HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-11-2022 Meeting PacketMEMORANDUM
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
A Board of the City of Iowa City
DATE: October 5, 2022
TO: CPRB Members
FROM: Tammy Neumann
RE: Board Packet for meeting on TUESDAY, OCTOBER 11, 2022
Enclosed please find the following documents for your review and comment at the next board meeting:
■ Agenda for 10/11 /22
• Minutes of the meeting on 09/13/22
• ICPD Use of Force Review/Report
• ICPD Memorandum- Quarterly Summary report IAIR/CPRB, 3rd Qtr. 2022
• DRAFT — Fiscal Year 2022 CPRB Annual Report
• Office Contacts — September 2022
• Complaint Deadlines
AGENDA
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
Tuesday, October 11, 2022 — 5:30 P.M.
EMMA J HARVAT HALL
410 E. Washington Street
ITEM NO.1 CALL TO ORDER and ROLL CALL
ITEM NO.2 REPORT FROM NOMINATING COMMITTEE
ITEM NO.3 CONSIDER MOTION TO FIX METHOD OF VOTING
COMMENT: As the By -Laws do not prescribe the method of voting, the Board
will need to make a motion to fix the method of voting. Nominations can be made
by balloting or from the floor. Voting can be by voice vote, show of hands, or
ballot. The Board should decide if the basis for decision is majority vote of the
total membership and procedure for canvass of ballots.
ITEM NOA NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF CHAIRPERSON
MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS
BALLOT OR VOTE
ITEM NO.5 NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF VICE -CHAIRPERSON
MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS
BALLOT OR VOTE
ITEM NO. 6 CONSIDER MOTION ADOPTING CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR
AMENDED
■ Minutes of the meeting on 9/13/22
• ICPD Use of Force Review/Report April 2022
• ICPD Memorandum — Quarterly Summary report IAIR/CPRB, 3rd Qtr. 2022
ITEM NO. 7 NEW BUSINESS
• Fiscal Year 2022 CPRB Annual Report
• CPRB Meeting Location
CPRB-Page 2
October 11, 2022
ITEM NO. 8 OLD BUSINESS
a None
ITEM NO. 9 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. 10 BOARD INFORMATION
ITEM NO. 11 STAFF INFORMATION
ITEM NO. 12 MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS
• November 8, 2022, 5:30 PM, Emma J Harvat Hall
• December,14, 2022, 5:30 PM, Emma J Harvat Hall
• January 10, 2023, 5:30 PM, Emma J Harvat Hall
ITEM NO. 13 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 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies
including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22-7(5)
police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in
the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are
made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of
government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications
from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons
would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available
for general public examination.
ITEM NO. 14 ADJOURNMENT
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.
Preliminary
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 13, 2022
CALL TO ORDER: Vice -Chair Orville Townsend called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ricky Downing, Melissa Jensen, Jerri MacConnell,
Saul Mekies, Orville Townsend, Stuart Vander Vegte (5:35 p.m.)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Amanda Nichols
STAFF PRESENT: Staff Tammy Neumann, Legal Counsel Patrick Ford
OTHERS PRESENT: Iowa City Police Captain Denise Brotherton, CPRB Liaison — Councilor
Laura Bergus, Deputy City Manager Redmond Jones
RECOMMENATIONS TO COUNCIL
(1) Accept CPRB #22-06 Report
(2) Accept CPRB #22-07 Report
CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion by MacConnell, seconded by Jensen to adopt the consent calendar as presented.
• Minutes of the meeting on 08/16/22
• ICPD Policy 304 (Conducted Energy Device)
• ICPD Policy 1033 (Wellness Program)
Motion carried 5/0. Nichols and Vander Vegte absent.
NEW BUSINESS
Select Nominating Committee — Mekies and MacConnell volunteered to be on the nominating
committee. They will report back to the Board with recommendations for Chair and Vice Chair at the
next meeting.
Discuss CPRB Board Powers 8-8-8 B T "Orr its own motion by a simple maigrity vote of all members
of the board the board may file a complaint. " - MacConnell stated she has some concerns about a
Board member having the ability to submit a complaint on the Boards behalf based on videos seen on
the news and on social media. She referred to a statement made by previous Chairman Selmer who
said the Board could only respond to complaints that were filed by a citizen and if a Board member saw
something they had a concern about, they could file a complaint individually as a citizen. She explained
she is following two principles. First is to be fair and to protect the integrity of the Board. Second, she
strongly objects to a complaint being filed based on something that was posted on social media or was
seen on the news. She noted the Board has always stated that a complaint can only be filed by
someone who was "in the vicinity and saw it with their own eyes." She pointed out if the Board can do
this, then what is stopping the public from filing complaints based on social media and the news as well.
She shared if this situation comes up in a future meeting, she will abstain to save the Board's integrity.
Jensen stated she shares in MacConnell's concerns. She noted it is difficult for the Board to be
objective when filing a complaint based on social media etc. Townsend shared that having worked with
CPRB
September 13, 2022
people with mental illness, he understands they are quite vulnerable, and as such are not going to file a
complaint on their own. Townsend thinks removing this option from the ordinance may exclude these
individuals. He said it is necessary for the Board to protect the vulnerable population. MacConnell
reminded Townsend that individuals are invited to have a support person assist them in the process.
Ford explained that the ordinance allows a board member to make a motion to file a complaint and
putting it to vote by the Board. If approved, a board member will file a complaint on behalf of the entire
board. He said to remove this power would require approval by the Board and then Council. Jensen
said while the ordinance gives the Board the power to file a complaint, it is necessary to take into
consideration of the concerns of all Board Members. Vander Vegte shared that after seeing a particular
incident on social media and on the news, he felt it was necessary for the Board to further investigate
the incident. He pointed out that in an instance where a person may have a criminal record, they are
not likely to file a complaint on their own. He further noted it is important for the Board protect the public
while also having a good relationship with the police officers who are here to serve and protect. If the
Board were to file a complaint, it would allow members to view the body -cam video may provide more
of the necessary information. Ford suggested perhaps the Board could suggest an amendment to the
item in the ordinance to include specific parameters to be met prior to filing a report. Townsend asked
MacConnell put some notes together regarding the potential ordinance amendment and to let the Board
know when she has this complete so it can be added to a future agenda.
OLD BUSINESS
None
PUBLIC DISCUSSIO
None
BOARD INFORMATION
None
STAFF INFORMATION
Jensen expressed her desire to move the meetings back to the Helling Conference Room stating it is
easier to hear other board members speak and it puts the members at a closer proximity to the big
screen when viewing reports etc. This item will be added to the October agenda for further discussion.
MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS
• October 11, 2022 5:30 PM, Emma J. Harvat Hall
• November 8, 2022, 5:30 PM, Emma J. Harvat Hall
• December 13, 2022, 5:30 PM, Emma J. Harvat Hall
• January 10, 2022 5:30 PM Emma J. Harvat Hall
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Motion by Jensen, seconded by Vander Vegte, 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
CPRB
September 13, 2022
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 6/0. Nichols absent. Open session adjourned at 5:50 p.m.
REGULAR SESSION
Returned to open session at 6:21 p.m.
Motion by Jensen, seconded by Vander Vegte, to accept CPRB Report #22-06 as amended and
forward to City Council.
Motion carried 5/0. Mekies abstained. Nichols absent.
Motion by Vander Vegte, seconded by Jensen, to accept CPRB Report #22-07 as amended and
forward to City Council.
Motion carried 6/0. Nichols Absent.
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Mekies, seconded by Vander Vegte to adjourn the meeting at 6:25 p.m.
Motion carried 6/0. Nichols absent.
