Loading...
12-13-2021 Meeting PacketMEMORANDUM COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City DATE: December 9, 2021 TO: CPRB Members FROM: Chris Olney RE: Board Packet for meeting on MONDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2021 Enclosed please find the following documents for your review and comment at the next board meeting: • Agenda for 12/13/21 • Minutes of the meeting on 11/9/21 • ICPD General Order 21-02 (Crisis Intervention) • ICPD Use of Force Review/Report October • Correspondence from Kenn Bowen, Sabri Rose Sky, Pat Bowen, Zach Krisl, Kevo Rivers, Stephany Hoffelt, Ann Houlahan, Maureen Vasile, Iowa City Catholic Worker • Memo from City Manager — CPRB Expansion Ordinance Draft Office Contacts — November • Complaint Deadlines ITEM NO. 1 ITEM NO. 2 AGENDA COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD MONDAY DECEMBER 13, 2021 — 5:30 P.M. EMMA J HARVAT HALL 410 E. Washington Street CALL TO ORDER and ROLL CALL CONSIDER MOTION ADOPTING CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED • Minutes of the meeting on 11/9/21 • ICPD General Order 21-02 (Crisis Intervention) • ICPD Use of Force Review/Report October • Correspondence from Kenn Bowen, Sabri Rose Sky, Pat Bowen, Zach Krisl, Kevo Rivers, Stephany Hoffelt, Ann Houlahan, Maureen Vasile, Iowa City Catholic Worker ITEM NO. 3 NEW BUSINESS , • Meet Law Enforcement Liaison, Joah Seelos • Discussion CPRB advisory/review role and policy recommedations ITEM NO.4 OLD BUSINESS • Discussion of CPRB Recommendations to City Council 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 • January 11, 2022, 5:30 PM, Emma J Harvat Hall • February 8, 2022, 5:30 PM, Emma J Harvat Hall • March 8, 2022, 5:30 PM, Emma J Harvat Hall • April 12, 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 If you will need disability -related accommodations in order to participate in this program/event, please contact Chris Olney at 319-356-5043, christine-olney@iowa-city.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. CPRB-Page 2 December 13, 2021 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. 9 ADJOURNMENT DRAFT COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD MINUTES — November 9, 2021 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Amanda Nichols called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jerri MacConnell, Saul Mekies, Theresa Seeberger MEMBERS ABSENT: Orville Townsend STAFF PRESENT: Staff Chris Olney/Kellie Fruehling Legal Counsel Patrick Ford STAFF ABSENT: Legal Counsel Patrick Ford OTHERS PRESENT: Police Chief Dustin Liston, City Council Member Janice Weiner, CPRB Liaison RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL (1) Accept CPRB #21-01 Report (2) Accept CPRB #21-04 Report CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Seeberger, seconded by MacConnell, to adopt the consent calendar as presented. • Minutes of the meeting on 10/12/21 • Minutes of the meeting on 11/1/21 • ICPD Use of Force Review/Report August • ICPD Use of Force Review/Report September • ICPD Complaint Report Jan -Oct 2021 Seeberger noted the use of force report specifically referring to the 9/26 OWI incident and 9/5 knocking over a moped incident and asked Chief Liston to clarify as to what the standard operating procedure was for the drawing of a weapon. Chief Liston explained each individual scenario is specific to the circumstances and the standard procedure for drawing of a weapon is what is objectively reasonable from the officer's perspective at the time of the incident. Liston noted that every use of force incident including the drawing of a weapon is documented and is reviewed at 3 levels. Seeberger had concerns as to the reason why a weapon was drawn during the OWI arrest. Chief Liston will look into the report and provide more information for the Board at the next meeting. Seeberger asked about the ICPD complaint report and if those complaints would come to the CPRB. Chief Liston explained the report is internal complaints filed directly with the police department and the report is provided to the CPRB as information only. Nichols noted that a complaint could be filed directly with ICPD or with the CPRB, adding that previously the CPRB had not received information on ICPD complaints but will now because of the ordinance change which the CPRB had requested. Motion carried, 4/0, Townsend absent. CPRB November 9, 2021 NEW BUSINESS Draft Legal Counsel Contract Fruehling explained that the CPRB's Legal Counsel contract with Patrick Ford will end on January 31, 2022 and the Board had three options regarding the Counsel position. A. The City and vendor may renew the original contract for two additional three year time periods by mutual agreement. Either party may terminate the contract at any time, for any reasons. B. Renew and negotiate contract terms. C. Send out a new RFQ for Legal Services and go through the proposal process set by the Board. This would not foreclose Counsel Ford from being selected. Fruehling noted she had spoken with Counsel Ford and he would be willing to renew the contract at the current rate if the Board chose to do so. Fruehling explained the Board could further discuss Ford's employment status in closed session. The Board agreed to discuss the contract renewal options in closed session based on Section 21.5(1)(i) of the Code of Iowa 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. Discussion of Recommendation for ARPA Funds Nichols noted the City had requested input from Board/Commissions on suggestions for the spending of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds. Nichols stated she would like the CPRB to recommend that the funds are used for direct payment to undocumented workers as written in her draft letter to City Council. Nichols said that other Boards and Commissions had recommended the ARPA funds be used for undocumented workers and that the Board had received emails as a late meeting handout in support of the draft letter, which was included in the meeting packet. Mekies felt if the City was asking for the Boards opinion it did not necessarily mean the CPRB needed to as it was outside of the Boards purview. He stated he appreciated the opportunity to give an opinion but, in this case, it was not germane. Seeberger stated she was not opposed to what the letter recommended but felt it was not under the purview of the ordinance of what the CPRB existed for and that the Board was not in a position to recommend something outside of CPRB matters. MacConnell also felt it was outside of the CPRB's purview. Nichols stated she wanted to stand by the recommendation and noted it was the Boards responsibility to represent the public and that the City had asked all Boards and Commission for suggestions. Olney noted there were other options to respond as individuals by the on-line survey monkey or sending an email. Mekies felt this recommendation would open pandoras box and just because someone asked an opinion does not necessarily mean it had to be given. He asked to move to the next item on the CPRB November 9, 2021 Draft agenda. MacConnell agreed and felt it was a political topic and the CPRB should not express political views. A member of the public David Schwindt spoke and agreed with Mekies and other members that a letter on ARPA funds would be outside of the CPRB's purview and would not be appropriate. Discussion of Police Department Agreements with Agencies Seeberger explained she would like to have some type of agreement with outside police agencies that would compel them to cooperate with the CPRB's investigation when a complaint is submitted that involves Iowa City police working in conjunction with other agencies. Seeberger asked Chief Liston for his opinion. Chief Liston stated it would be difficult since there would be no leverage with other agencies. He noted some agencies have jurisdiction within Iowa City and regardless if ICPD was working with another agency, ICPD would follow its own policies, not the other agencies. Nichols stated she would support an agreement between other agencies and Seeberger added it would be beneficial to the CPRB on complaints that involve multiple agencies. Chief Liston noted the City Manager's preliminary plan included a proposal for a regional CPRB which would need to be agreed to by other agencies. Discussion CPRB Advisor /Review Board Role The Board agreed to table discussion to the next meeting when Townsend will be present. OLD BUSINESS Discussion of CPRB Recommendations to the City Council Nichols asked Board members if they had any comments regarding the memo included in the meeting packet from City Manager regarding the CPRB recommendations update. The Board had no questions or comments. Nichols reported that the CPRB proposed budget was complete and would be sent to City Council. PUBLIC DISCUSSION None. BOARD INFORMATION MacConnell suggested a future discussion regarding how the change to increase CPRB members would affect the time for discussion during a meeting. STAFF INFORMATION Fruehling reminded the Board of the opportunity to attend a Board/Commissioner training webinar on open meetings and public records. Chief Liston noted the ICPD was in the process of rewriting the policy manual and he would keep the Board informed as it rolls out in phases. TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS sub'ect to change) ■ December 14, 2021, 5:30 PM, Emma J Harvat Hall January 11, 2022, 5:30 PM, Emma J Harvat Hall ■ February 8, 2022, 5:30 PM, Emma J Harvat Hall CPRB November 9, 2021 Draft EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by Seeberger, 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, 4/0, Townsend'absent. Open session adjourned at 6:06 P.M. REGULAR SESSION Returned to open session at 6:35 P.M. Motion by Mekies, Seeberger, seconded by Mekies to forward CPRB #21-01 report to City Council. Motion Carried, 4/0, Townsend absent. Motion by Mekies, seconded by MacConnell to not consider CPRB complaint #21-04 based on lack of personal knowledge — City Code section 8-8-3 (B) definition of complaint and to forward report to City Council. Motion Carried, 4/0, Townsend absent. Motion by Mekies, seconded by MacConnell to retain CPRB Legal Counsel Patrick Ford and to extend contract for three years. AYES: MacConnell, Mekies. NAYS: Seeberger. ABSTAIN: Nichols. ABSENT: Townsend. Motion Carried, 2/1/1. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by Nichols, seconded by Townsend. Motion carried, 4/0, Townsend absent. Meeting adjourned at 7:29 P.M. n A 1-4 N O N O N 0 N x x x x c x x x x x a N N ti N x j x x O x ^O x i x I x o x 7 N M M N N Ix 00 x x x x z41 C d d .0R w UO e o ' A 'E 0- 4 d Z O GZ n 3 7w COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240-1826 (319) 356-5041 November 1, 2021 To: City Council Complainant City Manager Equity Director Chief of Police Officer(s) involved in complaint From: Community Police Review Board Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint #21-01 This is the Report of the Community Police Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of Complaint CPRB # 21-01 (the "Complaint"). The Board thanks the Complainant for bringing this matter to the Board's attention. Regardless of the outcome, it is people in the complainant's position that help keep a 'checks and balances' on police activity. BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, the Board's responsibilities are as-followE��, 1. The Board forwards all complaints to the Police Chief, who completes an investtgadi . (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(A).) 