ICPD Police Chief
The Iowa City Community Police Review Board (CPRB) held the annual Community Forum on
Wednesday, April 20, 2022 at 6 p.m.
Board member Melissa Jensen called the meeting to order.
Board members were asked to introduce themselves.
No correspondence was received pertaining to this forum.
Orville Townsend conveyed the thrust of the role of the CPRB communication noting that Iowa
City is one of the few cities in the country with such a Board. Essentially, the Board hears and
reviews complaints by the public, noting that the CPRB also has an opportunity to give input to
the City Council.
Jensen asked for a clarification on the use of the words "sustain" and "not sustain" when the
Board considers complaints. Ford (legal counsel) gave the following explanation: "sustained
complaints mean we agree with the complainant, the citizen, who has made a complaint of
wrongful conduct by an officer, and not sustained means the opposite." In other words, "not
sustained" means the Board does not agree with the complainant." Townsend added that the
Board thrives for fairness by looking at the evidence presented in the complaint, video clips, and
the difficult situations that officers encounter.
In lieu of lack of public participation in this forum, Nichols discussed recommendations by
CPRB to the City Council that have been implemented, namely the following:
• Expansion of the board from five to seven members
• Change to allow a complainant a chance to respond to the chief's report; in the past the
CPRB would only receive complaints directly from the public but now also receives
complaints filed with the Iowa City Police Department
• CPRB now receives valuable additional data on a quarterly basis
• The statute of limitations to file a complaint has been lengthened from 90 days to 180
days
Page 2
Addressing the Board through a chat sent to the Board, a member of the public (Redmond Jones
II) asked Board members their view of recent events surrounding "a greater number of police
shootings, excessive force, and other issues that has driven a wedge between the police
department and the community," and steps taken to "build trust between the police department
and the community outside."
Nichols and Townsend responded by asserting that one of the CPRB's goals is to facilitate the
kind of communication that encourages the public to communicate with the Board. Nichols
added that past recommendations to the City Council that have not been implemented will be
brought up again. MacConnell added that the Police Dept. now has a "non -police" liaison able to
address mental health issues and other social issues. Nichols added that the equity director also
receives a copy of the complaint.
In answer to a question (Martha Shaw) about the percentage of "sustained," vs. "non -sustained"
complaints, Fruehling indicated that the information is included in the annual report to the City
Council. Nichols asked for more clarification/accessibility on that data.
Seeing no other input from the public or other Board members, Nichols called for an
adjournment.
The community forum adjourned at 6:48 p.m.
Page 1
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD COMMUNITY FORUM
Wednesday, April 20, 2022 — 6:00 PM
Electronic Zoom Meeting Platform
CPRB Members Present: Ricky Downing, Melissa Jensen, Jerri MacConnell, Saul Mekies
Amanda Nichols, Orville Townsend, Stuart Vander Vegte.
Staff Present: Kellie Fruehling, Tammy Neumann
Others present: Patrick Ford, Legal Counsel, Laura Bergus, City Council
Liaison, Dustin Liston, ICPD Police Chief
Call to order:
Jensen: All right, I'd like to go ahead and call the meeting to order. This would be the
Community Police Review Board Community Forum. Can we go ahead and have
a roll call please?
Jensen: Okay just, this, this is Melissa again for what it's worth. Um I show that that my
camera is on but I'm not seeing a screen so just if you'd make a note of that. I
apologize. Um I'd like to welcome everybody to the Community Forum, and we
will go ahead, and I'd like to do an introduction of the board. Again, if I could
get some assistance with that that would be good.
Neumann: Okay, urn, if each of you could, uh, we'll start with...Melissa, why don't we just
go ahead and start with you.
Jensen: Okay. All right. My name is Melissa Jensen. I've been an Iowa City resident
probably 24 years and uh previously on the Community Police Review Board. I
stepped away for a while to another city board and now I'm back uh to provide uh
support, assistance and work here in Iowa City at Mercy Hospital and uh welcome
everybody to who's been able to join us
Neumann: Thanks Melissa. Um Saul, would you introduce yourself. Uh no, I still can't hear
you. Um okay. I don't know Kellie if you can take a look at Saul's? Uh so we'll
go next to Stuart then, if you could introduce yourself.