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2021 - 2022
•9/20/21
1011221
11/1/21
11/9/21
12/13/21
01/1122
02/08/22
03/08/22
04/08/22
04/20/22
05/10/22
06/14/22
07/12/22
08/16/22
09/13/22
NAME
FORUM
Ricky
—
----
—
—
—
•---
—
—
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Downing
Melissa
X
X
X
O
X
X
X
Jensen
Jerri
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
MacConnell
Saul Mekies
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Amanda
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
Nichols
Theresa
X
X
X
X
O
O
---
••--
-
--
---
-
----
f"
Seeberger
Orville
X
X
X
O/E
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Townsend
Stuart
----
—
—
•---
—
—••
•---
---•
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
O/E
X
Vander Vegte
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a Member
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
A Board of the City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-1826
(319) 356-5041
September 13, 2022
To: City Council
Complainant
City Manager
Chief of Police
Officer(s) involved in complaint
From: Community Police Review Board
Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint # 22 - 06
This is the Report of the Community Police Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of
Complaint CPRB # 22 - 06 (the "Complaint").
BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY:
Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, the Board's responsibilities are as follows:
1. The Board forwards all complaints to the Police Chief, who completes an investigation. (Iowa
City Code Section 8-8-7(A).)
2. When the Board receives the Police Chiefs report, the Board must select one or more of the
following levels of review, in accordance with Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1):
a. On the record with no additional investigation.
b. Interview /meet with complainant.
c. Interview /meet with named officer(s) and other officers.
d. Request additional investigation by the police chief, or request police assistance in the
board's own investigation.
e. Perform its own investigation with the authority to subpoena witnesses.
f. Hire independent investigators.
3. In reviewing the Police Chiefs report, the Board must apply a "reasonable basis" standard of
review. This means that the Board must give deference to the Police Chiefs report, because of
the Police Chief's 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)(3)).)
6. Even if the Board finds that the complaint is sustained, the Board has no authority to discipline
the officer involved.
BOARD'S PROCEDURE:
The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on April 7, 2022. As required by Section
8-8-5(B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation.
The Chief's Report was filed with the City Clerk on June 1, 2022. As per Section 8-8-6(D) of the City
Code, the Complainant was given the opportunity to respond to the Chief's report.
The Board voted on July 12, 2022 to apply the following Level of Review to the Chiefs Report: on the
record with no additional investigation, pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1)(a).
The Board met to consider the Report on July 12, 2022, August 16, 2022, and September 13, 2022.
Prior to the July 12, 2022 meeting, the Board had the opportunity to review the complaint and the Police
Chief's report, and to watch and listen to body worn camera and/or in -car camera footage showing the
interaction between the officers and complainant.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
Complainant called police about a verbal altercation between him and employees at Hy Vee. He felt he
had a dissatisfactory engagement with employees. Police were dispatched. The underlying basis for the
altercation between the complainant and the store employees was unclear. When police arrived,
complainant was unhappy with treatment of the complaint and how the police officers treated the
complainant. These are the things that the complainant felt were not done according to procedure.
ALLEGATION 1 — Neglect of Duty — Violation of ICPD Rules and Regs 315 Duty Responsibilities
— Officers shall respond to requests for police assistance from members of the public.
Chief's Conclusion — Not Sustained
Board's Conclusion — Not Sustained
Basis for Board's Conclusion — The complainant alleged the officers involved were somehow
neglectful in their duties in dealing with complainant's situation. "Both officers listened patiently to the
Complainant voice his complaints about a private business, Hy-Vee. However, the officers determined
that the employees did not assault or harass the Complainant, so there was no criminal act for the
officers to investigate. One officer tried to explain that the situation was not a police matter, and would
be best handled by filing a complaint with Hy-Vee management. The other officer told the Complainant
the officer did not know how the officers could help the Complainant, and asked how they could
help. The officers were called to the scene by Hy-Vee management — not by the Complainant. There
is nothing to support the Complainant's allegations that the officers did not respond to a request for
police assistance. After reviewing body cam footage, the Board felt there was no basis to the allegation.
ALLEGATION 2 — Officer's business cards were not provided — Violation of ICPD Rules and
Regs Rule 335.10 Department Business Cards — A personalized card may be used by officers.
Chief's Conclusion — Not Sustained
Board's Conclusion — Not Sustained
Basis for Board's Conclusion - The complainant alleged the officers involved did not have business
cards with them. According to rule 335.10, Officers are not required to have business cards on hand,
but it is considered the best practice. One of the officers did give their badge numbers and names to
the complainant. Therefore, the Board felt there was no basis to the allegation.
ALLEGATION 3 — Discourtesy — Violation of ICPD Rules and Regs 320.04 Courtesy — Members
shall be courteous and orderly in their dealings with the public.
Chief's Conclusion — Not Sustained
Board's Conclusion — Not Sustained
Basis for Board's Conclusion - The complainant alleged the officers involved were discourteous in
the execution of their duty. Both officers were patient, professional and compassionate to the
complainant. Both officers behaved courteously and were clearly interested in the complainant's well-
being. The officers offered advice to the complainant on how to remedy the matter to his satisfaction.
After reviewing body cam footage, the Board felt there was no basis to the allegation.
COMMENTS: The Board agrees that carrying of business cards is best practice.
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
A Board of the City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-1826
(319) 356-5041
September 14, 2022
To: City Council
Complainant
City Manager
Chief of Police
The officer(s) involved in complaint
From: Community Police Review Board
Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint #22-07
This is the Report of the Community Police Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of
Complaint CPRB #22-07 (the "Complaint").
BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY:
Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, the Board's responsibilities are as follows:
1. The Board forwards all complaints to the Police Chief, who completes an investigation. (Iowa
City Code Section 8-8-7(A).)
2. When the Board receives the Police Chiefs report, the Board must select one or more of the
following levels of review, in accordance with Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1):
a. On the record with no additional investigation.
b. Interview /meet with complainant.
c. Interview /meet with named the officer(s) and other the 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 Chief's 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 on/y if:
a. The findings are not supported by substantial evidence; or
b. The findings are unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious; or
c. The findings are contrary to a police department policy or practice, or any federal, state,
or local law.
5. When the Board has completed its review of the Police Chiefs report, the Board issues a public
report to the city council. The public report must include: (1) detailed findings of fact; and (2) a
clearly articulated conclusion explaining why and the extent to which the complaint is either
"sustained" or "not sustained ". (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(3)).)
6. Even if the Board finds that the complaint is sustained, the Board has no authority to discipline
the officer involved.
BOARD'S PROCEDURE:
The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on May 19, 2022. As required by Section
8-8-5(B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation.
The Chief's Report was filed with the City Clerk on July 8, 2022. As per Section 8-8-6(D) of the City
Code, the Complainant was given the opportunity to respond to the Chiefs report.
The Board voted on August 16, 2022 to apply the following Level of Review to the Chiefs Report: On the
record with no additional investigation, pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7 (13)(1)(a).
The Board met to consider the Report on July 8, 2022, August 16, 2022, and September 13, 2022.
Prior to the July 12, 2022 meeting, the Board had the opportunity to review the complaint and the Police
Chief's report. At the July 12, 2022 meeting, the board had the opportunity to watch and listen to body
worn camera and/or in -car camera footage showing the interaction between the officer and the
complainant.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
On 3/29/2022, the officer took a phone request for a theft and returned the call. The Complainant
advised she had hired a mover in 2020 to move belongings from a location in Iowa City to a location in
Texas, and pieces of her property were not delivered after paying for the services. The officer advised
the Complainant that it was a civil matter and not criminal. The Complainant then left another message
for the officer with the mover's contact information. The officer spoke with the mover and then contact
the Complainant, advising her of the conversation with the mover, and suggested to her to work out the
situation with the mover.
On 4/13/2022, additional calls from the Complainant were received by a supervisor, who emailed the
officer. The officer contacted the Complainant on 4/15/2022, and advised her if the Complainant wanted
to make a fraud report, she should work with her bank. An additional call was received by a supervisor
from the Complainant on 5/19/2022, an email was sent to the officer, who returned a call to the
Complainant on 5/21/2022 when he returned from time off. The Complainant emailed the officer her
bank statement, and the officer advised he would let her know if there was anything criminal. The
officer determined the issue was still a civil matter.
The officer had no unanswered contacts from the Complainant and all calls were recorded. The Cedar
Rapids Police Department was originally contacted by the Complainant on 5/22/2020, she was advised
the matter was civil and referred to the Iowa City Police Department as the reported transaction
occurred in Iowa City. The Complainant did not contact Iowa City until 3/29/2022.
