HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-13-2021 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