Vander Vegte: Can you hear me okay?
Neumann: Yes
Vander Vegte: Okay good. My microphone wasn't working. I'm Steve Vander Vegte. I've only
lived here for about 3 years now. Um I work here at Mobile Crisis Counseling
which, uh, is an organization that helps people in mental health crisis, um, and
helps the police out uh quite a bit at times to deal uh the community in crisis. Um
I was in the military, worked with the uh the military police in there, and I've
Page 2
always had a good working relationship in the various communities with the
officers I worked with and uh I'm going to enjoy working with the board. Thank
you.
Neumann: Thank you. Okay, Jerri, can you introduce yourself.
MacConnell: Hi. I'm Jerri MacConnell. I've lived in Iowa city for about 12 years now and I've
been on the board for about a year and a half, I think. Um, I was a psychiatric
social worker when I lived in Cleveland. Um, I, I, um, I practiced for 23 years and
then I moved to Iowa, and I'd like um to be able to give input to some of the
emotional and psychiatric issues that come up on the board.
Neumann: Great. Thank you. Ricky?
Downing: Yeah Hi. Um, my name is Ricky Downing. Um, I've lived in Iowa City since
1980. Um I worked as a, a nurse for 34 years at the V.A. and also retired from the
military. Um, and I'm learning to be a fulltime grandpa which is great.
Neumann: Wonderful. Orville, could you introduce yourself, and we can see you now. And
you are muted I believe.
Townsend: Okay, I'm Orville Townsend and I've been in Iowa City since 1962. Uh, when I
first came to Iowa City, it was a difference scene, different racial atmosphere, So,
during the years that I've been here, after I graduated, I tried to be involved in as
many civic activities as po, possible. Mainly my philosophy is if you see
something wrong, uh, or they say they see something, I say try to get involved and
make a difference. Uh I'm on my second term with the Community Police
Review Board and I'd like to point out that Iowa City is one of the few cities in
the country that has the Community Police Review Board.
Neumann: Thank you. Saul, um, you are muted so if you could unmute yourself and see if
we can hear you. And I see you are unmuted but we still cannot hear you. Um.
MacConnell: Tom his volume up.
Neumann: Well, my volume is up. I don't think that's the issue. Um. Okay. Well Saul, I
guess we'll see what we can, if we can hear you at some point. Um Patrick, I
don't know if you want to introduce yourself.
Ford: Yeah sure. Hi everybody, my name is Pat Ford. I'm uh actually not a board
member, I'm an attorney at the Leff Law Firm in Iowa City and I am ub counsel
for the board. So, I'm independent counsel, I'm not employed by the City and
I've been uh counsel for the board for seven or eight years now.
Neumann: Thank you all. Um, Melissa do you want to take it over again.
Jensen: All right. Do you want me to take it back or give it back to Orville?
Townsend: No, you can, you can take it.
Page 3
Jensen: Thanks Orville. Okay. Uh Item number 3 on the agenda is to Consider motion to
accept correspondence and/or documents. I don't have the correspondence in
front of me, so um Orville,1, go ahead Tammy.
Neumann: I did not mean to interrupt you. We did not receive any correspondence
Jensen: Okay
Neumann: So, you can move on then to item number 4, which is, yeah..
Jensen: Okay, Item number four is Community, communicating, excuse me, with the
CPRB, who we are and what we do.
Neumann: That's correct. Are you able to, to elaborate on that?
Townsend: I can take that one if she's...
Neumann: That sounds good Orville
Townsend: ...not comfortable with it.