On 6/8/2022, the Complainant was contacted by a supervisor from ICPD who advised the Complainant
the situation was a civil matter. The supervisor discussed the reasons why with the Complainant, and
case number was provided for her insurance company.
COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION #1 — Neglect of duties
Chief's conclusion: Not sustained
Board's conclusion: Not sustained
Basis for the Board's conclusion: The Complainant alleges that the officer refused to help her
regarding an alleged stolen credit card and stolen property, and failed to return emails or call the
Complainant back. The officer returned every request he received to contact the Complainant. A
review of the Information supports this conclusion. There may have been a misunderstanding
on the part of the Complainant about what the police were doing, and she believed it to be
criminal, however the Complainant had been advised on more than one occasion, the matter
was civil and not criminal. The Complainant's claims were documented to assist her with the
civil process. The officer's actions were not in violation of policy.
COMMENTS: None
TO: Chief Dustin Liston
CD
FROM: Sgt. Andrew McKnight - ``--
RE: April 2022 Use of Force Review
DATE: September 23", 2022
The Iowa City Police Department policy requires an employee to complete a written report -for any��portable
use of force. Reportable use of force is defined in the Department's General Order 99-05, which is`�rtled Use
of Force and available for public viewing on the department's website. This policy provides employees with
guidelines on the use of deadly and non -deadly force.
Upon receipt of the report, the supervisor is responsible for completing an administrative critique of the
force. This process includes interviews with involved employees, body worn and in -car camera review,
review of any additional available video, and review of written reports. The employee's use of force report
and the supervisor's critique is then forwarded to the Captain of Field Operations and the Chief of Police for
final review and critique.
On a monthly basis, the previous month's use of force reports and supervisor critiques are reviewed by an
administrative review committee consisting of a minimum of three sworn personnel. This Use of Force
Committee consists of two supervisors as designated by the Chief of Police and one officer, typically a
certified use of force instructor.
The Use of Force Review Committee met on September 23rd, 2022. It was composed of Sgt. McKnight,
Sgt. J Fink, and Officer Colin Fowler.
For the review of submitted reports in April, the Review Committee documented the following:
■ 52 individual officers were involved in 26 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 26 uses of force, 24 involved force being used against people. There were two animals euthanized
by officers.
• Out of the 52 officers involved in the 24 uses of force against people, 6 superficial injuries were sustained by
suspects and 1 superficial injury was sustained by an officer.
• No violations of policy were noted during this review period.
• Out of the 24 uses of force against people, arrests were made 20 times (83%).
• Mental health was identified by officers as being a factor in seven of the uses of force used against persons
(29%).
• Drugs and/or alcohol was identified by officers as being a factor in seventeen of the 24 uses of force against
persons (70%).
• Out of the 24 times force was used on persons, four were identified as white females (16%), eight were
identified as white males (33%), thirteen were identified as black males (54%) and two were identified as black
females (8%).
■ Out of the 24 uses of force, the average number of officers involved in the force was 2.3
• In total during this time, the ICPD had 5,187 calls for service with 24 calls for service resulting in force being
used on persons.
The highest level of force in each incident is reflected below along with the year-to-date:
Force Used Aril 2022 Occurrences
2022 Year -to -Date
Hands-on
8 37
1 6
0 3
4 5
9 14
Taser Display
Taser Discharge
OC Spray Deployment
Firearm(s) Display
Firearms Discharge
0
0
ASP Striking
0
0
Officer Striking/KickingStriking/Kicking
0
0
Animals Euthanized by Officer
2
6
Spec Response Team Callouts
0
1
Vehicle Pursuits
0
0
Officer Injuries
2
5
Suspect Injuries
6
10
Reports to U.S. DOJ
0
0
Total Use of Force incidents to date equal 78. Total calls for service in the same period equal 19,364. This
results in a year-to-date use of force being deployed in .40% of our total year-to-date calls for service.
Watch Date
Occurred
and
Officers
Involved
Late Night
Watch —
Two
Officers
IOWA CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
Use of Force Report
April 2022
Incident Incident type Arrest Force Used
Number Made
Y/N
4/1 1 2022002390 1 Domestic
IFA
April 2022 Use of Force Report
I0 A CFTV
cs iow♦
PULICE
Officers responded to a
business for reports of a
fight. Before officers
arrived, the male half of the
altercation who had thrown
a female subject to the
ground, striking her
repeatedly, took off in a
vehicle. The vehicle was
located, and the subject
identified and arrested.
When taken into custody,
the subject attempted to
walk away from an officer
and an officer took hold of
the subject's jacket, pulling
him towards the officer.
The subject tensed up and
continued to pull away from
the officer. An officer used
their right and left hands to
hold on to the subject's left
hand attempting to pull it
behind his back. The
subject continued to pull
away. An officer placed
their left leg behind the
subject's legs, using his
momentum to place him on
the ground. An officer
used both hands to hold on
to the subject's right arm,
placing it into an arm bar
behind his back. An officer
told the subject to put both
c
April 2022 Use of Force Report
hands behind his back or
he would be sprayed with a
chemical irritant. The
subject complied and
handcuffs were placed on
each wrist. The subject
was transported to the
police department for
processing for operating
while intoxicated. While at
the police department the
subject refused multiple
times to exit the vehicle.
One officer took hold of the
subject's left arm with their
right hand and pulled him
from the vehicle. The
subject lunged and kicked
an officer. An officer
continued to hold on to the
subject's left arm and
another officer placed their
arm under the subject's
arm pit creating an
underhook as they walked
the subject to the police
department. Once inside
the subject continued to
fight with officers and an
officer took hold of the
subject's shirt with both
hands, then, using their left
hand took hold of the
subject's right shoulder
pulling the subject to the
ground. Another officer
assisted by pushing the
back of the subject's head
towards the ground. The
subject stood up and an
officer pulled the subject's
feet with their hands,
causing the subject to sit
on abench where he was
secured with handcuffs.
There were no injuries to
the subject or officers.
Late Night
4/2
2022002394
Fight
Y
Officers responded to a
Watch —
fight in progress at a local
Three
bar where it was reported
Officers
that a male and female
were engaged in a fight
outside. Officers arrived
and observed a male and
female fighting. One
officer took hold of the
subject's shoulders to
prevent her from re-
engaging in the fight. An
officer placed their arms
around the subject and
lowered her to the ground.
The subject stood up and
attempted to run from
officers. An officer
wrapped their arms around
the subject's legs and
lowered her to the ground
again. The subject
continued to throw elbows
at officers as well as
continuing to kick out and
c
scream at officers. One
officer placed their hand on
the back of the subject's
head, pushing down
towards the ground. The
3
subject ignored all
commands to stop fighting
CD
and continued to assault
_
officers by kicking and
striking towards officers.
One officer sprayed the
subject in the face with a
chemical irritant and an
officer took hold of the
subject's left arm, placing it
behind the subject's back
so that another officer
could take hold of her right
arm, pull it behind her back
April 2022 Use of Force Report
so that another officer
could place handcuffs on
each wrist. One officer
took hold of the subject's
right arm with their left
hand and escorted her to
the squad car. The subject
continued to pull away and
-_
refused to walk to the
in
vehicle without dragging
9
her feet. At the squad car,
=�
the subject braced her feet
in the vehicle door and
refused to sit inside the
vehicle. An officer pushed
on the subject's upper
body and head into the
vehicle. There were no
injuries to officers and
superficial injuries to the
subject.
Late Night
4/3
2022002432
Armed Subject
Y
Officers responded to a bar
Watch —
for reports of men
Three
displaying handguns
Officers
outside the bar. Upon
arrival, officers could see a
handgun inside a vehicle
occupied by several male
subjects. The officers on
scene drew their service
weapons, two were kept at
the low ready and one was
pointed at the subjects as
they exited the vehicle and
were placed into handcuffs.
Once the subjects were
removed from the vehicle
and secured the officers
holstered their weapons.
There were no injuries to
the subject or officers.
Evening
4/3
2022002473
Traffic Stop
Y Officers located a subject
Watch —
on a traffic stop who was
Two
barred from driving.