2. When the Board receives the Police Chiefs report, the Board must select ot'aeor mj3rje of the following levels of review, in accordance with Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7Mi'l ): , a 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(13)(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)(5).) 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 July 28, 2021. As required by Section 8-8-5(B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation. The Chief's Report was filed with the City Clerk on September 2, 2021. As per Iowa City Code Section 8-8-6(D), the Complainant was given the opportunity to respond to the Chief's report, no response was received. The Board voted on September 20, 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(13)(1)(a). The Board met to consider the Report on September 20, 2021, October 12, 2021 and November 1, 2021. Prior to the September 20, 2021 meeting, the Board had the opportunity to review the complaint, and watch and listen to body worn cams and/or dash cams that showed the entire.interacti between the officers and Person #1. Person #1 is the subject of the complaint. FINDINGS OF FACT On or about May 13, 2021, around 2:30 p.m., Officer A responded to a two vehiele_accfont in the Sycamore Mall area in Iowa City, Iowa. The two individuals involved in the accident°are referred to as Person #1 (P1) and Person #2 (P2). Officer A talked to both individuals.`The vehicles belonging to both individuals suffered minor damage. Officer A received competing versions of the cause of the accident from the two individuals, each saying the other was at fault. Officer A then talked to two independent witnesses who had remained on the scene. Witness #1 said she/he couldn't see what happened since trees were blocking her/his view. Witness #2 said she/he was able to observe the entire incident. Witness #2 said P1) was at fault since P1 pulled out in front of the car driven by P2 and did not yield as required by ordinance. There was no indication that either Witness #1 or 2 knew either P1 or P2. Prior to any decision being made by the officer as to who was at fault, P1 got on the phone and remained on the phone for the duration of the incident. Based on the information from the independent witness, Officer A prepared a ticket/citation and approached P1. The officer also told P1 that he didn't have SR -22 insurance. P1 corrected the officer that P1 no longer needed SR -22 insurance. The officer advised P1 that Officer A was issuing a citation to him/her and she/he needed her/him to sign and acknowledge it. P1 immediately responded that he/she wasn't taking the ticket. She/he walked away from Officer A. Officer A then stated to P1 that he/she was under arrest. Officer A continued saying that he/she needed to sign the ticket or 'come with me.' P1 stated he/she would not sign the ticket. Two other officers responded during this event. Officer B had arrived at the scene, apparently to ask Officer A a question. Officer B remained on the scene as emotions were escalating. Officer C was called to the scene later in an attempt to have a higher ranking officer, in this case a Sergeant, explain the citation process to P1. Both Officers B and C tried numerous times to explain to P1 that by signing the citation, P1 was not admitting guilt. Rather, the purpose of signing the citation was to acknowledge the charge and promise to appear in court at a date in the future to plead not guilty or guilty. They also explained to P1 that when people don't sign citations they can be arrested. P1 was not able to accept the explanation of any of the officers. Her/his words were misogynistic - making statements to the effect that he/she wasn't talking to women because their brains were not working. Allegation 1 - The reason for the two "police vans" to be called to investigate the accident. The Chief of Police notes in his report that one of the allegations is that two 'police vans' were called to investigate. He states that it was two SUV's. The board does not find this relevant to the complaint. So any complaint as to this issue is unsustained. The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager. Chief's Conclusion - Not sustained _ 3 Board's Conclusion - Not sustained -' Allegation 2 - Other person involved in the accident was immediately allowed Oleave. An allegation that P2 was allowed to leave immediately is unfounded and not sustained P2 stayed through the time that the independent witnesses gave statements to Officer A. The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager. Chief's Conclusion - Not sustained Board's Conclusion - Not sustained Allegation 3 - First two officers couldn't/wouldn't explain the purpose of the papers. All 3 Officers at various points throughout the incident made multiple attempts to explain the purpose of the papers. Officer A did not do a good or sufficient job of explaining the purpose of the papers until after she threatened to arrest P1. However, P1 immediately became agitated when told about the ticket, arguably putting Officer A in a position to believe he/she needed to assert some authority to maintain control of the situation. This will be further addressed under `comments.' The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager. Chief's Conclusion - Not sustained Board's Conclusion - Not sustained Allegation 4 — P1 was told he/she would be arrested if he/she didn't sign the papers. The papers were taken away from her/him so that he/she could not sign the papers, suggesting Officers never had any intention of letting him sign them. Officers had every intention of convincing [P1] to sign the citation and stated multiple times they did not want to take him to jail. The three officers all explained to [P1] that his signature on the citation was not an admission of guilt but an acknowledgement to take care of the ticket by appearing in court... [P1] refused to take the papers ... As such the officers never took the papers away from him removing his ability to sign them....' The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager. Chief's Conclusion - Not sustained Board's Conclusion - Not sustained Allegation 5 — The 3rd officer had his hand on the holster of his gun while talking to [Man #1]. While this is true, it is not against department policy and was not a show of unreasonable force. Man #1 did not appear threatened by this. Nonetheless Comments below will address this. The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager. Chief's Conclusion - Not sustained Board's Conclusion - Not sustained - cn -s COMMENTS 1) Prior to issuing a citation, an officer would preface the conversation with words to the effect: This is a notice to appear in court on [date] and plead not guilty or guilty. Signing this does not mean you are guilty of anything. The law states you have to sign this citation. In addition prior to giving the citation consider giving a brief statement of facts supporting it. For instance, in a case like this, say two independent witnesses said you pulled out in front of the other vehicle. Perhaps tell subject they can fight this in court. 2) Double check things like violations of SR -22 before telling someone that they are required to have SR -22 Insurance. 3) Officers should attempt to refrain from resting hands on holsters/guns/stun gun/ other weapons when in the public view. While these stances are normal to officers who carry a gun every day, many people have never even touched a gun and may feel intimidated or even threatened when an officer has his/her hand on a gun. This does not apply to situations when an officer believes, per recognized procedure, that he/she may need to use a weapon. CPRB REPORT OF #21-04 TO THE CITY COUNCIL i Re: Investigation of Complaint CPRB # 21-04 —_ _–] The board is without jurisdictional authority to consider CPRB Complaint #21-04, filed October 12, 2021, because the complainant lacked personal knowledge of the alleged misconduct. City Code section 8-8-3 (B) (Definition of Complaint; Complaint Process in General) provides as follows: B. Any person with personal knowledge of the alleged police misconduct may file a complaint with the board. In order to have "personal knowledge", the complainant must have been directly involved in the incident or witnessed the incident. If the person with personal knowledge is underage or otherwise unable to complete a complaint form, the complaint may be filed by such person's designated representative. The City Manager, the Police Chief, the City Council or the board itself may file a complaint based on a reasonable belief that police misconduct has occurred regardless of personal knowledge. The person or official filing the complaint may hereafter be referred to as the "complainant". DATED: November 9, 2021 CD ADM -08.1 Crisis intervention 1A. .1 4iy�r Date of Issue General Order Number December 6, 2021 21-02 Effective Date Section Code December 6, 2021 Reevaluation Date Amends /Cancels December 2024 PURPOSE This policy provides guidelines for interacting with those who may be experiencing a me ntal health or emotional crisis. Interaction with such individuals has the potential for misc ommunication and violence. It often requires an officer to make difficult judgments about a person's mental state and intent in order to effectively and legally interact with the indiv idual. II. POLICY The Iowa City Police Department is committed to providing a consistently high level of service to all members of the community and recognizes that persons in crisis may bene fit from intervention. The Department will collaborate, where feasible, with mental health professionals to develop an overall intervention strategy to guide its members' interactions with those experiencing a mental health crisis. This is to ensure equitable and safe treatment of all involved. :. III. DEFINITIONS Crisis Intervention: Emergency response to mental, emotional, and bgllavioral distress. Signs or symptoms may include: Loss of memory/disorientation ADM -08.2 Delusions -false beliefs not based on reality. The individual will often focus on persecution or feelings of grandeur. Depression Hallucinations -hearing voices, seeing, smelling, tasting, or feeling things. Manic behavior -accelerated thinking and speaking or hyperactivity with no or little need for sleep. Anxiety -feeling of intense panic or fright. Incoherence -difficulty expressing oneself or disconnected from ideas and thoughts. An episode in which a person creates significant or repeated disruptive disturbances and may be at risk of harm to themselves or others. Events in which a person is not able to use their cognitive and emotional capabilities, function in society or meet ordinary demands of everyday life. While in this condition individuals may not be able to control their thoughts, feelings, or actions. This may be permanent or temporary due to failure to take required medication, alcohol and/or drug abuse, or a traumatic event. Suicidal Subjects LE Liaison: For purposes of this policy LE Liaison shall mean the Foundation 2/CommUnity Contract Crisis Counselor assigned to the Iowa City Police Department or a member of the CommUnity Mobile Crisis Unit. IV. GUIDELINES A. Safety of the individual, responding public safety personnel, and the community is the priority. B. Officers will attempt to de-escalate the situation when safe and feasible. Preference is to stabilize in place, refer for treatment and avoid incarceration. C. Officers will utilize the on -duty Law Enforcement Liaison if available. The Liaison will normally work 10 am to 6pm. Officers are encouraged to utilize Mobile Crisis when appropriate. D. Officers will defer to the LE Liaison on scene regarding stabilization of individuals and whether the individual poses an immediate danger to themselves or others :requiring emergency commitment. The officer on scene has final authority to direct activities relating to the safety of responding officers, the LE Liaison and the public. E. Follow up with individuals will be the responsibility of the LE Liaison as Teemed necessary based on their experience. It is the responsibility of the LE Liaison to determine whether they should be accompanied by a uniformed offbarlor fvlfow Up'_ interactions. At a minimum they will notify the JECC of their arrival and`d0p6rtwpp from the location where the follow up is being conducted. r� ADM -08.3 V. PROCEDURES A. Initial Response 1. If the LE Liaison is available and it is safe and feasible, officers and the LE Liaison should respond together. 