State lawmakers this week advanced a bill that would dismantle citizen review boards that probe alleged police misconduct like those established in Cedar Rapids, Iowa City, Coralville, University Heights and Dubuque.
Senate File 2325 would make changes to city civil service commissions that oversee the testing, hiring, promotion and discipline for police officers, firefighters and other civil service positions.
The bill passed the Senate 37-9 after being amended to insert a provision that states a city with a civil service commission “shall not adopt, enforce, or otherwise administer” or establish “a board or other entity for the purpose of citizen review of the conduct of police officers.”
Skylar Limkemann, an attorney for the Iowa Fraternal Order of Police, said the bill aims to improve due process in disciplinary hearings for civil service employees, including police and firefighters, by incorporating case law and clarifying procedures. The group represents about 2,000 of the roughly 7,000 law enforcement officers in the state.
Limkemann, who represented a former Cedar Rapids police officer who unsuccessfully appealed his firing for being dishonest about 2016 traffic stop and violating department policies, said the bill aims to standardize the civilian review process for law enforcement in Iowa.
“What this bill does is it says we already have a civil service commission process here in the state of Iowa. We do not need a civilian review process,” Limkemann told members of a House subcommittee that advanced the bill Thursday.
Additionally, Iowa law does not provide regulations for how civilian review boards operate. As a result, each of the communities that has one has adopted different processes and purposes for their police review board, Limkemann said.
“Unfortunately, what we've seen really since 2019 and 2020 is just a continual attack of our law enforcement officers by some of the civilian review boards,” he said. He didn’t cite any specific incident where a board's review has escalated to the point of officers receiving additional consequences.
Representatives for the Iowa League of Cities and the cities of Iowa City, Coralville, Des Moines, Cedar Falls expressed concerns to lawmakers about eliminating citizen review boards — even if their city does have them in place — citing their role in increasing transparency and accountability.
Kelly Paschke, representing the Iowa Peace Officers Association, argued that the civil service system is broken and stacked against police officers, saying they often face political interference and lack of due process.
Employees appealing disciplinary decisions before a civil service commission would be allowed to request the production of documents and depose witnesses.
The bill states a civil service employee could be removed, discharged, demoted or suspended only with “just cause and upon a finding by a preponderance of evidence” they violated the law, city rules or policies, or is physically or mentally unfit.
Sen. Scott Webster, a Republican from Bettendorf, during Senate floor debate criticized past discussions about policing policy by Iowa City’s Community Police Review Board. Webster also asserted citizen review boards “give no due process to a police officer at all.”
The Iowa City Community Police Review Board, according to city code, “has no power to review police officer personnel records or disciplinary matters” and “has only limited civil, administrative review powers, and has no power or authority over criminal matters.”
Webster also said the legislation is needed to defend law enforcement from “political interventions by citizen review boards and the media frenzy that goes along with them.”
“Today we send a clear message to the brave men and women who put on their uniform every day, who stand on that thin, blue line: We have their back. We stand with them. We respect them,” Webster said.
Sen. Janice Weiner, a Democrat who represents Iowa City, took umbrage with Webster’s comments about Iowa City's board, and defended it when she spoke on the Senate floor the next day.
“As for our community police review board, facts are super helpful. They’ve helped build relations within the community,” Weiner said. “They’re citizens who in some cases may have had difficult relations with police in the past and want to improve them, citizens who just want to be part of the process, as well as others who have experience with policing.”
In Cedar Rapids, the Citizen Review Board is focused on public engagement and improving community-police relations, advising the city on police department policies and practices, reviewing citizen complaints and serving on the committee that hires the police chief — a process the city just recently completed.
The board was created in 2021 after racial justice advocates, led by the nonprofit Advocates for Social Justice, pushed for stronger civilian oversight of local law enforcement after George Floyd’s murder by Minneapolis police in 2020 as one of seven demands for reform.
But the board itself doesn’t have disciplinary authority over officers. When the city receives a complaint against an officer, the police department’s Professional Standards unit conducts an investigation and delivers findings to the police chief, who then reviews that report and may request additional information.