Officers
Officers attempted to place
the subject into handcuffs,
April 2022 Use of Force Report
i
2022002572
Evening
4/8
Fight
Y
Watch —
One Officer
April 2022 Use of Force Report
but she continued to pull
away from officers.
Officers grabbed the
subject's left arm with both
hands. The subject
attempted to retrieve items
from her pocket and
continued to pull away from
officers. An officer told the
subject to stop pulling
away or she would be
sprayed with a chemical
irritant. The subject
continued to pull away and
was sprayed with a
chemical irritant in the face.
The subject then placed
her hands behind her back
and handcuffs were placed
on both wrists. There were
no injuries to officers or the
sect.
Officers responded to a bar
for reports of a fight where
the subject assaulted bar
staff. An officer placed the
subject under arrest, pulled
their arms behind their
back and placed handcuffs
on each wrist. The subject
was told to walk to a
nearby police vehicle, but
the subject planted his feet
firmly on the ground and
refused to walk. The
subject was told by the
officer that they would
apply a wrist lock which
would cause discomfort if
the subject did not start
walking. An officer applied
a wrist lock, holding on to
the subject's left arm with
their left hand and twisting
the subject's left wrist. The
subject then complied and
walked toward the vehicle
without any other issues.
There were no injuries to
the subject or officers.
ip Y Officers initiated a felony
traffic stop on a vehicle
containing three individuals
suspected of being armed
and being involved in a
burglary. Officers had their
sidearms drawn and one
officer pointed his sidearm
at the occupants as they
exited the vehicle and were
handcuffed. There were
no injuries to the subjects
or officers.
:r
Y
April 2022 Use of Force Report
Officers assisted the
another law enforcement
agency on a traffic stop.
Officers asked the subject
multiple times to exit the
vehicle, but the subject
refused. Two officers
grabbed the subject's left
arm and pulled the subject
from the vehicle. The
subject struck an officer
with a closed fist on the
officer's chest. An officer
pushed the subject on the
back towards the side of
her vehicle, trying to pull
the subject's hands behind
her back. An officer placed
their body near the
subject's torso and placed
their leg between the
subject's legs in order to
keep the subject in place
for handcuffing. The
subject urinated on the
officer. An officer took hold
of her hands and tried to
pull them behind her back.
The subject continued to
Day Shift —
One Officer
Late Night
Watch —
Four
Officers
4/10 1 2022002640
4/10 1 2022002630
Domestic
Fight
Y
u
April 2022 Use of Force Report
hold on to the bed of the
truck in order to resist the
handcuffing process. An
officer took hold of the
subject's hand and the
subject bit the officer. An
officer drew their taser and
announced that the subject
was about to be tased,
however, the officer
holstered the taser without
use. An officer was able to
pull the subject' hands
behind their back and
complete the handcuffing
process. There were no
injuries to the subject and
superficial injuries to an
officer.
Officers were dispatched to
a residence for a domestic
assault. While speaking to
the suspect standing in the
doorway, an officer took
hold of the subject's right
hand with their hands and
pulled the subject out of
the residence. The subject
lowered himself to his
knees and the officer
pulled the subject's hands
behind his back and placed
handcuffs on each wrist.
There were no injuries to
the officers or subject.
Officers responded to
reports of multiple subject's
fighting in an alleyway near
a business. Upon arrival
officers arrested several
individuals. An officer took
hold of a subject's left arm
to apply handcuffs. The
subject continued to pull
away and an officer took
hold of the subject's torso
c•-)
4.J
Day Shift —
One Officer
Late Night
Watch —
One Officer
Evening
Watch —
One Officer
4/11 2022002655 Injured Animal
4/12 1 2022002685 1 Injured Animal
4/13
N
N
2022002739 Warrant Y
Service
April 2022 Use of Force Report
and pulled the subject to
the ground. The subject
continued to flail around.
An officer sprayed a
chemical irritant in the
subject's eyes and an
officer pulled the subject's
arms behind their back and
handcuffs were applied.
Officers approached other
subject's who were fighting
instructing them to stop but
the fighting continued.
One subject was placed
into handcuffs immediately
and placed into a patrol
vehicle. Another subject
who had been fighting was
located in a vehicle. Two
officers took hold of her
arm and pulled her from
the vehicle. The subject
continued to pull away from
officers. One officer pulled
the subject's left arm
behind her back and
another officer pulled her
right arm behind her back
and applied handcuffs. The
subject was placed inside a
patrol vehicle and
transported to jail. There
were no injuries to officers
or subjects.
Injured deer shot and killed
by officer.
Injured deer shot and killed
by officer.
An officer encountered a
vehicle with a passenger
who had an active arrest
warrant. An officer drew
their sidearm and kept the
weapon at the low ready as
they ordered the subject
Evening
4/14
2022002762
Felony Stop
Watch —
One Officer
Evening
4/14
2022002768
Trespass
N
Watch —
One Officer
c�
�w
April 2022 Use of Force Report
out of the vehicle. The
subject complied, exited
the vehicle, put their hands
behind their back and
handcuffs were placed on
each wrist. There were no
injuries to officer or subject.
Officers located a stolen
vehicle previously
broadcast by another law
enforcement agency. The
vehicle was driven by a
subject known to have
violated an order of
protection earlier in the
evening. The subject was
also known to be a barred
driver. Officers called the
subject out of his vehicle
and an officer pointed their
service weapon at the
subject. The subject
followed all commands,
walked towards officers,
lowered himself to his
knees and was handcuffed
by officers without injury to
the subject or officers.
Officers responded to a
residence for reports of a
suspected prowler who had
entered a crawl space.
Officers positioned
themselves outside the
crawl space as a hatch
opened. Officers gave
commands for the subject
to show his hands, one
officer pointed their service
weapon at the subject until
he showed his hands.
There were no injuries to
officers or the subject.
Late Night
4/15
2022002804
Trespass
Y
Officers
Watch —
reports
Two
was tre
Officers
busines
advised
also hal
arrest v
told the
active a
the sub,
claims,
from ofi
ran dove
blockec
vehicle,
turned 1
with cle
took a f
officer
and pu;
the pats
subject
and an
subject
chemic
attempt
subject
down o
to hold
while ai
handcu
The sul
transpc
was set
flushed
subject
wanted
hospita
transpc
hospita
hospita
compla
handcu
An offic
set of h
the sub
April 2022 Use of Force Report
responded for
of a subject who
spassing at a local
;s. Dispatch
I that the subject
d multiple active
tarrants. One officer
subject that he had
irrest warrants and
ject refuted the
and began to run
'icers. The subject
in a path which was
I by a police patrol
The subject
:owards an officer
nched fists and
fighting stance. One
ackled the subject
Shed him towards
-ol vehicle. The
continued to fight,
officer sprayed the
in the face with a
al irritant. In an
to control the
an officer pushed
n the subject's head
the subject in place
n officer placed
ffs on each wrist.
)ject was
irted to jail where he
an by EMS who
out his eyes. The
then stated that he
to go to the
I and an officer
irted him to the
I. Once at the
I, the subject
ined that his
ffs were too tight.
:er added another
andcuffs to make
ject more
(J
ct
65
c-
C. a
Evening 4116 2022002828
Watch —
One Officer
Evening 4117 2022002854
Watch —
One Officer i
Suspicious
Activity
Warrant
Service
comfortable. The subject
continued to berate officers
and refused to get back
into the squad car after he
had received his treatment.
One officer took hold of the
subject's right arm with
both of their hands as
another officer took hold of
the subject's left side.
One officer pushed the
subject's upper body into
the vehicle and then took
hold of the subject's legs,
placing them into the
vehicle and closing the
door as the subject
continued to kick and spit
at officers. The subject
was transported to jail
without injury to officers or
the subject.
Y Upon seeing a uniformed
police officer, a subject
took off running refusing to
stop when directed to do
so. An officer chased the
subject who reached into
his waistband and
discarded an unidentified
object. Once the officer
caught up with the subject,
they drew their sidearm
and pointed it at the
subject directing them to
the ground. The subject
complied, was handcuffed,
and found to have an
active arrest warrant. The
subject was taken to jail
without injury to the subject
or officers.