2. Any call involving an immediate threat to life, or which creates an imminent risk to public safety, shall be promptly addressed by on -duty personnel regardless of whether a LE Liaison is available to respond or not. a. While enroute to the call, officers will ascertain if the LE Liaison is available and, if so, ask JECC to dispatch them to the call as well. b. If the LE Liaison is not available, officers will respond as trained. B. Assessment The LE Liaison, or officers in the LE Liaison's absence, will evaluate the individual to determine their ability to care for themselves and to determine if the individual poses a threat to themselves or others. This assessment can be based upon the individual's words or actions. The presence of a trusted family member, acquaintance, or professional care giver should be considered as a mitigating factor. C. Community Care Taking Involuntary Committal 1. Iowa code 229.22 states "A peace officer who has reasonable grounds to believe that a person is mentally ill, and because of that illness is likely to physically injure themselves or others if not immediately detained, may without a warrant take or cause that person to be taken to the nearest available medical facility". a. An individual who is taken to a medical facility for an involuntary psychological evaluation will be transported via squad car or ambulance and not by the LE Liaison. b. Upon arrival at the hospital, officers and/or the LE Liaison will describe the circumstances to the attending physician and will wait at the hospital until released by medical staff. D. Voluntary Committal 1. If the individual does not pose a threat of harm to themselves or others, and no probable cause for an arrest is present, officers or the LE Liaisdn'will r make reasonable efforts to ensure the person's immediate safety needs am met. This could include referral to the Guide Link Center, homeless shelter, facilitating contact with a counselor, family member or other responsible person. 2. An individual who is taken to a medical or treatment facility on a voluntary basis for evaluation or treatment will be transported via squad car, ambulance or by the ADM -08.4 mental health liaison in their assigned work vehicle and in accordance with the operating procedures set forth by their employer. E. Arrest 1. If officers determine an individual in mental health/behavioral crisis warrants criminal charges a physical arrest should only be used as a last resort. 2. Officers should consider an alternative to immediate incarceration to include requesting an arrest warrant at a later date. F. Reports 1. LE liaisons are not authorized to query or view personal identifiable information contained in NCIC reports. When relevant, Records Department staff will forward redacted copies of reports, detailing interactions with mentally ill individuals, to the LE Liaison for possible follow up. 2. If an officer generates an incident report, the LE Liaison's involvement will be documented in the narrative portion of the report. LE Liaison's will generate their own reports, following HIPPA protocols, and these will not be attached to, shared with, or made part of any ICPD records or files. The purpose of documenting the existence of other reports will aid in the discovery process should it be necessary. Dustin Liston, Chief of Police WARNING This directive is for departmental use only and does not apply in any criminal or civil proceeding. The department policy should not be construed as a creation of a higher legal standard of safety or care in an evidentiary sense with respect to third -party claims. Violations of this directive will only form the basis for departmental administrative sanctions. r REDLINE VERSION Red highlights are deletions Green highlights are additions ADM -08.1 Crisis Intervention Date of Issue I General Order Number December 6, 2021 21-02 Effective Date Section Code December 6, 2021 - Reevaluation Date Amends / Cancels December 2024 N I. PURPOSE - - This policy provides guidelines for interacting with those who may be experiencir-Q a me ntai health or emotional crisis. Interaction with such individuals has the poteritial�JQr misc. ommunication and violence. It often requires an officer to make difficult judgments about a person's mental state and intent in order to effectively and legally interact with.itae indiv idual. II. POLICY The Iowa City Police Department is committed to providing a consistently high level of service to all members of the community and recognizes that persons in crisis may bene fit from intervention. The Department will collaborate, where feasible, with mental health professionals to develop an overall intervention strategy to guide its members' interactions with those experiencing a mental health crisis. This is to ensure equitable and safe treatment of all involved. III. DEFINITIONS Crisis Intervention: Emergency response to mental, emotional, and behavioral distress. Signs or symptoms may include: Loss of memory/disorientation ADM -08.2 Delusions -false beliefs not based on reality. The individual will often focus on persecution or feelings of grandeur. Depression Hallucinations -hearing voices, seeing, smelling, tasting, or feeling things. Manic behavior -accelerated thinking and speaking or hyperactivity with no or little need for sleep. Anxiety -feeling of intense panic or fright. Incoherence -difficulty expressing oneself or disconnected from ideas and thoughts. An episode in which a person creates significant or repeated disruptive disturbances and may be at risk of harm to themselves or others. Events in which a person is not able to use their cognitive and emotional capabilities, function in society or meet ordinary demands of everyday life. While in this condition individuals may not be able to control their thoughts, feelings, or actions. This may be permanent or temporary due to failure to take required medication, alcohol and/or drug abuse, or a traumatic event. Suicidal Subjects LE Liaison: For purposes of this policy LE Liaison shall mean the Foundation 2/CommUnity Contract Crisis Counselor assigned to the Iowa City Police Department or a member of the CommUnity Mobile Crisis Unit. IV. GUIDELINES A. Safety of the individual, responding public safety personnel, and the community is the priority. B. Officers will attempt to de-escalate the situation when safe and feasible. Ri�ference is to stabilize in place, refer for treatment and avoid incarceration. r� C. Officers will utilize the on -duty Law Enforcement Liaison if available. The Liaison Will normally work 10 am to 6pm. Officers are encouraged to utilize Mobile Crisis when appropriate. D. Officers will defer to the LE Liaison on scene regarding stabilization of mdiv_id4s and whether the individual poses an immediate banger to themselves or others requiring emergency commitment. The officer on scene has final authority to direct act'wities relating to the safety of responding officers, the LE Liaison and the public. E. Follow up with individuals will be the responsibility of the LE Liaison as deemed necessary based on their experience. It is the responsibility of the LE Liaison to determine whether they should be accompanied by a uniformed officer for follow up interactions. At a minimum they will notify the JECC of their arrival and departure from the location where the follow up is being conducted. ADM -08.3 V. PROCEDURES A. Initial Response 1. If the LE Liaison is available and it is safe and feasible, officers and the LE Liaison should respond together. 2. Any call involving an immediate threat to life, or which creates an imminent risk to public safety, shall be promptly addressed by on -duty personnel regardless of whether a LE Liaison is available to respond or not. a. While enroute to the call, officers will ascertain if the LE Liaison is available and, if so, ask JECC to dispatch them to the call as well. b. If the LE Liaison is not available, officers will respond as trained. B. Assessment The LE Liaison, or officers in the LE Liaison's absence, will evaluate the individual to determine their ability to care for themselves and to determine if the individual poses a threat to themselves or others. This assessment can be based upon the individual's words or actions. The presence of a trusted family member, acquaintance, or professional care giver should be considered as a mitigating factor. C. Community Care Taking Involuntary Committal 1. Iowa code 229.22 states "A peace officer who has reasonable grounds to believe that a person is mentally ill, and because of that illness is likely to physically injure themselves or others if not immediately detained, may without a warrant take or cause that person to be taken to the nearest available medical facility". a. An individual who is taken to a medical facility for an involuntary psychological evaluation will be transported via squad car or ambulance and not by the LE Liaison. b. Upon arrival at the hospital, officers and/or the LE Liaison will describe the circumstances to the attending physician and will wait at the hospital until released by medical staff. D. Voluntary Committal If the individual does not pose a threat of harm to themselves or other, and no probable cause for an arrest is present, officers or the LE Liaison will make reasonable efforts to ensure the person's immediate safety needs are met. This could include referral to the Guide Link Center, homeless shelter, facilitating contact with a counselor, family member or other responsible person. 