Afterward, the chief provides a report to the board, which may provide its own report to the City Council if a board majority disagrees with the chief's findings.
Under the ordinance, “detailed written findings of fact and evidence concerning the allegations in the complaint” are provided the board, but identifying information such as faces or names of witnesses, officers and victims are edited out of the materials.
Rep. Eric Gjerde, a Democrat and Cedar Rapids police officer, said there’s merit in changing civil service procedures “to ensure every civil service employee has due process,” but objects to eliminating citizen police review boards.
“This comes back to, in my opinion, a local-control issue,” Gjerde told The Gazette. “ … I think the Cedar Rapids Police Department, the city of Cedar Rapids and the Cedar Rapids police review board has a positive relationship and should be able to continue.”
In a statement, the Advocates for Social Justice board urged the community to call state representatives and ask they vote no on the bill. The advocates say the Cedar Rapids City Council's approval of the board affirmed its role in strengthening community-police relations and law enforcement accountability.
"SF 2325 is yet another example of our state legislature trying to silence the Black, Brown and other marginalized voices of the citizens of Iowa,“ the group said. ”After all the protests, community forums and negotiations, it is disgusting, heartbreaking and telling that we are still having to navigate repeated attacks and setbacks. ASJ affirms that the state’s action to ban citizen review boards is an act of white supremacy and one that is intentional act to uphold violent and racist systems in our state, all while undermining local agency.“
Rep. Sami Scheetz, D-Cedar Rapids, said House Democrats plan to offer amendments to “preserve and protect the existence and operation of citizen review boards across Iowa.”
“While I recognize and support many aspects of the civil service bill that provide necessary protections for public-sector workers,” eliminating the police review boards “undermines the progress we have made in establishing crucial platforms for dialogue, accountability, and reform within our policing systems,” Scheetz said. “The presence of citizen review boards has proved to be an invaluable asset in building trust and fostering a constructive relationship between law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve.”
The bill now heads to the full House Local Government Committee for consideration and passage before a March 15 legislative deadline.
https://www.thegazette.com/state-government/iowa-bill-would-ban-citizen-police-review-boards/
Senate File 2325 would make changes to city civil service commissions that oversee the testing, hiring, promotion and discipline for police officers, firefighters and other civil service positions.
The bill passed the Senate 37-9 after being amended to insert a provision that states a city with a civil service commission “shall not adopt, enforce, or otherwise administer” or establish “a board or other entity for the purpose of citizen review of the conduct of police officers.”
Skylar Limkemann, an attorney for the Iowa Fraternal Order of Police, said the bill aims to improve due process in disciplinary hearings for civil service employees, including police and firefighters, by incorporating case law and clarifying procedures. The group represents about 2,000 of the roughly 7,000 law enforcement officers in the state.
Limkemann, who represented a former Cedar Rapids police officer who unsuccessfully appealed his firing for being dishonest about 2016 traffic stop and violating department policies, said the bill aims to standardize the civilian review process for law enforcement in Iowa.
“What this bill does is it says we already have a civil service commission process here in the state of Iowa. We do not need a civilian review process,” Limkemann told members of a House subcommittee that advanced the bill Thursday.
Additionally, Iowa law does not provide regulations for how civilian review boards operate. As a result, each of the communities that has one has adopted different processes and purposes for their police review board, Limkemann said.
“Unfortunately, what we've seen really since 2019 and 2020 is just a continual attack of our law enforcement officers by some of the civilian review boards,” he said. He didn’t cite any specific incident where a board's review has escalated to the point of officers receiving additional consequences.
Representatives for the Iowa League of Cities and the cities of Iowa City, Coralville, Des Moines, Cedar Falls expressed concerns to lawmakers about eliminating citizen review boards — even if their city does have them in place — citing their role in increasing transparency and accountability.
Kelly Paschke, representing the Iowa Peace Officers Association, argued that the civil service system is broken and stacked against police officers, saying they often face political interference and lack of due process.
Employees appealing disciplinary decisions before a civil service commission would be allowed to request the production of documents and depose witnesses.