Jensen: Sure, that's fine Orville, thank you
Townsend: Um, we are the Community Police Review Board and as I mentioned earlier, Iowa
City is one of the few cities in the country that has one. Uh, our function is, is that
if a citizen feels that he or she in terms of their contact or communication with the
uh Iowa City Police Department, if they feel that they've been treated unfairly or
did not receive the level of respect that uh they feel they were due, they can file a
complaint with the Community Police Review Board. Once that complaint is
filed, it basically gives information to board members to give us a chance to
review the material and uh included in that material is the Police Chief report on
the complaint. Each complaint is made, the police chief assess the situation and
gives his uh, uh, urn ruling on whether or not the officer acted appropriately or
inappropriately. Uh, once he files his report, then the board, we get that report and
then we have a chance to look at any other information. Uh as you know our
police officers have uh body cameras, uh squad cars have camcorders on the
dash, so we have an opportunity to go in and look at information and after we've
done that then we as a board can get together and make a ruling on whether we
feel the officer acted appropriately or inappropriately. And that is whether that
we will sustain or not sustain that officers uh, uh actions. Uh, one of the things
that I find very positive about the board, we also have an opportunity to make
recommendations to the City Council. We are an advisory board and one of our
functions is to try to do everything we can to make the system better. Thank you.
Jensen: Okay, other, other board members anybody like to um you know add anything.
Orville thank you for that. That was, um, you did a great job. Anybody else want
to add to a um a little tidbit to uh kind of our experiences or things we'd like to
share with those attending the meeting? Okay. I'm not uh, not hearing anything
Page 4
additional so I'd like to go ahead and move to item number five on the agenda,
Public Discussion. So, I do know that we have some attendees so um Tammy, I
don't know if there is anything additional we need to do with um for an attendee
to comment but or to share their concerns.
Neumann: Uh, actually I'm going to turn that over to Kellie, I...
Jensen: Okay
Neumann: ...I can see.
Fruehling: Yeah, it looks like everybody is, is on zoom and not on a phone call. So, if you
want to use the raise hand button if you want to ask a questions or um talk to the
board about anything, uh just raise your hand and we'll we'll call on you and I'll
promote you to uh to a panelist. Don't be shy.
Jensen: So, I've gotta, I can jump in maybe and get it started. I've heard people ask this
question before and I don't know if anybody's had this or not. When we talk
about sustain or not sustain, I think that's confusing. Um, and if we could talk
about that a little bit. I don't know, Pat, if you want to speak to that or anybody
else but that's something that I've had questions about is what that really means.
Ford: Sorry, did you all want me to comment about that.
Jensen: I mean that's find if you'd like to. I just thought that was something that we've
had questions about in the past. That might be helpful.
Ford: Okay. Yeah sure. So, the language of sustained or not sustained when it refers to a
complaint comes directly from the ordinance that creates the CPRB Board. And
so, what that actually means is the board is determining whether to sustain the
complaints that are in the written document submitted by the complainant. So, uh
sustained complaints means we agree with the complainant, the citizen, uh who
has made a complaint uh are of uh wrongful conduct by an officer and not
sustained means the opposite. Meaning that the board decided that they do not
agree with the complainant and thinks that uh the chiefs ruling on the issue was
correct.
Jensen: Okay. Thank you. Anybody, anybody else.
Fruehling: Melissa, Amanda, Amanda is on. She must have gotten connected so.
Jensen: Okay
Fruehling: Oh, and you're muted.
Nichols: I apologize. It is still telling me on my computer that it is waiting for the host to
start the meeting. I don't know why. Um, and then I thought to try from my phone
and it's working from my phone just fine, so I apologize to everybody.
Townsend: Welcome
Page 5
Jensen: Welcome. Do I get, does this mean I get to turn it back over to Amanda?
Nichols: Yes, I can, I can take over.
Jensen: Okay. We were at item number five, the public discussion.
Nichols: Okay
Jensen: If that's helpful.
Nichols: Thank you
Townsend: One of the things that I would share is from looking at complaints over the years
is that, you know, we've had complaints uh filed, that when you look at all the
material, initially it looks like the you know person that filed the complaint may
have a valid reason. But then as we continue to look at the complaint and we look
at all the available material then we find that there are other things involved and,
and you know the person making the complaint they see just certain things and
they uh determine how they feel about it and a lot of times they are just looking at
one thing but when you look at what the officers responsibility is in terms of the
action that he or she has initiated it makes a big difference. So, you know, I think
we have to find a true balance and we basically want to make sure that the person
filing the complaints rights haven't been violated but we also have to look at the
reality that our officers are daily put into situations where they have to perform
their duties and it's not an easy thing to do and they don't always get the
outcomes that they'd like to. But basically, all in all I think they're doing a good
job.