2. An individual who is taken to a medical or treatment facility on a voluntary basis for evaluation or treatment will be transported via squad car, ambulance or by the ADM -08.4 mental health liaison in their assigned work vehicle and in accordance with the operating procedures set forth by their employer. E. Arrest 1. If officers determine an individual in mental health/behavioral crisis warrants criminal charges a physical arrest should only be used as a last resort. 2. Officers should consider an alternative to immediate incarceration to include requesting an arrest warrant at a later date. F. Reports T ' 'ffic6rs Shall utilize the crisis report authorized by the Department for documenting interactions with individuals experiencing a mental health and/or substance abUse and?or hauSing crisis. LE liaisons will be provided access to &4es di atint� follow up ane#. eferrad�.tO.,Legy&rn#4ggj irr providers. 2. LE liaisons are not authorized to query or view personal identifiable information contained in NCIC reports. When relevant, Records Department staff will forward redacted copies of reports, detailing interactions with mentally ill individuals, to the LE Liaison for possible follow up. 3. If an officer generates an incident report, the LE Liaison's involvement will be documented in the narrative portion of the report. LE Liaison's will generate their own reports, following HIPPA protocols, and these will not be attached to, shared with, or made part of any ICPD records or files. The purpose of documenting the existence of other reports will aid in the discovery process should it be necessary. Dustin Liston, Chief of Police WARNING This directive is for departmental use only and does not apply in any criminal or civil proceeding. The department policy should not be construed as a creation of a higher legal standard of safety or care in an evidentiary sense with respect to third -party claims. Violations of this directive will only form the basis for departmental administrative sanctions. TO: Chief Dustin Liston FROM: Sgt. Andrew McKnight w RE: October 2021 Use of Force Review DATE: December 7`h, 2021 = . The Iowa City Police Department policy requires an employee to complete a written report,_. f6r any,>oportable use of force. Reportable use of force is defined in the Department's General Order 99-05, _i6 is titled Use - of Force and available for public viewing on the department's website. This policy provideseoployees 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 December 7th, 2021. It was composed of Sgt. McKnight, Sgt. Fink, and Officer Fowler. For the review of submitted reports in October, the Review Committee documented the following: 67 individual officers were involved in 33 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 33 uses of force, 28 involved force being used against people. The other five were animals being euthanized by an officer. • Out of the 67 officers involved in the 28 uses of force against people, four superficial injuries were sustained to officers and four superficial injuries were sustained by suspects. • No violations of policy were noted during this review period. • Out of the 28 uses of force against people, 24 arrests were made (87%). • Mental health was identified by officers as being a factor in six of the uses of force used against persons (21%). • Drugs and/or alcohol was identified by officers as being a factor in twenty two of the 28 uses of force against persons (78%). • Out of the 28 times force was used on a person, eighteen were identified as White (64%), ten were identified as Black (36%). • Out of the 28 uses of force, the average number of officers involved in the force was 2.0 • In total during this time period, the ICPD had 5,923 calls for service with 33 calls for service resulting in force being used. It is noted that five of the 33 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 October 2021 Occurrences 2021 Year -to -Date Hands-on 12 83 Taser Display_3 11 I 9 Taser Discharge 2 OC Spray Deployment 9 13 Firearm(s) Display 2 23 Firearms Discharge 0 0 ASP Striking 0 0 Officer Striking/Kicking Striking/Kicking 0 3 Animals Euthanized by Officer 5 39 Special Response Team Callouts 0 1 Vehicle Pursuits 0 0 Officer Injuries 4 15 Suspect Injuries 4 15 Reports to U.S. DOJ 0 0 Total Use of Force incidents to date equal 200. Total calls for service in the same period equal 59,385. This results in a year-to-date use of force being deployed in .33% of our total year-to-date calls for service. ' IOWA CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT Use of Force Report J, October 2021 Watch Date Incident Incident Arrest Force Used Occurred Number type Made and Y/N Officers Involved Day Watch 10/1 2021007166 Injured N Injured deer shot and — Two Animal killed by officer Officers Day Watch 10/1 2021007169 Mental N Officers were dispatched — Two Crisis to a school at the request Officers of staff to assist with a student they described as f being out of control, threatening and assaultive. Officers stood by as staff members held G..., - the student in place to prevent continued assault. Staff walked the student to their father's vehicle and the student attempted to break free. One officer took hold of the student's left arm, the other officer took hold of his right wrist, twisting it into a wrist lock to prevent him from striking out. An officer used their other hand to hold the back of the student's jeans as he was walked to his father's vehicle. There were no injuries to the student or officers. Late -Night 10/2 2021007191 Public Y An officer attempted to Watch — Intoxication engage a subject who ran Three from the officer. After a Officers brief foot chase the October 2021 Use of Force Report October 2021 Use of Force Report subject stumbled and fell to his knees. An officer wrapped their arms around the subject's torso and held them on the ground. The subject continued to attempt to stand. Another officer pulled the subject's knees from under them, placing the subject face down on the ground. Another officer pulled the subject's arms behind their back and placed handcuffs on each wrist. There were no injuries to the subject or officers. Evening 10/2 2021007225 Injured N Injured deer shot and Watch — Animal killed by officer One Officer Late Night 10/2 2021007201 Domestic N Officers responded to a Watch — domestic where it was Three alleged that a female had Officers been thrown against a wall. Upon arrival, officers encountered a highly intoxicated female who complained of neck and facial pain. The subject continuously refused medical treatment from the paramedics and attempted to lock herself inside a bathroom. Based on the assessment by medical staff, she was unable to refuse medical care. One officer took hold of her right arm and secured a handcuff on her wrist, pulling her arm behind her back. Another officer pulled her other arm behind her back and laced her wrist into October 2021 Use of Force Report October 2021 Use of Force Report handcuffs. Paramedics brought a stretcher to the front door and she walked towards the stretcher. She then stopped walking and officers took hold of her arms and lifted her on to the stretcher. Once on the stretcher the subject slipped out of her left handcuff. One officer took hold of her arm and another officer re applied handcuffs. Paramedics strapped her to a stretcher and transported her for medical treatment. Late Night 10/4 2021007238 Public Y An officer observed an Watch — Intoxication individual carrying a One Officer traffic cone. Upon contact the officer observed signs that the subject was intoxicated. The subject refused to identify herself u and provided a false 6N name. An officer attempted to place her into handcuffs, but she : continuously pulled her G= arms away. An officer took hold of her right µ' wrist, pulled it behind her back and placed a handcuff around her wrist. The officer pulled the other arm behind her back and completed the handcuffing process. The subject then went limp and refused to stand. Officers placed their hands underneath her arm pits and lifted her to her feet and escorted the subject to the squad—] October 2021 Use of Force Report Late Night Watch — Three Officers Evening Watch — Two Officers 10/3 10/4 2021007239 2021007262 Public Intoxication Trespass Y In October 2021 Use of Force Report car for transport. There were no injuries to the subject or officers. While conducting a bar check, officers identified a subject who was in possession of alcohol, believed to be under the legal age. After making eye contact with him, he placed his drink to the side and moved towards the doorway. He began to run from the officer ignoring multiple commands to stop. One officer intercepted the chase and removed their taser from its holster and placed the red dot on his torso. He stopped running and one officer wrapped their arms around him telling him to get on the ground. One officer pushed the subject's body towards the ground he continued to tense his body in an attempt to stay on his feet. One officer pulled the subject's arms behind his back and another officer placed handcuffs on to the subject's wrists. He was transported to jail without injury to the subject or officers. Officers responded to an area business for reports of a male trespassing. Upon arrival, officers located a bloodied individual who was visibly upset. He had been injured in a previous Evening 10/4/2 2021007282 Watch — 021 Two Officers altercation but refused help or medical treatment and refused to leave the business. The subject with clenched fists was I taunting officers to shoot him. After attempts to verbally de-escalate the subject he continued to threaten officers. The subject was told to leave the business multiple times, but he refused to leave. The subject crossed his arms and held them close to his chest. Officers pulled his arms behind his back and placed him into handcuffs. There were no injuries to the subject or officers. Suspicious Y Officers responded to a Activity residence for reports of suspicious activity. Upon arrival, officers were contacted by three irate females who were directing aggression towards a male subject including verbal threats to physically harm the male. An officer told them several times to back up and leave the area, however, they failed to do so. They walked upon an officer several times, getting close to their faces, threatening them with physical violence stating that they would punch an officer in the face. A female subject was told that she was under arrest and an October 2021 Use of Force Report rII October 2021 Use of Force Report officer took hold of her left wrist. Another subject attempted to intervene by striking the officer's forearms to break their grip. The subjects continued to push the officer and attempted to strike the officer in the face with a closed fist several times. An officer wrapped their arms around a subject's lower body, pulling her to the ground falling on the subject. The subjects continued to punch out and kick officers and continued to attempt to stand. An officer placed their body on top of the subject to prevent them from standing. Subjects continued punching and kicking out towards officers and an officer deployed their taser, striking the subject causing her to fall. The subject continued to be combative