Y An officer observed a
subject known to have an
active arrest warrant and a
history of assaulting
April 2022 Use of Force Report
officers. An officer
approached the subject
and told him he had an
c'
active arrest warrant. The
subject dropped to his
knees, placed his hands
�•--
behind his back and an
ti
officer placed hand cuffs
c
onto each wrist. The
subject was told to stand
up but refused. An officer
used their left hand to grab
the subject's sweatshirt
and lifted him to his feet.
The subject was told to
walk but refused, instead
planting his feet on the
ground, leaning his body
weight back making it
difficult for the officer to
move the subject. An
officer placed the subject's
right thumb over the
handcuffs using their left
hand in an attempt to get
the subject to walk forward.
The officer also pulled the
front of his sweatshirt to
get him to walk but he
continued to plant his feet
and refused to walk. The
subject began moving from
side to side in an attempt
to get away from the
officer, so an officer placed
their right leg behind the
subject and pushed on the
subject's chest, causing
him to fall backwards,
stopping him from
continuing to flee. An
officer took hold of the
subject's shirt and leg
using their right hand,
picked the subject up and
carried him to a waiting
April 2022 Use of Force Report
vehicle. The subject
continued to kick out
towards the officer striking
the officer in the leg. The
officer grabbed the front of
the subject's sweater and
lifted the subject to his feet.
The officer used their left
hand and grabbed the
subject's sweatshirt with an
underhook position and
walked the subject to the
car. The subject was
placed into the vehicle and
taken to jail. There were no
injuries to the subject or
officers.
Evening
4/17
2022002860
OWI
Y
Three officers responded
Watch —
to reports of a driver in a
Three
vehicle striking parked cars
Officers
in a parking lot. Upon
arrival an officer located an
intoxicated subject in the
driver's side of his vehicle.
The officer instructed to the
subject to exit the vehicle,
but he refused. An officer
leaned into the vehicle and
unlocked the door. An
officer took hold of the
subject's left arm with their
right hand, but the subject
pulled away, refusing to
exit the vehicle. Another
officer took hold of the
subject's left wrist and
began pulling him out of
the vehicle, but the subject
continued to pull away. An
officer reached into the
vehicle to take hold of the
subject and the subject bit
the officer. An officer
sprayed the subject in the
face and another officer
attempted to pull the
April 2022 Use of Force Report
subject out of the vel
from the passenger
The subject lunged
towards an officer ar
officer drew their tas
their pocket, pointinc
towards the subject,
placing the dot on hi
torso. The subjects
back on to the seat.
officer placed their h
on the subject's left i
and pulled him from
vehicle onto the grOL
Another officer place
knee on the small of
back to keep him on
ground while anothe
officer pulled the sut
arms behind his bac
placed handcuffs on
each wrist. There w
injuries to the officer
the suspect receivec
superficial injuries.
Day Watch
4/18
2022002872
Mental Crisis
N
Officers responded t
— Two
residence for reportE
Officers
female subject who I
her wrists with an
unidentified object.
arrival, officers locate
female inside a bath
The female attemptE
-:
hold the door shut, c
could see the femalE
was bleeding from h
w
arms. There was bl(
4�
other areas of the
'
bathroom. Officers t(
hold of the subject's
and right arms and c
her out of the bathro
away from the razor
she had been using
herself. The subject
the floor crying as of
April 2022 Use of Force Report
hicle
side.
id an
er from
i it
at
An
ands
Nrist
the
and.
:d their
his
the
)ject's
k and
to
ere no
s and
oa
;ofa
iad cut
Upon
ad the
room.
.d to
ifficers
who
er
)od in
)ok
left
lulled
om
that
to cut
sat on
ficers
Late Night
utilized de-escalation
techniques until the subject
received medical
treatment. There were no
injuries to the officers or
_subject.
Officers attempted to
4/23
2022002991
Suspicious
Y
Watch —
Activity
identify a subject in a local
Two
bar and the subject
Officers
repeatedly refused to
produce identification and
attempted to run from
officers. An officer took
hold of the subject's left
arm to prevent him from
running but he broke free
from the officer's grip and
continued to flail around in
an attempt to pull away
from the officer. One
officer pushed the subject
up against a nearby wall,
and an officer pulled both
of the subject's arms
behind his back, walking
him towards the exit. Once
outside, the subject
continued to attempt to run
from officers. One officer -
maintained control of the
subject's arms by holding
on to them as the officer
C,1
told the subject to get on
the ground. The subject
refused to comply so one
officer tripped the subject
by sweeping his leg,
rig
-
directing the subject to the
ground while holding on to
his arms. Another officer
pushed the subject using
his forward momentum on
to direct him to the ground.
Once on the ground an
officer pulled the subject's
arms behind his back and
April 2022 Use of Force Report
placed handcuffs on each
wrist. There were no
injuries to the officers and
superficial injuries to the
subject.
Officers were dispatched to
Late Night
4/23
2022003001
Weapons
Y
Watch —
Offense
reports of a subject who
One Officer
had pointed a gun at
someone. An officer
observed a male subject
with a gun in his hand as
the subject began to walk
away from the officer. The
subject continued to ignore
officer commands to stop,
instead electing to walk
away with his hand inside
his waistband. The officer
drew their service weapon,
pointed it at the subject's
torso and told him to place
his hands above his head.
The officer could see the
frame of a weapon in his
waistband and continued to
direct him to place his
hands above his head.
The subject complied and
an officer placed handcuffs
on the subject's wrists.
There were no injuries to
the subject or officers.
Evening
4/26
2022003101
Domestic
Y
Officers responded to
Watch —
Abuse
reports of a fight in a
Three
residence where a female
Officers
could be heard pleading for
the male subject to stop
touching her. A male
subject ran from officers
`
ignoring their commands to
stop. An officer chased the
subject and grabbed on to
the bottom of his shirt,
however the subject broke
:
the officers grasp and
continued running. An
April
2022 Use of Force
Report
officer caught
subject, took I
hands with thi
pulled his arrr
back and pla(
subject into N
While walking
car, the subje
continuously i
his pockets ig
commands to
subject contir
away from off
attempted to I
while he was
towards the v
subject contir
his body and
from officers.
used their hai
to the subject
they escorted
vehicle. The
stopped walk)
limp, causing
have to lift thf
the ground. (
placed their h
the subject's;
attempt to lift
ground and it
The subject k
bracing his le
vehicle preve
from placing I
vehicle. Offic
of the subject
preventing thi
kicking out to,
and placing h
_
vehicle. An c
fell off and in
r
-
to retrieve the
subject contir
out and be cc
officers rp aye
April 2022 Use of Force Report
up with the
hold of his
air hands,
is behind his
,ed the
andcuffs.
to the squad
ct
,eached into
noring
stop. The
cued to pull
ricers and
Dite an officer
walking
ehicle. The
cued to twist
pull away
Officers
ids to hold on
is torso as
him to the
subject then
ing and went
officers to
subject off
officers
ands under
arms in an
him off the
ito a vehicle.
icked out
gs against the
nting officers
iim into the
:ers took hold
's feet,
a subject from
wards officers
is feet into the
,fficers BWC
their attempts
camera the
cued to kick
imbative. An
d the subject
Day Shift —
Two
Officers
Evening
Watch —
Two ,,)
Officers
ca
n.�
4/26 1 2022003164 1 Mental Crisis
4/29 1 2022003180
Trespass
in the face with a chemical
irritant and the subject
turned away, burying his
face in the back seat.
Officers were able to shut
the door and transport the
subject. There were no
injuries to the officers and
superficial injuries to the
subject.
N Officers were assisting a
case worker with a client
who has serious mental
illness. During ambulance
transport and at the
hospital the subject
continuously attempted to
grab at staff members and
equipment. The subject
attempted to punch a
paramedic and an officer
took hold of the subject's
right hand, pulled the
subject's arm behind his
back. Another officer held
the other arm and placed
handcuffs onto each wrist.