Nichols: Do we have any members of the public with any questions. I don't see any hands
raised right now. Um but we are welcoming both questions and input. One of the
things that we do have the ability to do is make recommendations to policy
changes, so I'm always interested in hearing what the community thinks about
that since that is who we are serving. So, please feel free to raise your hand if
anybody has any questions or comments at any point in time.
Nichols: Um, have we talked about the changes that have been made to the board this year.
Jensen: We have not.
Nichols: Okay. So, last year we submitted recommendations for changes to the Iowa City
Council and some of those changes have been implemented. Um, we have
expanded the board from five to seven members whom are here tonight are newly
appointed members from that expansion. Um, we have changed, the code has
been changed to allow a complainant a chance to respond to the chiefs report.
Previously the complainant would get one chance to make their complaint in
writing. They would then receive the police chiefs report, when we receive the
police chief reports and then we would do our own independent investigation.
There's now an additional step where if the complainant gets the police chiefs
Page 6
report back and has anything that they want to add or dispute they do have a
chance to respond to that before we complete our investigation_ That was
approved May of last year. We also used to only get complaints that were filed
directly with us. Community members can file a complaint against an officer
either directly with the Iowa City Police Department or with the Community
Police Review Board. IF they were file directly with the Police Department, we
would never see those. Now those do get forwarded to us on a monthly basement,
or monthly basis. The chief agreed to that one. Um, we're also getting some
additional data in our quarterly report that we did not used to receive. And the
statute of limitations to file a complaint has been lengthened from ninety days to
A hundred and eighty days, which is more in line with some of the other boards
and commissions in town and the deadlines that they have. Anyone have any
questions, questions or comments about any of those changes?
Townsend: Uh, yeah, I don't have any comments about the changes, but I would just like to
share that you know when it comes to uh police and the citizens a lot of times
people kind of adapt attitudes that it's us against them. And, and, you know with
the Community Police Review Board this definitely isn't the case. For example,
you know, our police chief attends all of our meetings and when he can't attend,
he sends a representative. So, you know, he's involved, he's there to give us
input, and basically, you know, that's a big plus. So, you know I, I've, I've been
really impressed with the way things are set up. Also, you know, the board has,
we have our own attorney that's been appointed for us so anytime we run across
issues that have legal boundaries that we are not comfortable with, you know, we
can turn to our attorney and get uh you know uh feedback in terms of the direction
we should take. So, you know, what I'd really like, you know, the citizens to walk
away with is to focus more on the efforts that the City has put in place to protect
the citizens' rights and give the citizens a voice.
Nichols: Thank you Orville. I would like to clarify um for community members that the
police chief or chief's representative um is present for the public part of the
meeting, does leave for the executive sessions when we actually discuss
complaints and do our investigation and the lawyer is present for the entire
meeting for both parts of that. Did we go over the process for filing a complaint?
Has that been discussed tonight?
Townsend: I think so.
Jensen: So, Orville to you talked a little bit about who we are and what we do. I, I wonder
if um the process itself, though, like how when a complaint is filed kind of in
general what happens, like how, when a complaint is filed, kind of in general
what happens. Like how there's time, timing attached to each of the steps and
things like that. If that would be helpful or not.