as only one of the taser prongs connected, so an officer attempted to gain compliance by delivering a taser drive stun to the back of the subject's leg, the result of which was that the subject began to comply. Two officers pulled the subject's arms behind her back and placed handcuffs on each wrist. There were superficial injuries to both Late Night Watch — One Officer CCii : Late Night Watch — Two Officers 10/9 2021007419 10/9 12021007420 Public Intoxication Public Intoxication Y VA October 2021 Use of Force Report the officer and the subject. An officer approached a subject carrying an open bottle of Tequila. The subject began walking away from the officer when told to stop. An officer took hold of her left arm and held on to her as they attempted to identify her. She continued to refuse to identify herself and attempted to walk into the street away from officers. An officer placed their right leg behind her right leg and swiped her to the ground. The officer guided the subject to the ground, rolled her on to her stomach, took hold of both of her arms pulling them behind her back and placing handcuffs onto each wrist. The subject was then transported to the PD for processing. There were no injuries to the subject or officers After a short foot chase officers contacted an intoxicated subject who had previously been identified by bar staff as attempting to gain access to their bars using fake identification. One officer grabbed the subject's shirt which caused the subject to slowdown. An officer wrapped their arms around the subject's torso and pulled him Day watch 10/9 — Three Officers u� 2021007427 1 Domestic Y October 2021 Use of Force Report down to the ground. The subject continued to flail his arms around and was told by an officer that he would be sprayed with a chemical irritant if he failed to comply. The subject complied and an officer took hold of his arms, pulled them behind his back and completed the handcuffing process. There were superficial injuries to one officer and the subject. Officers were dispatched to a residence for reports of a domestic dispute involving a subject who had a brick. When officers attempted to take the subject into custody, they tensed their body and pulled their arms close to their chest. Two officers took hold of the subject's arms, pulling their arms behind their back and another officer completed the handcuffing process by securing handcuffs on both wrists. While walking to the transport vehicle, the subject pulled away from officers and resisted to walk to the vehicle. One officer placed pressure on the subject's thumb, a pain compliance technique. The subject was escorted to the vehicle without incident. There were no injuries to officers or the subject. Late Night 10/9 2021007455 Possession Y Officers contacted Watch - of subjects who had been Two Controlled ejected from a bar. One Officers Substance subject ran from officers and two officers took the subject to the ground by pushing down on the left side of the subject's body and pulling the subject's left arm behind their back causing the subject to fall. Another officer pulled the subject's right arm behind their back and they were placed into handcuffs. There were no injuries to the subject or officers. Late Night 10/9 2021007460 Public Y Officers observed an Watph - Intoxication intoxicated male arguing Two .W, outside a bar. Bar staff Officers stated that he had been - ' causing issues all night and that he needed to leave. He was told he fob was under arrest and one officer took hold of his •E ; w - right wrist and another officer took hold of his left wrist. Both officers pulled his arms behind his back, but he tensed his body and pulled away from officers. One officer pushed him then pulled down on his wrist guiding him to the ground. He ignored commands to place his hands behind his back. An officer announced that the subject would be sprayed in the face with a chemical irritant if he continued to fight with officers. He failed to October 2021 Use of Force Report October 2021 Use of Force Report comply and was sprayed in the face. Officers then pulled his arms behind his back and placed him into handcuffs. His eyes were flushed with water and he was transported to jail without injury to the subiect or officers. Late Night 10/10 2021007467 Disorderly Y Officers responded to a Watch — Conduct bar for reports that a Two subject was causing Officers issues in the bar. Upon contact, he attempted to run from officers. After a few steps, an officer took hold of his right arm and pushed him in the back, up against a wall preventing him from running. He was told to ' put his hands behind his back and he complied. An officer placed handcuffs on each of his wrists. An officer sustained superficial injuries and there were no injuries to the subject. _ 10/10 2021007477 Fight w/ Evening Y Officers responded to Watch — Weapon reports of a physical fight Three involving multiple Officers subjects, one of which was reported as having a gun. One officer located the male who was reported to have a firearm. The officer drew their sidearm keeping it at the low ready as they ordered the subject to place his hands against a nearby wall. The subject was found to have a firearm tucked into his waistband. An officer October 2021 Use of Force Report October 2021 Use of Force Report pulled the subject's arms behind his back and placed handcuffs onto each wrist. Another officer observed a subject fleeing from the area, at one point throwing a chair at officers. After a brief foot chase an officer drew their taser and placed the dot on the subject's torso while issuing commands for the subject to stop. An officer arced their taser, caught up with the subject, rebolstered their == �a _ taser and lowered their shoulder lunging into the ' subject, causing him to fall to the ground. The subject was given multiple commands to put his hands behind his back but ignored commands, instead keeping his hands underneath his body. One officer sprayed him in the face with a chemical irritant, then took hold of his left wrist, pulled his arm behind his back and another officer secured handcuffs onto each wrist. There were superficial injuries to one officer and no injury to the subject. The subject was transported to 'ail. Public Y While attempting to arrest Late Night 10/13 2021007559 Watch — Intoxication an intoxicated subject, Two the subject pulled away Officers from officers and refused to put their hands behind their back. One officer attempted to pull the October 2021 Use of Force Report Late Night Watch — One Officer Day Watch — Three Officers 10/13 12021007561 10/15 1 2021007634 Injured N Animal Assault Y Causing Injury October 2021 Use of Force Report subject's arm behind their back and another officer placed their leg in front of the subject's legs, tripping and lowering them to the ground. The subject continued to pull their arms away from officers resisting being handcuffed. One officer sprayed the subject in the face with a chemical irritant and another officer pulled the subject's arms behind their back and placed handcuffs on each wrist. No officers sustained injuries however the subject complained of pain from the irritant. The subject was decontaminated with water and towels and was transported to jail. Injured deer shot and killed by officer Officers responded to a subject who had been identified as being involved in a previous violent assault. Upon contact, the subject was screaming at officers, had balled his fist, cocked back his arm and attempted to punch an officer. One officer drew their taser and pointed it towards the subject, but it was never deployed. Another officer moved towards the subject, wrapped their arms around his torso, arabbina his riaht forearm October 2021 Use of Force Report with their left hand, pushing him towards a _ nearby wall to create leverage. The officer °+ _= pulled both of the subject's arms behind his w r back as he continued to pull away. Another officer took hold of the subject's left arm with both hands, placing the subject into a gooseneck hold. An officer placed handcuffs on the subject's wrists, and he was transported to jail without injury to the subject or officers. Evening 10/15 2021007645 Injured N Injured raccoon shot and Watch — Animal killed One Officer Officers responded to an Evening 10/15 2021007651 Harassment Y Watch — area for reports of a Four disturbance. Upon Officers arrival, officers encountered a male subject threatening to kill another subject. Officers attempted to de-escalate the situation by telling him to walk away but he failed to comply. He was told that he was not being detained but he elected to stay in the area continuing to threaten physical violence. An officer told him that he was under arrest and to put his hands behind his back. He pulled away and an officer put their left foot behind his legs, wrapped their arms around his torso and October 2021 Use of Force Report October 2021 Use of Force Report pulled him to the ground. An officer took hold of his right arm and attempted to pull it behind his back. He continued to flail around on the ground, grabbing and squeezing an officer's arm. An officer placed their chest and left knee onto the cTM subject preventing him from standing while other officers took hold of his arms, pulled them behind his back and placed handcuffs on each wrist. The subject refused to walk to the patrol vehicle, so officers took hold of his arms and legs and lifted the subject to the vehicle. He was transported without injury to the officers or subject. Late Night 10/15 2021007664 Public Y Officers approached an Watch — Intoxication intoxicated male in a bar Two who appeared to be Officers under the legal age. When asked to provide identification he ignored officers and attempted to exit the bar. One officer took hold of his right arm and he shrugged the officer off and pulled away. The officer took hold of his right arm and pulled it behind his back. He pulled away again ignoring commands for him to stop pulling away. One officer used their left leg to trip the subject who then fell to his knees. Once on the ground the suNect continued to be October 2021 Use of Force Report Evening 10/16 2021007682 Trespass Y Watch — One Officer October 2021 Use of Force Report combative with officers, flailing his arms towards officers getting back to a standing position. An officer again tripped the subject by using their right leg to sweep his legs causing him to be lowered to the ground. He was observed reaching into his waistband several times. Another officer sprayed the subject in the face and the subject rolled on to the left side of his body. He continued to refuse to put his hands behind his back and officers continued to pull his arms behind his back in an attempt to hand cuff the subject. He continued to reach for his waistband and so an officer used their taser to provide a drive stun to the subject in the middle of his back. He became compliant, and officers pulled the subject's arms behind his back and placed handcuffs on each wrist. The subject received medical attention for superficial injuries and the exposure to a chemical irritant and was transported to jail. Officers responded to grocery store for reports of a