At the hospital the
handcuffs were removed
but the subject began to be
combative, punching out
towards hospital staff.
Officers held the subject's
arms while staff placed him
into soft restraints. There
were no injuries to officers
or the subject.
Y Officers responded to a
business for reports of a
person who was
trespassing. Dispatch also
advised that the subject
had active arrest warrants.
Officers told the subject
that he was under arrest
and he began to move
April 2022 Use of Force Report
away and run from officers.
One officer placed their left
hand over the subject's
right shoulder and took
hold of the subject's right
hand with their right hand.
The subject tensed up and
pulled away. One officer
wrapped both of their arms
around the subject and
lowered him to the ground.
The officer kept their left
arm on the subject's back
keeping downward
pressure on the subject to
ensure that he did not get
up off the ground. An
officer placed their right
hand on his left shoulder,
grabbed his left wrist with
their left hand and pulled
his left arm behind his
back. An officer held his
arms behind his back and
placed handcuffs on each
wrist. There were no
injuries to the subject and
superficial injuries to an
2022003181
officer.
Officers performed a traffic
Evening
4/29
Traffic Stop
Y
Watch —
stop on a driver who was
Two
found to be in possession
Officers
of illegal substances, a toy
gun, and a suspended
license. The driver was
told to exit the vehicle so
that a search of the vehicle
could be conducted. The
subject exited the vehicle
and started to walk away
from officers. One officer
F"
took hold of the subject's
right wrist to prevent him
from walking away and the
subject pulled away and
tried to break the officer's
April 2022 Use of Force Report
grip. Doing this caused 1
subject to fall. Once on 1
ground an officer pulled 1
subject's right wrist behir
his back and another
officer pulled the subject
left wrist behind his back
placing handcuffs on ea(
wrist. There were no
injuries to the officers an
superficial injuries to the
subject.
Late Night
4/30
2022003188
Domestic
Y
Officers responded to
Watch —
reports of a domestic figl
Five
in a residence. Upon
Officers
arrival, officers heard tw(
gun shots coming from tl
residence. Officers
surrounded the residenc
and had their sidearms,
shotguns, and less letha
weapons presented in
public view. The subjecl
exited the residence, oni
officer pointed their
shotgun at the subject's
torso, while the subject
followed all commands.
Handcuffs were placed c
to each wrist and officer:
re holstered their weapo
The subject was
transported to jail. Then
were no injuries to the
subject or officers.
CD
r
April 2022 Use of Force Report
he
he
he
he
id
s
:h
J
It
ie
in
Is.
Memorandum
TO: File
FROM: Captain Denise Brotherton
RE: Quarterly Summary Report IAIR/CPRB, 3rd Quarter 2022
DATE: October 4, 2022
Attached you will find the IAIR/CPRB 2022 3rd quarter summary report for the Iowa City
Police Department Internal Affairs/Community Police Review Board investigative file.
There were two non -criminal investigations involving five ICPD employees that were
received externally through on-line CPRB complaints. These two CPRB complaints
remain under investigation. There were two internal non -criminal complaints that were
initiated by supervisory staff on three employees for improper actions and an improper
search. These investigations are still active.
cc: CPRB
Sgt. Doug Hart
[AIR / CPRB Summary
Dui NOW 22-10
CPRB NOW Date and TO of Incident location of innddetnt Assigtiad Date Type of Investilialion Res011108 0170 of Colviaint
22-09
7/2/2022
23:17
100 S Clinton
7/5/2022
Improper Conduct
External
22-09
7/2/2022
23:17
100 S Clinton
7/5/2022
Improper Conduct
External
22-09
7/2/2022
23:17
100 S Clinton
7/5/2022
Improper Conduct
External
22-09
7/2/2022
23:17
100 S Clinton
7/5/2022
Improper Conduct
External
Dut Nuoier
22-11
CPRB Numher
Date and TM of Incident
Location of Incident
As*od Date
Type of Investigation Resolution
Origin Of Ea Inp fault
8/21/2022
1:34
N Dubuque St
8/22/2022
Improper Action
Internal
8/21/2022
1:34
N Dubuque St
8/22/2022
Improper Action
Internal
R Nunber 22-12
IB NMMW Date and Tine of Incident location of Incdent Asfted Date Type of Investigation Resolution [IrigN of CWnlplain
Wednesday, October 5, 2022 Page 1 of 2
9/5/2022 22:00 600 blk Riverside Dr 9/6/2022 Improper Search Internal
DDR22-13
CPRR wmw Date and TM of fndw laeatlon of fooldetit Assklad Date Typo of luRsUgabon Rasa ffu origin of WOO
22-10 9/17/2022 19:01 Hwy 6 E/Sturgis Corn 9/20/2022 Improper Conduct External
Wednesday, October 5, 2022 Page 2 of 2
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Established in 1997, by ordinance #97-3792, the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board formerly
known as Citizens Police Review Board and now known as Community Police Review Board
(hereafter referred as the CPRB), consisted of five members appointed by the City Council. In
February of 2022, the Board increased to seven members as per ordinance #22-4873.
The Board was established to review investigations into claims of police misconduct, and to assist the
Police Chief, the City Manager, and the City Council in evaluating the overall performance of the
Police Department by reviewing the Police Department's investigations into complaints. The Board is
also required to maintain a central registry of complaints and to provide an annual report setting forth
the numbers, types, and disposition of complaints of police misconduct. The Board shall hold at least
one community forum each year for the purpose of hearing citizens' views on the policies, practices,
and procedures of the Iowa City Police Department. To achieve these purposes, the Board complies
with Chapter 8 of the Iowa City Code and the Board's By -Laws and Standard Operating Procedures
and Guidelines.
ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022
Meetings
The CPRB tentatively holds monthly meetings on the second Tuesday and special meetings as
necessary. During FY22 the Board held fifteen meetings which included two special meetings, and
one Community Forum.
ICPD Policies/Procedures/Practices Reviewed By CPRB
The ICPD regularly provided the Board with monthly Use of Force Reports, Internal Investigation
Logs, Demographic Reports, and various Training Bulletins. The Department also provided various
General Orders for the Board's review and comment. A senior member of the Police Department
routinely attended the open portion of the CPRB meetings and was available for any questions Board
members had regarding these reports.
Presentations
In April of 2022 the Board held its fourteenth Community Forum required by the City Charter. The
forum was held electronically due to COVID-19 restrictions. Board members introduced themselves
and shared a summary of the Board duties. No correspondence was received from the public.
Chairperson Nichols shared recommendations that the Board forwarded to City Council for adoption
which included expanding the board from five to seven members, allowing a 21-day period for a
complainant to respond to the Chief's Report, and the statute of limitations to file a complaint was
increased from 90 days to 180 days.
The forum was then opened to the public. There were three members of the public that sent questions
to the Board via Zoom Chat. Topics included the importance of building trust between the Police
Department and the community, the addition of a "non -police" liaison to the Police Department to
address mental health and other social issues, and the number of "sustained" vs "non -sustained"
complaints.
Board Members
In October 2021 officers were nominated with Amanda Nichols as Chair and Theresa Seeberger as
Vice -Chair. Due to the resignation of Theresa Seeberger, Orville Townsend was nominated as Vice
Chair in March 2022. Melissa Jensen was appointed in April 2022 to fill the unexpired term of
Theresa Seeberger. Ricky Downing and Stuart Vander Vegte were appointed to the board in April in
response to the amendment of the ordinance increasing the number of members from five to seven.
CPRB Annual Report FY 2022 — DRAFT 10/01 /2022 —1
COMPLAINTS
Number and Type of Allegations
Seventeen complaints (21-01, 21-02, 21-03, 21-04, 21-05, 21-06, 21-07, 21-08, 21-09, 22-01, 22-02,
22-03, 22-04, 22-05, 22-06, 22-07, 22-08) were filed during the fiscal year July 1, 2021 - June 30,
2022.
Fourteen public reports were completed during this fiscal period (20-02, 20-05, 20-06, 20-07, 20-08,
21-01, 21-02, 21-03, 21-07, 22-01, 22-02, 22-03, 22-04, 22-05). Six complaints were summarily
dismissed (21-04, 21-05, 21-06, 21-08, 21-09, 22-08). Two complaints filed in FY22 were pending
before the Board (22-06, 22-07).