Page 7
Nichols: Okay Yeah, um. I'm trying to find what I was looking for for this part. Um, so,
from the time of an incident any person that has personal knowledge of an
incident involving Iowa City police officer has a hundred and eighty days to file
an initial complaint. Um, after they filed that initial complaint, they will then
receive a report back from the chief of police after their initial investigation is
done. I want to say too that the person can have a support person with them
through every step of the process when they go into the police department to file a
complaint if they choose to do it that way. Um, Otherwise, our complaint forms
are now available online on the City website if you just Google the Iowa City
Community Police Review Board you'll get to our area, and there is a link to file
a complaint online now. Um after the police chief finishes his investigation and
files a report, that report goes to the complainant and to us at the Community
Police Review Board. And, then the complainant has 21 days from the time of the
police chief s report to give a response to that report which we will then also get,
and the police chief will get, and the police chief has 10 days left to respond to
that at which point we then make a decision as to what level of review we're
going to set the complaint at. Um, if we think we that we have enough
information that we can discuss and make a decision as to whether was a violation
or an act of misconduct or whether we need more information. And if we need
more information there are a few different levels of review that we set that at that
allow us to either request an interview with the complainant, which is always up
to the complainant to consent to or not if they would like to speak with us and
give us more information or um if they don't, they can always decline that and
that can be over the phone or in person. Um and then we have 90 days to write
our report as whether or not we think that the complaint should be sustained or
not sustained based on ... one of the levels of review is also to review footage. We
can review body cam footage and dash cam footage and our report is due like I
said within 90 days to City Council. And then that report is public with
identifying information removed. So, the names of the complainant and the names
of the officers are not made public, but the rest of the report is. Anybody think
that I, did I leave anything out? Anybody have any questions about that?
Fruehling: Amanda there is a comment in the chat. Do you want to read that?
Nichols: Let me, it's on my phone instead of
Fruehling: Oh. I certainly can if you can't see it very well.
Townsend: Could you go ahead and read that.
Fruehling: Sure. Um it says,'as you know the country has witnessed over the recent years a
greater number of police shootings, excessive force, and other issues that has
driven a wedge between the police department and the community. Uh they're
interested in hearing from the board their impressions of recent events. Uh Grand
Rapids is an example, and if there are things that they can help build trust between
Page 8
the police department and the community outside of strictly handling complaints.
(asked by Redmond Jones II)
Townsend: Can I take a shot at that, to begin with.
Nichols: Yeah. I think that part of that is largely where our community forums and our
ability to make recommendations to policy comes in. I think that there are
definitely a lot of avenues through policy to reduce some of those situations and
reduce some of the harm that can come from policing, um, and that is something
that I'm really hoping to hear more of from the community as well in regards to
suggestions for things that they would like to see us work on to that end.
Townsend: And I would just like to share that, I'm big on communication and we're fortunate
that if a citizen has a concern that has to do with law enforcement, you can
contact the police department and request a meeting with the police chief.
Because, you know, it's like, if you're not aware that a situation exists, you can't
begin to put things in place to improve or rectify.
MacConnell: I was going to say also that we only take complaints regarding Iowa City police
officers. We don't take any complaints from Coralville or uh University policy or
other departments. We get some people trying to complain through there and we
have to refer them back to their own departments.
Nichols: Yes, Coralville does have their own CPRB now and the university has a safety
and security committee um that people can direct complaints to in those areas.
Um and I also want to say that in off of what Orville said, in addition to being
able to directly talk to the police chief, um I want to also emphasize that we
recognize, at least I recognize that um if someone feels that they have been
harmed by an officer that that might be something that is not comfortable or does
not feel safe, and that is one of the reasons that we exist as a third party to file a
complaint with. Um, again you can do that online now. Um you do not have to go
into the police department, and you are able to have a support person with you
through every step of the process to help you fill out those forms um with you if
you do choose to meet and talk with us if we have more questions for you
afterwards, etcetera. There, there are multiple avenues for making those
complaints.
Townsend: I would just like to touch upon in the area that we don't talk about that much, and
that's mental illness. And uh as you know, ind individuals when they're having a
mental illness episode uh you know they're not coherent in terms of what they're
doing but I, I would say that from what I've seen over the years that I've been on
the police review board, and just looking at materials that the training that our
officers receive is really advantageous to that particular population.
MacConnell: And the department does have policy for the police officers how how to deal with
it, it's in the manual and urn that's one of the things that we can look at also. The
Page 9
standard of review has to be on the re, how a reasonable officer would react. Um,
so that's one of the main things. We want to be fair to the public and we want to
be fair to the police officers and that can be a balancing act. But again, the board
has lots of information that they can refer back to. By looking at the body cams,
by looking at the car cams, and by talking to the police officer and finding out
what the standards are and that type of thing.