subject trespassing. Upon making contact with the subject, they walked aggressively towards an officer vellina obscenities. October 2021 Use of Force Report The officer informed the subject that they were under arrest and asked the subject to turn around and place their hands behind their back. The subject refused and the officer threatened to use a chemical irritant. The subject turned around and an officer took hold of both arms. The subject tensed their body and attempted to pull away from the officer. The officer pulled the subject's arms behind their back and placed a handcuff on each wrist. The subject then refused to get into a patrol vehicle and an officer had to push their upper body into the vehicle. The subject then sat up and entered the vehicle. There were no injuries to N the subject or officers. Late Night 10/19 2021007767 Injured Injured deer shot and Watch — Animal killed by officer One Officer Day Watch 10/19 2021007771 Trespass Y Officers responded to a — Four service agency for Officers reports of an individual having a seizure. Officers were informed by medical staff that the individual had died sometime in the middle of the night. A bystander became irate when medical staff elected not to perform CPR. The subject was shouting and posturing with staff and residents. As a result, October 2021 Use of Force Report October 2021 Use of Force Report residents articulated that the subject's behavior made them feel unsafe. Staff indicated that they wanted the subject to be trespassed from the agency for 24 hours. An officer delivered the - trespass notice, and this escalated the subject's aggressive behavior as f . they refused to retrieve their belongings and leave the facility. An officer told the subject that they were under arrest and took hold of their arms and attempted to pull them back behind their back however the subject continued to pull away. An officer swiped the subject's legs, and another officer wrapped their arms around the subject's torso placing them on the ground. The subject continued to flail around, kick out and fight with officers, so an officer sprayed the subject in the face with a chemical irritant. Officers were able to take hold of the subject's arms, pull them behind their back, and place handcuffs on each wrist. The subject decontaminated with water and transported to jail without injury to the subject or officers. Evening 10/19 2021007792 Welfare Y An officer encountered an Watch — Check individual walking in the One Officer street without footwear. The officer stopped to October 2021 Use of Force Report October 2021 Use of Force Report perform a welfare check and found that the subject had active arrest warrants. The officer took hold of the subject's left arm and they pulled away. The subject continued to pull away, so the officer used his leg to sweep the subject's leg from underneath the subject causing them to be lowered to the ground. Once on the ground the officer was able to pull both subject's arms behind their back and place handcuffs on each wrist. The subject was taken into custody without injury to the subject or officer. Day Shift — Mental Officers responded to a 10/20 2021007813 N Two Impairment residence for reports of Officers an individual having a mental health crisis. Upon arrival, officers encountered an individual who had articulated that he would kill his wife. Upon arrival, the subject made other statements about planning to kill himself, produced a knife, and held it to his throat. One officer drew their taser, placed the red dot on the subject's torso and told the subject to drop the knife. Another officer had their service weapon drawn and held at the low ready. The subject threw the knife to the side. One officer covered the subject with their taser as October 2021 Use of Force Report October 2021 Use of Force Report another officer holstered their weapon, took hold of the subject's arms, pulled them behind their back and placed handcuffs on both wrists. The subject was transported to the hospital for a mental health evaluation. Late Night 10/23 2021007889 Traffic Stop Y An officer ordered a Watch — subject to step out of their Two vehicle and walk towards Officers the officer. The subject ignored commands and reached back inside the vehicle. An officer took hold of the subject's arm and attempted to pull them from the vehicle. The subject held on to something inside the vehicle. Another officer had hold of the subject's other arm in an attempt to pull them from the vehicle. The subject -� turned on the officers and `='." continued to pull away, attempting to run from officers. The subject was pushed into the side of the vehicle to prevent them from running. The subject continued to push towards officers and one officer wrapped their arms around the subject's torso and pulled them to the ground. While on the ground the subject continued to ignore commands to put their hands behind their back. One officer sprayed a chemical irritant into the subject's face and the October 2021 Use of Force Report October 2021 Use of Force Report d to flail ;er used a cing their assure it ear. I the )ulled it back, Icuffs on subject i for the exposure e officer cial itched to ;s officers to find top of a them I the ting up. I top e subject lis iim get ial was subject Id the n to his ubject and an J to push mach. ,ed up k. One of the st and roll the itinued to :nse his ised a subject continue around. An offic pain compliance technique by pla knuckle on a pre point behind thel Officers grabbec subject's arms, I them behind the and placed hanc each wrist. The was offered decontaminatior chemical irritant but declined. On received superfii injuries Day Watch 10/23 2021007902 Fight in Y After being disp, — Two Progress a fight in progre: Officers arrived on scenE an individual on subject, holding down preventinc subject from get The individual of indicated that thi would continue f assault if he let f up. The individL told to get off the and an officer to CT. subject to turn o stomach. The s failed to comply, officer attemptec him onto his stoi The subject ten: and pushed bac officer took hold subject's left wri used leverage t( subject on to his stomach. He coi pull away and to body. Officers L chemical irritant: October 2021 Use of Force Report d to flail ;er used a cing their assure it ear. I the )ulled it back, Icuffs on subject i for the exposure e officer cial itched to ;s officers to find top of a them I the ting up. I top e subject lis iim get ial was subject Id the n to his ubject and an J to push mach. ,ed up k. One of the st and roll the itinued to :nse his ised a October 2021 Use of Force Report the subject in the face. The subject began to comply placing his hands behind his back as an officer placed a handcuff on one wrist, then placed a hand cuff on the other forearm. During the search, he began to be combative by pulling e�. away, tensing his F. muscles placing one of his hands into his pocket. F• The subject was unsteady on his feet and refused to stand to be searched so an officer pulled the subject to the ground. The subject continued to tense their muscles and pull away from officers. The subject was again sprayed with a chemical irritant and eventually allowed officers to search his pockets. An ambulance responded with water and first aid. The subject was transported to jail without injury to the subject or officers. While on foot patrol of the Late Night 10/24 2021007922 Fight in Y Watch — Progress downtown business Two district, officers observed Officers a fight in front of a local bar where one subject was assaultive towards multiple people. Upon contact with the subject, he attempted to punch an officer then took off running. After a brief chase the officer took hold of the subject's left October 2021 Use of Force Report October 2021 Use of Force Report arm with their left hand and pulled the subject close to their body. The subject immediately tensed his body and pulled away from the officer. The officer lowered their body, lunged forward towards the subject, wrapped their arms around the subject p using their body weight to take the subject to the ground. Another officer took hold of the subject's upper body and moved c ' the subject away from the -- front wheels of a parked _ vehicle. An officer took ` hold of the subject's left arm however the subject continued to tense his body refusing to place his hands behind his back. An officer used a chemical irritant, spraying the subject in the face in an attempt to gain compliance. An officer took hold of the subject's arms again, pulled them behind his back and placed handcuffs on each wrist. The subject walked to a patrol vehicle but tensed his arms and pulled away from officers. One officer placed their left hand under the subject's right wrist, applying upward pressure to keep the subject from pulling away. The subject's eyes were flushed with water and he was transported to 'ail October 2021 Use of Force Report October 2021 Use of Force Report without injury to the suspect or officers. Day shift — 10/27 2021008005 Violation No Y Officers were dispatched One Officer Contact to a residence for reports Order of a male brandishing a machete. An officer with their service weapon drawn in the low ready position made contact with the subject at the front door of a residence. The officer holstered their weapon, and the subject was handcuffed by another officer without incident. The subject was transported to jail without injury to the subject or officers. Officers responded to a Late Night 10/30 2021008090 Fight in Y Watch — Progress fight outside of a Two downtown bar where a Officers subject was on top of another subject. An officer separated the subjects and attempted to interview the individual. The subject attempted to re-engage into the fight and the officer took hold of the subject's arm to prevent him from fighting. Another officer lowered their body and pushed into the subject causing l the subject to fall to the ground. Once on the r ° ground one officer took hold of the subject's left arm and the subject held his right arm close to his chest. An officer took hold of the subject's right arm and pulled it behind his back. Handcuffs were laced on both wrists and October 2021 Use of Force Report October 2021 Use of Force Report the subject was transported to jail without injury to the subject or officers. Evening 10/30 2021008125 Traffic Stop Y An officer initiated a Watch — traffic stop where the Two driver was found to have Officers a suspended license and a variety of illegal narcotics in the vehicle. An officer asked multiple times for the driver to exit the vehicle and the driver refused. An officer opened the driver's side . door, took hold of the G, subject's left arm with j their left hand and pulled the subject from the vehicle. The subject fell to the ground and resisted the handcuffing process by tensing their muscles and holding his hands close to his body. The officer grabbed his left wrist with their hand and pulled it behind his back. Another officer took hold of his right wrist and pulled his arm behind his back. An officer placed handcuffs on his wrists, and he was transported to jail without injury to the subject or the officers.. October 2021 Use of