ALLEGATIONS
Complaint #20-02
Allegation 1 - Excessive Use of Force.
Chiefs Report Findings: Allegation 1 - NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 1 - NOT SUSTAINED
Complaint #20-05
Allegation 1 - Excessive Use of Force.
Chiefs Report Findings: Allegation 1 - NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 1 - NOT SUSTAINED
Complaint #20-06
Allegation 1 - Excessive Use of Force.
Chief's Report Findings: Allegation 1 - NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 1 - NOT SUSTAINED
Complaint #20-07
Allegation 1 - Excessive Use of Force.
Chiefs Report Findings: Allegation 1 - NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 1 - NOT SUSTAINED
Complaint #20-08
Allegation 1 - Excessive Use of Force.
Chiefs Report Findings: Allegation 1 - NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 1 - NOT SUSTAINED
CPRB Annual Report FY 2022 - DRAFT 10/01/2022 - 2
Complaint #21-01
Allegation 1 — The reason for the two "police vans" to be called to investigate the accident.
Chiefs Report Findings: Allegation 1 - NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 1 - NOT SUSTAINED
The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager.
Allegation 2 — Other person involved in the accident was immediately allowed to leave.
Chiefs Report Findings: Allegation 2 — NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 2 — NOT SUSTAINED
The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager.
Allegation 3 — First two officers couldn't/wouldn't explain the purpose of the papers.
Chiefs Report Findings: Allegation 3 — NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 3 — NOT SUSTAINED
The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager.
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.
Chief's Report Findings: Allegation 4 — NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 4 — NOT SUSTAINED
The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager.
Allegation 5 — The 3rd officer had his hand on the holster of his gun while talking to (Man #1).
Chief's Report Findings: Allegation 5 — NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 5 — NOT SUSTAINED
The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager.
Complaint #21-02
Allegation 1 — Harassment
Chiefs Report Findings —Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager.
Allegation 2 — Denial of Mental Health Status (response to person in crisis).
Chiefs Report Findings: Allegation 2 — NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 2 — NOT SUSTAINED
The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager.
CPRB Annual Report FY 2022 — DRAFT 10/01/2022 — 3
Complaint #21-03
Allegation 1 — Excessive use of force
Chief's Report Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager.
Complaint #21-07
Allegation 1 — Improper/Unlawful Search
Chiefs Report Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager.
Complaint #22-01
Allegation 1 — Violation of Rules and Regulations 315 Duty and Responsibilities
Chief's Report Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager -
Complaint #22-02:
Allegation 1 — Excessive Force
Chiefs Re ort Findin s: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager.
Allegation 2 — False Arrest
Chiefs Report Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager.
Complaint #22-03
Allegation 1 — Neglect of duty
Chief's P.eport Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager.
Complaint #22-04
Allegation 1 — Bias -based policing
CPRB Annual Report FY 2022 — DRAFT 10/01/2022 — 4
Chiefs Report Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager.
Complaint #22-05
Allegation 1 — Discourtesy
Chief's Report Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
Board's Findings: Allegation 1 — NOT SUSTAINED
The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager
Level of Review
The Board decided, by simple majority vote, the level of review to give each report, selecting one or
more of the six levels specified in the City Code per complaint:
Level a
On the record with no additional investigation
10
Level b
Interview or meet with complainant
5
Level c
Interview or meet with named officer
0
Level d
Request additional investigation by Chief or
5
City Manager, or request police assistance
in the Board's own investigation
Level a
Board performs its own additional investigation
0
Level f
Hire independent investigators
0
Complaint Resolutions
The Police Department investigates complaints to the CPRB of misconduct by police officers. The
Police Chief summarizes the results of these investigations and indicates in a report (the Chief's
Report) to the CPRB whether allegations are sustained or not sustained. (If complaints are made
against the Chief, the City Manager conducts the investigation and prepares and submits the reports.)
The Board reviews both the citizens' complaint and the Chiefs Report and decides whether its
conclusions about the allegations should be sustained or not sustained. The Board prepares a report
which is submitted to the City Council.
Of the twenty allegations listed in the fourteen complaints for which the Board reported, none were
sustained.
Comments
The Board made comments and/or recommendations for improvement in police policy, procedures, or
conduct in eight of the reports:
Complaint #20-02
The Board remains divided in its opinions on this incident, even after lengthy deliberations.
Consensus was not reached, and the Board voted 3/2 to "Not sustain" this complaint. It was
concerning that the dispersal order could not be heard in 2 of the 5 videos, as this indicates that a
large portion of the crowd of protesters was unable to hear the order. The Police Chief has told the
Board that the department has invested in improved technology to ensure messages reach everyone
in any future crowd incidents
There was discussion about the Board filing its own complaint of discourtesy, as allowed by Iowa City
Code Section 8-8-3B. However, the Board did not have access to the videos of the incident until after
the 180-day deadline to file a complaint had passed. For this reason, the Board recommends that this
CPRB Annual Report FY 2022 — DRAFT 10/01 /2022 — 5
section of the city code be changed so that the Board has 180 days from the time it receives access
to audio/video evidence of an event to file its own complaint, rather than 180 days from the time of the
incident. For this complaint, the Board's concerns are addressed here in the comments.
It is indisputable that tear gas causes harm. It irritates cells and activates pain receptors, causing
"intense burning pain in the eyes, throat, skin and mucous membranes. Tear gas can also cause
exaggerated muscle cramping in the eye and sensitivity to light that leads to eye closure. Other
effects of tear gas include a difficulty in swallowing, drooling and severe burning in the mouth. In some
cases, it can cause an asthma attack or swelling in the area that could potentially lead to asphyxiation
or death." The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention defines tear gas, or riot control agents, as
"chemical compounds that temporarily make people unable to function by causing irritation to the
eyes, mouth, throat, lungs, and skin."
(htt s:l/www.usatoda .com/stor /news/factcheck/2020/06/06/fact-check-its-true-tear- as-chemical-
wea on-banned-war/3156448DD11)
It is because of this well -established harm that "the 1925 Geneva Protocol categorized tear gas as a
chemical warfare agent and banned its use in war shortly after World War I." This ban was
strengthened by the U.N.'s Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) that outlawed the use of riot
control agents in warfare and went into effect in 1997.
If an officer believes that he/she must cause harm to protect the public, that should be a solemn thing.
However, some of the Officers in the tape seemed to be excited to have the opportunity to deploy
munitions, and the laughter, insulting and dehumanizing comments, and remarks about how
"amazing" and "neat" the gas was gave the appearance that some officers were detached from the
harm they were causing. This leads to questions and concerns about the culture of the department.
While the changes made to the Use of Force Policy following this incident are beneficial steps that will
hopefully prevent a recurrence of ICPD involvement in teargassing non -combative protesters, the
internal climate portrayed in the body -cameras of officers involved in this incident should be
addressed.
Complaint #20-05
The Board remains divided in its opinions on this incident, even after lengthy deliberations.
Consensus was not reached, and the Board voted 3/2 to "Not sustain" this complaint. It was
concerning that the dispersal order could not be heard in 2 of the 5 videos, as this indicates that a
large portion of the crowd of protesters was unable to hear the order. The Police Chief has told the
Board that the department has invested in improved technology to ensure messages reach everyone
in any future crowd incidents
There was discussion about the Board filing its own complaint of discourtesy, as allowed by Iowa City
Code Section 8-8-3B. However, the Board did not have access to the videos of the incident until after
the 180-day deadline to file a complaint had passed. For this reason, the Board recommends that this
section of the city code be changed so that the Board has 180 days from the time it receives access
to audio/video evidence of an event to file its own complaint, rather than 180 days from the time of the
incident. For this complaint, the Board's concerns are addressed here in the comments.