Nichols: And I personally would still like to see us work on, we tried, um with our bias
based policing, um recommendation that we passed as a board that did not get
approved by the city um because of conflicts with state law um but I would like to
see us remove police from mental health circumstances as much as possible
through policy and I'm not quite ready to give up on that one yet. I'd like to keep
working on that as well for the rest of my term.
MacConnell: And the police department does have um a person, a liaison now, who is able to
go out and deal with mentally cases. They don't go originally because you don't
know well, recently not around here, but some police officers got killed going out
to domestic violence situation and um you also have to ensure the safety of
whomever is going out to intervene. Um the social person that acts with the police
goes out to follow-up on questions, um making sure people are getting services
that they need if it's mental health or if its sociological or whatever, but then the
individual always has the right to refuse to um take, act upon the
recommendations.
Fruehling: Amanda, I have another uh question in the chat and too if you want to address the
board, you can use thee raise hand button. But the question is, is a CPR complaint
form the same as the ICPD complaint form. If not, what are the differences.
(asked by Kathleen Thornton)
Nichols: Um they are separate forms. Um and I feel like I should know the answer to that
question, but I cannot honestly say off the top of my head what the differences are
other than where they are submitted to. That is something that we can look at
and ... I mean like I said I know that our form is available on the CPRB City site
um but I'm sure we could put up a side by side where we could include the one to
discuss adding the one directly to the department right next to that, um, I imagine.
Jensen: Amanda, does the um, when a complaint is filed, does the equity director also still
receive a copy of that complaint.
Nichols: As far as I know yes. I don't think there has been any change to that.
Jensen: Okay
Neumann: Um this is Tammy, Melissa, yes, she does receive a copy.
Jensen: Okay. Thank you
Page 10
Nichols: Do we have any other questions or comments from the community. Are there any
other board members that have anything?
Jensen: Amanda there is look like one more one more um comment in the chat, a question
in the chat. Can you see it.
Nichols: Is there data reflecting the number of complaints received and the number that are
sustained versus unsustained. (asked by Martha Shaw) I know that that data
exists. I believe um Tammy or Kellie can please tell me if I'm wrong about this.
On the website I know you can link directly to all of the public complaints. Does
that, is that summarized at the top or bottom there how many of those per year
were each way.
Fruehling: I'll take that one Tammy. Um we do, the board does do an annual um report uh
that does have the numbers. It's on a fiscal year and not a calendar year. Um but
there is also uh City Manager's office compiled a, a bunch of data that's on the
Black Lives Matter webpage. So, I think its icgov.orglBlackLivesMatter that has
um over time all of the information compiled uh and in a report on that webpage.
Nichols: Could we also, because I know that when we when you go to look at the public
report, they're in folders by years. Would it be possible to discuss having in each
of those folders just at the top before each report, before the list of all reports
having so many out of so many sustained in each fiscal year calendar.
Fruehling: We can have that we can have that as a discussion point at our next board
meeting.
Nichols: To make that information a little more accessible.
Townsend: Good Point.
Nichols: Do any other board members or city representatives have anything that we
haven't covered? Otherwise, I guess maybe another moment for public
opportunity for comment or question and if none come up then we look at
adjourning. Feel free to raise your hand if you have anything you would like to
add. Okay, um I will motion to adjourn.
Townsend: I'll second that.
Nichols: All those in favor
Nichols: Community forum adjourned at 6:48. Thank you
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 11, 2022
TO: CPRB Board Members
FROM: Patrick J. Ford
Re: proposed revision to Ordinance 8-8
At your request, and for your consideration, I am proposing that the following be inserted
as new subsection 8-8-3(F) of the CPRB ordinance:
If any portion of a handwritten complaint is so illegible that the Police Chief and/or
the board cannot determine either the complainant's understanding of the facts, or
the basis of the complainant's allegation of misconduct, then the Police Chief
and/or the board may request that the City Clerk contact the complainant for the
purpose of clarifying any such illegible words set forth in the handwritten complaint.
If the complainant fails to cooperate with the City Clerk in this regard, such failure
may be grounds for finding the complaint to be "not sustained", in the event the
Police Chief and/or the board cannot determine either the complainant's
understanding of the facts, or the basis of the complainant's allegation of
misconduct.