Force Report Chris Olney From: kenn bowen <ckmbowen@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 4:12 PM To: Community Police Review Board Subject: Support for EWF � R15K To all concerned: I am writing in support of Agenda Item 3.2 Discussion on American Rescue Plan and the draft letter directing the city to invest in an Excluded Workers Fund. I heartily encourage the CPRB members to support the resolution and send a strong message to the city. Thank you in advance for your support. Kenn Bowen Iowa City, IA Chris Olney From: Sabri Rose Sky <sabriclaysky@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 4:18 PM To: Community Police Review Board Subject: In support of Agenda Item 3.2 r., Dear CPRE, Please support the American Rescue Plan Act funds going to the Excluded Workers Fund. Thank you. Sabrielle R. Sky [Stotts], Iowa City resident Chris Olney From: pat bowen <patjbowen@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 12:46 PM To: Community Police Review Board Subject: Excluded Workers CRPB My name is Pat Bowen, I am writing today in support of Agenda Item 3.2 on the discussion around the ARPA. I have been working with the EWF group since spring. I am a member of one of the coalition organizations. I have spoken and am on record of my support for the EWF at many city and county meetings. Families are hurting, we need to help those that are the unseen in our community. And most importantly they need direct payment, not more bureaucracy holding the money up. Thank you for the work you do. Thank you for supporting the Excluded Workers Fund! Sincerely, Pat Bowen She/hers Iowa City PS Amanda, I appreciated your op ed in the Gazette on Sunday! You were spot on! This email is from an external source. Chris Olney From: Leon Krisl <krislzach@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 12:53 PM To: Community Police Review Board Subject: Agenda Item 3.2 Discussion RfSit Hello! My name is Zach Krisl, and as a resident of Iowa City, I am writing in order to strongly encourage investing in the Excluded Workers Fund under the American Rescue Plan, and to support the resolution in order to build a more equitable community. Thank you for your time. -Zach Krisl Chris Olney From: Kevo Rivera <kevorivera.trc@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 11:46 AM To: Community Police Review Board Subject: Fund Excluded Workers Dear all, Thank you for discussing the urgent need to direct ARPA funds to excluded workers in Iowa City. As a member of the Iowa City Ad Hoc Truth and Reconciliation Commission, I have been invested in paying attention to and advocating alongside the voices of excluded frontline workers over the past several months. The TRC is a signed member of the Fund Excluded Workers Coalition, which has also garnered the support of the Human Rights Commission. I request that you approve the draft letter included on your agenda directing the city to invest in an Excluded Workers Fund. Thank you, Kevo Rivera Commissioner, Iowa City Ad Hoc Truth and Reconciliation Commission mobile: 319-576-8414 Note: Be advised that any electronic written correspondence sent to or from me concerning the TRC may be subject to becoming open record. Chris Olney From: info . <info@iowacitymutualaid.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 1:23 PM To: Community Police Review Board Cc: Mandi Nichols Subject: Agenda Item 3.2 1 RISK My name is Stephany Hoffelt and I am a coordinator of the Iowa City Mutual Aid Collective (ICMA). Members of ICMA are in full support of the direct payment of funds to the people who need it via the existing mechanisms in the county. Nicholas Theisen shared an insightful op-ed in today's Cedar Rapids Gazette that points out the fact that the county already has a means of distributing these funds through their direct assistance fund and there is no need for losing large amounts of funds due to bureaucratic shuffling of money. t �-w-w.t gazeue.co �test��t _' : hl - unt '- cl ed-ry -dQn -net -a- middle-man/ This op-ed is also very much in alignment with ICMA's very strong belief in the autonomy and self- determination of all people. Members of the Fund Excluded Workers (FEW) coalition have shown that they are more than competent by navigating the tedious city local government situation the manner necessary to achieve their goal of direct distribution. I urge the CRPB to approve the draft letter as their official recommendation to city council. Best regards, Stephany Hoffelt (she.her.hers) 319-512-2422 (work) 319-541-1341 (mobile) w' • 'Vi=al Aid C&�sS e Chris Olney From• Ann Houlahan <anntherese2000@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 1:37 PM To: Community Police Review Board Subject: Excluded Workers Fund My name is Ann Houlahan. I am writing in support of agenda item 3.2. 1 strongly support and urge CPRB members to support the Excluded Workers Fund. Members of the coalition for the Excluded Workers Fund have been working tirelessly for months endeavoring to give these people they're just due - the same as we obtained in the form of stimulus payments. It is long overdue for us to act and, it's the right thing to do. Thank you for your consideration of this important issue. Ann Houlahan Catholic Worker House volunteer Sent from my iPad This email is from an external source. Chris Olney From: Maureen Vasile <maureenvasile@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 2:27 PM To: Community Police Review Board Subject: Fund Excluded Workers Iowa City Police Community Review Board, My name is Maureen Vasile. I am writing to you in support of Agenda item 3.2. Discussion on the ARP and the draft letter directing the city to invest in an Excluded Workers Fund. I am strongly requesting that the CPRD support The Excluded Workers Fund sending the Right Thing to Do message to the city. I have supported the excluded & immigrant workers the entire time as they are the ones who risked their health and the health of their loved ones, working to keep our city open during the pandemic. Now is the time, without a paid middle man, to give these diligent workers the money they deserve. Thank You, Maureen Vasile Catholic Worker FEW Coalition Chris Olney From: Iowa City Catholic Worker <iowacitycatholicworker@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 11:42 AM To: Community Police Review Board Subject: Please support Agenda #3.2 - Excluded Workers Fund Fil5F4. 44 iJtClupE!'+4t°u?W-TtO IOWd November 9, 2021 Iowa City Community Police Review Board: Thank you for including a discussion on the American Rescue Plan on your agenda at tonight's meeting. The 17 -group Fund Excluded Workers Coalition supports the draft letter on page 59 of tonight's agenda packet and urges you to sign your unanimous support to the letter. Previously incarcerated people and undocumented immigrants were not only excluded from unemployment insurance and stimulus checks, they are also disproportionately the targets of the police state, systemic racism, and structural violence. Direct cash payments to excluded workers is one of the most effective means of alleviating poverty. Lifting people out of poverty is one of the best ways to protect directly impacted people from harmful and unnecessary interactions with the police. Other city commissions concerned with social justice for people of color such as the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Human Rights Commission have also written their own letters and passed their own resolutions directing the city council to support an Excluded Workers Fund. All of us standing together on this issue would send a powerful message of unity and solidarity with previously incarcerated people, undocumented immigrants, and unemployed workers. We hope you will join your city commission colleagues and our 17 -group coalition on this issue. Thank you for your action on behalf of excluded workers - it means a lot, Alejandro Guzman, Ninoska Campos, Emily Sinnwell, and David Goodner Fund Excluded Workers Coalition Iowa City Catholic Worker Iowa City Ad -Hoc Truth and Reconciliation Commission Iowa Freedom Riders LULAC 308 LULAC Statewide Council Great Plains Action Society Ex - Incarcerated People Organizing (EXPO) Iowa Iowa Student Action SEIU Local 199 AFSCME 12 Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement Corridor Community Action Network Iowa City Mutual Aid Collective Iowa City Democratic Socialists of America Community Transportation Committee Nissa African Family Services Veterans for Peace Iowa City � r 07z - - An, .wrnzo,%W= T CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: November 23, 2021 To: Community Police Review Board From: Geoff Fruin, City Manager Re: Community Police Review Board (CPRB) Expansion On December 22nd, 2020 the CPRB sent the City Council a memo containing thirteen recommendations. One of the outstanding recommendations that you presented to the City Council was to expand membership of the CPRB from five members to seven or nine members. Specifically, your memo stated: "The CPRB requests to change its membership from the current five -member -board to having seven or nine members. In selecting from candidates for the CPRB, an emphasis shall be placed on persons being of a minority race, requiring at least four of the members shall be from a minority race. Further, it should be made mandatory that at least one member be a current or former member of the police force or otherwise considered an expert in police procedures and/or police policies." At its October 19, 2021 work session, the City Council discussed this recommendation and directed staff to prepare an ordinance that would expand membership to seven members. The City Council concurred with the CPRB's emphasis on the importance of both a diverse membership and the inclusion of a police professional. However, it was decided that mandating such diversity or police professional experience may be problematic, particularly if application pools for future openings are limited. The City Council felt comfortable indicating the strong preference for both objectives knowing that it is the elected leadership's final decision to appoint members to the board. Attached to this memo is a draft ordinance that expands membership to seven members. The draft maintains language that "The City Council shall strive to appoint members who represent the diversity of the community." While the CPRB recommended that at least one member be a current or former member of the police force, there are potential complexities with having a current peace officer employed by Iowa City as a voting member of the CPRB. In order to more successfully attract police professionals, the draft ordinance does strike an existing requirement that an officer be removed from the department for a minimum of five years. Thus, under the draft ordinance a recently retired peace officer may apply and be eligible to serve on the CPRB. Such appointment is not mandatory as the draft ordinance maintains language that the "The City Council also reserves the right, for good cause shown, to waive the requirement that the board include one current or former peace officer." It is important to note that Board composition has been the subject of discussion since the CPRB was created in 