The bill states a civil service employee could be removed, discharged, demoted or suspended only with “just cause and upon a finding by a preponderance of evidence” they violated the law, city rules or policies, or is physically or mentally unfit.
‘We have their back’
Sen. Scott Webster, a Republican from Bettendorf, during Senate floor debate criticized past discussions about policing policy by Iowa City’s Community Police Review Board. Webster also asserted citizen review boards “give no due process to a police officer at all.”
The Iowa City Community Police Review Board, according to city code, “has no power to review police officer personnel records or disciplinary matters” and “has only limited civil, administrative review powers, and has no power or authority over criminal matters.”
Webster also said the legislation is needed to defend law enforcement from “political interventions by citizen review boards and the media frenzy that goes along with them.”
“Today we send a clear message to the brave men and women who put on their uniform every day, who stand on that thin, blue line: We have their back. We stand with them. We respect them,” Webster said.
Sen. Janice Weiner, a Democrat who represents Iowa City, took umbrage with Webster’s comments about Iowa City's board, and defended it when she spoke on the Senate floor the next day.
“As for our community police review board, facts are super helpful. They’ve helped build relations within the community,” Weiner said. “They’re citizens who in some cases may have had difficult relations with police in the past and want to improve them, citizens who just want to be part of the process, as well as others who have experience with policing.”
‘Local-control issue’
In Cedar Rapids, the Citizen Review Board is focused on public engagement and improving community-police relations, advising the city on police department policies and practices, reviewing citizen complaints and serving on the committee that hires the police chief — a process the city just recently completed.
The board was created in 2021 after racial justice advocates, led by the nonprofit Advocates for Social Justice, pushed for stronger civilian oversight of local law enforcement after George Floyd’s murder by Minneapolis police in 2020 as one of seven demands for reform.
But the board itself doesn’t have disciplinary authority over officers. When the city receives a complaint against an officer, the police department’s Professional Standards unit conducts an investigation and delivers findings to the police chief, who then reviews that report and may request additional information.
Afterward, the chief provides a report to the board, which may provide its own report to the City Council if a board majority disagrees with the chief's findings.
Under the ordinance, “detailed written findings of fact and evidence concerning the allegations in the complaint” are provided the board, but identifying information such as faces or names of witnesses, officers and victims are edited out of the materials.
Rep. Eric Gjerde, a Democrat and Cedar Rapids police officer, said there’s merit in changing civil service procedures “to ensure every civil service employee has due process,” but objects to eliminating citizen police review boards.
“This comes back to, in my opinion, a local-control issue,” Gjerde told The Gazette. “ … I think the Cedar Rapids Police Department, the city of Cedar Rapids and the Cedar Rapids police review board has a positive relationship and should be able to continue.”
Bill would ‘silence’ marginalized voices
In a statement, the Advocates for Social Justice board urged the community to call state representatives and ask they vote no on the bill. The advocates say the Cedar Rapids City Council's approval of the board affirmed its role in strengthening community-police relations and law enforcement accountability.
"SF 2325 is yet another example of our state legislature trying to silence the Black, Brown and other marginalized voices of the citizens of Iowa,“ the group said. ”After all the protests, community forums and negotiations, it is disgusting, heartbreaking and telling that we are still having to navigate repeated attacks and setbacks. ASJ affirms that the state’s action to ban citizen review boards is an act of white supremacy and one that is intentional act to uphold violent and racist systems in our state, all while undermining local agency.“
Rep. Sami Scheetz, D-Cedar Rapids, said House Democrats plan to offer amendments to “preserve and protect the existence and operation of citizen review boards across Iowa.”
“While I recognize and support many aspects of the civil service bill that provide necessary protections for public-sector workers,” eliminating the police review boards “undermines the progress we have made in establishing crucial platforms for dialogue, accountability, and reform within our policing systems,” Scheetz said. “The presence of citizen review boards has proved to be an invaluable asset in building trust and fostering a constructive relationship between law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve.”
The bill now heads to the full House Local Government Committee for consideration and passage before a March 15 legislative deadline.
https://www.thegazette.com/state-government/iowa-bill-would-ban-citizen-police-review-boards/