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 2, 2022
TO: City of Iowa City Council
FROM: Community Police Review Board Members
Re: proposed amendments to Ordinance 8-8 requested by the Community
Police Review Board
The members of the CPRB request that the City Council consider adopting the
following proposed revisions to the CPRB ordinance. (Suggested additions are shown
with underlined text and suggested deletions are shown with st-"k ogh text.)
1. Subsection 8-8-5(B)(6) shall be amended to read as follows:
In the event the board's decision differs from that of the Police Chief, the Chief shall
meet with the board in closed session to discuss the discrepancy of opinion. If the board
requests the City Manager's presence at said meeting the City Manager will also attend.
Such meeting shall take place prior to the issuance of the board's public report to the
City Council. Within seven days after such meeting. the Police Chief andlor City
Manager may, in the Police Chiefs or City Managers discretion issue an amended
Investigative report for the board's consideration.
2. Subsection 8-8-7(B)(1) shall be amended to read as follows:
The board shall review all Police Chiefs reports and City Manager's reports concerning
complaints. The board shall decide, on a simple majority vote, the level of review to give
each Police Chiefs or City Manager's report, and the board may select any or all of the
following levels of review:
a. On the record with no additional investigation.
b. Interview/meet with complainant.
C. interview/meet with named officer(s) and other officers.
d. Request additional investigation by the Police Chief or City Manager, or request
police assistance in the board's own investigation.
e. Perform its own investigation with the authority to subpoena witnesses.
Hire independent investigators.
Any time after the board selects a level of review, the board may, on a simple ma'orit
vote select any other or additional level of review.
3. Subsection 8-8-7(B)(2) shall be amended to read as follows:
The board shall apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review when reviewing the Police
Chiefs or City Manager's report. This requires the board to give deference to the Police
Chiefs or City Manager's report because of the Police Chiefs and City Manager's
respective professional expertise. The board may
city M issue a report that disagrees with the
decision set forth in the Police Chiefs and/or City Manager's report only if:
a. The Police Chiefs or Ci Mana er's findings and/or conclusions are not
supported by substantial evidence;
b. The Police Chiefs or City Manager's findings and/or conclusions are
unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious; or
a The Police Chiefs or City Mana er's findings and/or conclusions are contrary to
a Police Department policy or practice, or any Federal, State, or local law.
4. Subsection 8-8-7(B)(3) shall be amended to read as follows:
If, in accordance with said standard; the board affirms the decision of the Police Chief or
City Manager with respect to the allegations of misconduct but nonetheless has concern
about the officer's conduct or police practices, policies, or procedures, it may so
comment in its report to the City Council. If such comments are critical of the officer's
conduct the board shall provide the officer a name clearing hearing pursuant to
subsection M B7 of this section. When collecting and reviewing additional evidence, the
board shall rely on evidence which reasonably prudent persons are accustomed to rely
upon in the conduct of their serious affairs.
5. Subsection 8-8-7(B)(4) shall be amended to read as follows:
If the board disagrees with the decision of the Police Chief or City Manager with respect
to the allegations of misconduct, the board and the Police Chief and/or City Manager
shall meet in closed session to discuss their disagreement about the complaint. If the
board requests the City Manager's presence at its meeting with the Police Chief, the City
Manager will also attend. Such meeting shall take place prior to the issuance of the
board's public report to the City Council. Within seven days after such meeting, the
issue an amended investigative report for the board's consideration.
6. The following shall be inserted as new subsection 8-8-7(B)(5), and the subsequent
subsections shall be re -numbered accordingly:
8.
9,
10.
11.
12.
3
Any time prior to the issuance of the board's public report to the City Council, any
member of the board may make a motion to vote again on whether to sustain or not
sustain the complaint.
Subparagraph 8-8-7(B)(5) of shall be re -numbered as subparagraph (B)(6).
Subparagraph 8-8-7(B)(6) of shall be re -numbered as subparagraph (13)(7).
Subparagraph 8-8-7(B)(7) of shall be re -numbered as subparagraph (13)(8).
Subparagraph 8-8-7(B)(8) of shall be re -numbered as subparagraph (B)(9).