1997. The initial ordinance language included that the "Board shall include one current or former "peace officer" as the term is defined by state laud' and gave the City Council the ability to waive that requirement for `good cause'. However, in 2003 the Council became concerned about possible conflicts with current or recently employed peace officers from the Iowa City Police Department. Thus, they amended the ordinance to prohibit the appointment of a current Iowa City peace officer or one that has been employed by the City of Iowa City within five years. November 23, 2021 Page 2 The CPRB and City Council have recently agreed that is important to have a peace officer perspective on the Board. The current ordinance significantly limits the pool of peace officer applicants and, given the expansion to seven members appears imminent, it seems very reasonable to drop the prohibition on recently employed peace officers. However, I do recommend that current peace officers employed by the City of Iowa City still be explicitly prohibited from serving on the CPRB. The draft ordinance will be presented to the City Council for consideration after the CPRB has an opportunity to review and comment on the proposal. Thank you for your continued service to the Iowa City community and for your ongoing advocacy to make positive changes to the current CPRB framework. Attachments: Draft Ordinance for CPRB Comment Prepared by: Susan Dulek, Asst. City Attorney, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5030 Ordinance No. Ordinance amending Title 8, entitled "Police Regulations," Chapter 8, entitled "Community Police Review Board," to increase the composition of the board from five members to seven members. Whereas, Resolution No. 20-159 entitled "Resolution of Initial Council Commitments addressing Black Lives Matter Movement and Systemic Racism in the wake of the murder of George Floyd by the Minneapolis Police and calls for action from protesters and residents" contained 17 actions items; and Whereas, the action item in Paragraph 8 was a request to the Community Police Review Board (CPRB) for a "report and recommendation ... regarding changes to the CPRB ordinance that enhance its ability to provide effective civilian oversight of the ICPD..."; and Whereas, the CPRB submitted a list of recommendations to City Council in a memo dated December 22, 2020; and Whereas, it is in the City's interest to enact a recommendation to increase the size of the board from five (5) members to seven (7) members; and Whereas, Ordinance No. 21-4857 amended Section 8-8-3D to lengthen the time period to file a complaint from 90 to 180 days after the alleged misconduct; and Whereas, a related provision at Section 8-8-3E also should have been amended to 180 days, and it is in the City's interest to correct this oversight. Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Section I. Amendments. 1. Title 8, entitled "Police Regulations," Chapter 8, entitled "Community Police Review Board," Section 3, entitled "Definition of Complaint; Complaint Process in General," Subsection E is amended by adding the underscore text and deleting the strike -through text as follows: E. Only those complaints to the board which do not involve the conduct of an Iowa City sworn police officer or are not filed within ninety (90 one hundred eighty (18Q) days of the alleged misconduct may be subject to summary dismissal by the board. 2. Title 8, entitled "Police Regulations," Chapter 8, entitled "Community Police Review Board," Section 8, entitled "Board Composition; Limited Powers of Board," Subsection Al is amended by adding the underscore text and deleting the strike - through text as follows: 1. The board shall consist of five (5) seven 7 members appointed by the City Council, who shall be Iowa City eligible electors and shall serve without compensation. The City Council shall strive to appoint members who represent the diversity of the community. Appointments to the board shall include one current or former "peace officer" as that term is defined by State law, except that a peace officer currently employed as such by the City of Iowa City WithiR fiVe «' YeaF& Of the appOiR+,. ent date shall not be appointed to the board. The City Council reserves the right to waive the residency requirement for good cause shown. The City Council also reserves the right, for good cause shown, to waive the requirement that the board include one current or former peace officer. Section II. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section III. Penalties for Violation. The violation of any provision of this ordinance is a municipal infraction. Section IV. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section V. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this day of 2022. Mayor Attest: City Clerk Approved by City Attorney's Office COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD OFFICE CONTACTS November 2021 Date Description None December 13, 2021 Mtg Packet COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD COMPLAINT DEADLINES CPRB Complaint #20-02 Filed: 06/04/20 Chief's report due (90 days): 09/02/20 Extension Request: 12/15/20 Extension Request: 02/01/21 OIR Report filed: 01/28/21 Chief's Report filed: 06/30/21 CPRB meeting #1 (Review): 02/09/21 CPRB meeting #2 (Review): 03/09/21 CPRB meeting #3 (Review): 04/14/21 CPRB meeting #4 (Review): 07/13/21 CPRB meeting #5 (Review): 08/02/21 CPRB meeting #6 (Review): 08/30/21 CPRB meeting #7 (Review): 09/20/21 CPRB meeting #8 (Review): 10/12/21 CPRB meeting #9 (Review): 11/01/21 CPRB meeting #10 (Review): 11/09/21 CPRB meeting #11 (Review): 12/13/21 CPRB meeting #12 (Review): ??/??/21 CPRB report due (90 days) from OIR report: 04/28/21 CPRB report due (90 day extension) from Chief's report: 09/28/21 CPRB report due (90 day additional extension): 12/27/21 CPRB Complaint #20-05 Filed: 08/14/20 Chief's report due (90 days): 11/12/20 Extension Request: 12/15/20 Extension Request: 02/01/21 OIR Report filed: 01/28/21 Chief's Report filed: 06/30/21 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CPRB meeting #1 (Review): 02/09/21 CPRB meeting #2 (Review): 03/09/21 CPRB meeting #3 (Review): 04/14/21 CPRB meeting #4 (Review): 07/13/21 CPRB meeting #5 (Review): 08/02/21 CPRB meeting #6 (Review): 08/30/21 CPRB meeting #7 (Review): 09/20/21 CPRB meeting #8 (Review): 10/12/21 CPRB meeting #9 (Review): 11/01/21 CPRB meeting #10 (Review): 11/09/21 CPRB meeting #11 (Review): 12/13/21 CPRB meeting #12 (Review): ??/??/21 December 13, 2021 Mtg Packet CPRB report due (90 days) from OIR report: 04/28/21 CPRB report due (90 day extension) from Chief's report: 09/28/21 CPRB report due (90 day additional extension): 12/27/21 CPRB Complaint #20-06 Filed: 08/19/20 Chief's report due (90 days): 11/17/20 Extension Request: 12/15/20 Extension Request: 02/01/21 OIR Report filed: 01/28/21 Chief's Report filed: 06/30/21 CPRB meeting #1 (Review): 02/09/21 CPRB meeting #2 (Review): 03/09/21 CPRB meeting #3 (Review): 03/26/21 CPRB meeting #4 (Review): 04/14/21 CPRB meeting #5 (Review): 07/13/21 CPRB meeting #6 (Review): 08/02/21 CPRB meeting #7 (Review): 08/30/21 CPRB meeting #8 (Review): 09/20/21 CPRB meeting #9 (Review): 10/12/21 CPRB meeting #10 (Review): 11/01/21 CPRB meeting #11 (Review): 11/09/21 CPRB meeting #12 (Review): 12/13/21 CPRB meeting #13 (Review): ??/??/21 CPRB report due (90 days) from OIR report: 04/28/21 CPRB report due (90 day extension) from Chief's report: 09/28/21 CPRB report due (90 day additional extension): 12/27/21 CPRB Complaint #20-07 Filed: 08/27/20 Chief's report due (90 days): 11/25/20 Extension Request: 12/15/20 Extension Request: 02/01/21 OIR Report filed: 01/28/21 Chief's Report filed: 06/30/21 CPRB meeting #1 (Review): 02/09/21 CPRB meeting #2 (Review): 03/09/21 CPRB meeting #3 (Review): 04/14/21 CPRB meeting #4 (Review): 07/13/21 CPRB meeting #5 (Review): 08/02/21 CPRB meeting #6 (Review): 08/30/21 CPRB meeting #7 (Review): 09/20/21 CPRB meeting #8 (Review): 10/12/21 CPRB meeting #9 (Review): 11/01/21 CPRB meeting #10 (Review): 11/09/21 CPRB meeting #11 (Review): CPRB meeting #12 (Review): December 13, 2021 Mtg Packet 12/13/21 ??/??/21 CPRB report due (90 days) from OIR report: 04/28/21 CPRB report due (90 day extension) from Chief's report: 09/28/21 CPRB report due (90 day additional extension): 12/27/21 CPRB Com laint #20-08 Filed: Chief's report due (90 days): Extension Request: Extension Request: OIR Report filed: Chief's Report filed: ----------------------------------------- CPRB meeting #1 (Review): CPRB meeting #2 (Review): CPRB meeting #3 (Review): CPRB meeting #4 (Review): CPRB meeting #5 (Review): CPRB meeting #6 (Review): CPRB meeting #7 (Review): CPRB meeting #8 (Review): CPRB meeting #9 (Review): CPRB meeting #10 (Review): CPRB meeting #11 (Review): CPRB meeting #12 (Review): ----------------------------------------- CPRB report due (90 days ) from OIR report CPRB report due (90 day extension) from Chief's report: CPRB report due (90 day extension): ----------------------------------- CPRB Comniaint #21-02 08/27/20 11/25/20 12/15/20 02/01/21 01/28/21 06/30/21 02/09/21 03/09/21 04/14/21 05/26/21 07/13/21 08/02/21 08/30/21 09/20/21 10/12/21 11/01/21 12/13/21 ??/??/21 ------------- 04/28/21 09/28/21 12/27/21 Filed: 09/20/21 Chief's report due (90 days): 12/20//21 Chief's report filed: 10/19/21 Complainant's response to the Chief's report (21 days to respond, no response received) 11/09/21 Chief/City Manager response to the Complainant's response (10 days to respond): --/--/-- CPRB meeting #1 (Review): 11/01/21 CPRB meeting #2 (Review): 12/13/21 CPRB meeting #3 (Review): ??/??/22 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CPRB report due (90 days from the date of the Chief/City Manager's response to the complainant): 02/07/22 December 13, 2021 Mtg Packet CPRB Complaint #21-03 Filed: 09/27/21 Chief's report due (90 days): 12/27/21 Chief's report filed: 11/15/21 Complainant's response to the Chief's report (21 days to respond no response received) 12/06/21 Chief/City Manager response to the Complainant's response (10 days to respond): --/- / - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CPRB meeting #1 (Review): 12/13/21 CPRB meeting #2 (Review): ??/??/22 CPRB meeting #3 (Review): ??/??/22 CPRB report due (90 days from the date of the Chief/City Manager's response to the complainant): 03/08/22 CPRB Complaint #21-07 Filed: 10/27/21 Chief's report due (90 days): 01/26/22 Chief's report filed: 11/30/21 Complainant's response to the Chief's report (21 days to respond) 12/21/21 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): ??/??/?? CPRB Complaint #21-08 Filed: 12/06/21 Chief's report due (90 days): 03/08/22 Chief's report filed: ??/??/22 Complainant's response to the Chief's report (21 days to respond) ??/??/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): ??/??/?? CPRB Complaint #21-09 Filed: Chief's report due (90 days): Chief's report filed: December 13, 2021 Mtg Packet 12/08/21 03/10/22 ??/??/22 Complainant's response to the Chief's report (21 days to respond) 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): TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE January 11, 2022 February 8, 2022 March 8, 2022 April 12, 2022