Subparagraph 8-8-7(B)(9) of shall be re -numbered as subparagraph (B)(10).
Subparagraph 8-8-7(B)(10) of shall be re -numbered as subparagraph (B)(11).
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
OFFICE CONTACTS
JUNE 2022
Date Description
None
June 14, 2022 Mtg Packet
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
COMPLAINT DEADLINES
CPRB Complaint #22.0&
Filed: 04/07/22
Chief's report due (90 days): 07/06/22
Chief's report filed: 06/01/22
Complainant's response to the Chief's report
(21 days to respond, no response received) 06/22/22
Chief/City Manager response to the
Complainant's response (10 days to respond): ??/??/??
CPRB meeting #1 (Review): ??/??/??
CPRB meeting #2 (Review): ??/??/??
CPRB report due ??/??/??
(90 days from the date of the Chief/City
Manager's response to the complainant
or Complainant's response deadline if
no response received)
CPRB Complaint_#22-07
Filed:
05/19/22
Chief's report due (90 days):
08/17/22
Chief's report filed:
??/??/??
Complainant's response to the Chief's report
??/??/??
(21 days to respond, no response received)
Chief/City Manager response to the
Complainant's response (10 days to respond):
??/??/??
CPRB meeting #1 (Review): ??/??/??
CPRB meeting #2 (Review): ??/??/??
CPRB report due ??/??/??
(90 days from the date of the Chief/City
Manager's response to the complainant
or Complainant's response deadline if
no response received)
June 14, 2022 Mtg Packet
CPRB Complaint #22-08
Filed:
Chief's report due (90 days):
Chief's report filed:
CPRB meeting #1 (Review):
CPRB meeting #2 (Review):
05/19/22
08/17/22
05/24/22
06/14/22
CPRB report due 08/22/22
(90 days from the date of the Chief's Report)
TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE
July 12, 2022
August 9, 2022
September 13, 2022
Updated 61812022
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
A Board of the City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City IA 52240-1826
(319)356-5043
Jerri MacConnell Term: July 1, 2019—June 30, 2023
320 E Washington St Apt 10-D
Iowa City, IA 52240
(H)319-333-1096
n e l li a 1896(dIg ma i l. com
Orville Townsend. Sr. Vice -Chair
713 Whiting Ave
Iowa City, IA 52245-5644
(H) 319-354-5995
(C) 319-331-3482
orville.townsend ahotma i I.com
Amanda Nichols
2713 East Court St
Iowa City, IA 52245
(C) 319-677-1153
d i rectorQcorridorcan.com
Saul Mekies
2151 Abbey Lane
Iowa City, IA 52246
smekiesC&kirkwood. ed u
Melissa Jensen
830 Elliot Ct.
Iowa City, IA 52246
(C)319-530-5490
tigger1033(&hotmai I. com
Ricky Downing
1112 Weeber Circle
Iowa City, IA 52246
(C)319-400-0931
rltd44 5.gmail.com
Stuart Vander Vegte
2625 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52245
(C)612-236-6128
stuartvv68na gmail.com
Term: July 1, 2020 — June 30, 2024
Term: July 1, 2020 — June 30, 2024
Term: July 1, 2021 —June 30, 2025
Term: July 1, 2021 — June 30, 2025
Term: Upon appointment — June 30, 2026
Term: Upon appointment — June 30, 2026
Updated 61812022
Patrick Ford, Legal Counsel
Leff Law Firm, L.L.P.
222 South Linn Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-1601
(0)319-338-7551
(C) 319-430-1549
fordalefflaw.com
City Council Liaison — Laura Ber us
319-541-9677
lau ra-beMus(a)iowa-city.org
CPRB Staff — Tamm_ v_ Neumann
319-356-5043
tamm-neumann Iowa-cit .or
City Clerk — Kellie Fruehling
319-356-5041
kel I ie-fruel i na(cDiowa-citv.orq
Equity Director -Stefanie Bowers
319-356-5022
stefanie-bowers@i0wa-city.org
Police Chief — Dustin Liston
319-356-5271
dusfin-Liston 0iowa-city. orq
City Legal- Sue Dulek
319-356-5030
sue -Du lek(a) iowa-city. org