It is indisputable that tear gas causes harm. It irritates cells and activates pain receptors, causing
"intense burning pain in the eyes, throat, skin and mucous membranes. Tear gas can also cause
exaggerated muscle cramping in the eye and sensitivity to light that leads to eye closure. Other
effects of tear gas include a difficulty in swallowing, drooling and severe burning in the mouth. In some
cases, it can cause an asthma attack or swelling in the area that could potentially lead to asphyxiation
or death." The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention defines tear gas, or riot control agents, as
"chemical compounds that temporarily make people unable to function by causing irritation to the
eyes, mouth, throat, lungs, and skin."
(htt s://www.usatoda .com/star /news/factcheck/2020/06106/fact-check-its-true-tear- as-chemical-
weapon-banned-war/3156448001 /)
CPRB Annual Report FY 2022 — DRAFT 10/01/2022 — 6
It is because of this well -established harm that "the 1925 Geneva Protocol categorized tear gas as a
chemical warfare agent and banned its use in war shortly after World War I." This ban was
strengthened by the U.N.'s Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) that outlawed the use of riot
control agents in warfare and went into effect in 1997.
If an officer believes that he/she must cause harm in order to protect the public, that should be a
solemn thing. However, some of the Officers in the tape seemed to be excited to have the opportunity
to deploy munitions, and the laughter, insulting and dehumanizing comments, and remarks about how
"amazing" and "neat" the gas was gave the appearance that some officers were detached from the
harm they were causing. This leads to questions and concerns about the culture of the department.
While the changes made to the Use of Force Policy following this incident are beneficial steps that will
hopefully prevent a recurrence of ICPD involvement in teargassing non -combative protesters, the
internal climate portrayed in the body -cameras of officers involved in this incident should be
addressed.
Complaint #20-06
The Board remains divided in its opinions on this incident, even after lengthy deliberations.
Consensus was not reached, and the Board voted 3/2 to "Not sustain" this complaint. It was
concerning that the dispersal order could not be heard in 2 of the 5 videos, as this indicates that a
large portion of the crowd of protesters was unable to hear the order. The Police Chief has told the
Board that the department has invested in improved technology to ensure messages reach everyone
in any future crowd incidents
There was discussion about the Board filing its own complaint of discourtesy, as allowed by Iowa City
Code Section 8-8-3B. However, the Board did not have access to the videos of the incident until after
the 180-day deadline to file a complaint had passed. For this reason, the Board recommends that this
section of the city code be changed so that the Board has 180 days from the time it receives access
to audio/video evidence of an event to file its own complaint, rather than 180 days from the time of the
incident. For this complaint, the Board's concerns are addressed here in the comments.
It is indisputable that tear gas causes harm. It irritates cells and activates pain receptors, causing
"intense burning pain in the eyes, throat, skin and mucous membranes. Tear gas can also cause
exaggerated muscle cramping in the eye and sensitivity to light that leads to eye closure. Other
effects of tear gas include a difficulty in swallowing, drooling and severe burning in the mouth. In some
cases, it can cause an asthma attack or swelling in the area that could potentially lead to asphyxiation
or death." The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention defines tear gas, or riot control agents, as
"chemical compounds that temporarily make people unable to function by causing irritation to the
eyes, mouth, throat, lungs, and skin."
(htt s://www.usatoda .Gom/stor /news/factcheck/2020/06/061fact-check-its-true-tear- as-chemical-
wea pon-ban ned-war/3156448001 /)
It is because of this well -established harm that "the 1925 Geneva Protocol categorized tear gas as a
chemical warfare agent and banned its use in war shortly after World War I." This ban was
strengthened by the U.N.'s Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) that outlawed the use of riot
control agents in warfare and went into effect in 1997.
If an officer believes that he/she must cause harm in order to protect the public, that should be a
solemn thing. However, some of the Officers in the tape seemed to be excited to have the opportunity
to deploy munitions, and the laughter, insulting and dehumanizing comments, and remarks about how
"amazing" and "neat" the gas was gave the appearance that some officers were detached from the
harm they were causing. This leads to questions and concerns about the culture of the department.
While the changes made to the Use of Force Policy following this incident are beneficial steps that will
hopefully prevent a recurrence of ICPD involvement in teargassing non -combative protesters, the
internal climate portrayed in the body -cameras of officers involved in this incident should be
addressed.
Complaint #20-07
CPRB Annual Report FY 2022 — DRAFT 10/01/2022 — 7
The Board remains divided in its opinions on this incident, even after lengthy deliberations.
Consensus was not reached, and the Board voted 3/2 to "Not sustain" this complaint. It was
concerning that the dispersal order could not be heard in 2 of the 5 videos, as this indicates that a
large portion of the crowd of protesters was unable to hear the order. The Police Chief has told the
Board that the department has invested in improved technology to ensure messages reach everyone
in any future crowd incidents
There was discussion about the Board filing its own complaint of discourtesy, as allowed by Iowa City
Code Section 8-8-313. However, the Board did not have access to the videos of the incident until after
the 180-day deadline to file a complaint had passed. For this reason, the Board recommends that this
section of the city code be changed so that the Board has 180 days from the time it receives access
to audio/video evidence of an event to file its own complaint, rather than 180 days from the time of the
incident. For this complaint, the Board's concerns are addressed here in the comments.
It is indisputable that tear gas causes harm. It irritates cells and activates pain receptors, causing
"intense burning pain in the eyes, throat, skin and mucous membranes. Tear gas can also cause
exaggerated muscle cramping in the eye and sensitivity to light that leads to eye closure. Other
effects of tear gas include a difficulty in swallowing, drooling and severe burning in the mouth. In some
cases, it can cause an asthma attack or swelling in the area that could potentially lead to asphyxiation
or death." The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention defines tear gas, or riot control agents, as
"chemical compounds that temporarily make people unable to function by causing irritation to the
eyes, mouth, throat, lungs, and skin."
(htt s://www,usatoda .com/sta /news/factcheck/2020106/00i/fact-check-its-true-tear- as-chemical-
weapon-banned-war/31564A80011)
It is because of this well -established harm that "the 1925 Geneva Protocol categorized tear gas as a
chemical warfare agent and banned its use in war shortly after World War I." This ban was
strengthened by the U.N.'s Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) that outlawed the use of riot
control agents in warfare and went into effect in 1997.
If an officer believes that he/she must cause harm in order to protect the public, that should be a
solemn thing. However, some of the Officers in the tape seemed to be excited to have the opportunity
to deploy munitions, and the laughter, insulting and dehumanizing comments, and remarks about how
"amazing" and "neat" the gas was gave the appearance that some officers were detached from the
harm they were causing. This leads to questions and concerns about the culture of the department.
While the changes made to the Use of Force Policy following this incident are beneficial steps that will
hopefully prevent a recurrence of ICPD involvement in teargassing non -combative protesters, the
internal climate portrayed in the body -cameras of officers involved in this incident should be
addressed.
Complaint #20-08
The Board remains divided in its opinions on this incident, even after lengthy deliberations.
Consensus was not reached, and the Board voted 3/2 to "Not sustain" this complaint. It was
concerning that the dispersal order could not be heard in 2 of the 5 videos, as this indicates that a
large portion of the crowd of protesters was unable to hear the order. The Police Chief has told the
Board that the department has invested in improved technology to ensure messages reach everyone
in any future crowd incidents
There was discussion about the Board filing its own complaint of discourtesy, as allowed by Iowa City
Code Section 8-8-3B. However, the Board did not have access to the videos of the incident until after
the 180-day deadline to file a complaint had passed. For this reason, the Board recommends that this
section of the city code be changed so that the Board has 180 days from the time it receives access
to audio/video evidence of an event to file its own complaint, rather than 180 days from the time of the
incident. For this complaint, the Board's concerns are addressed here in the comments.
It is indisputable that tear gas causes harm. It irritates cells and activates pain receptors, causing
"intense burning pain in the eyes, throat, skin and mucous membranes. Tear gas can also cause
CPRB Annual Report FY 2022 — DRAFT 10/01/2022 — 8
exaggerated muscle cramping in the eye and sensitivity to light that leads to eye closure. Other
effects of tear gas include a difficulty in swallowing, drooling and severe burning in the mouth. In some
cases, it can cause an asthma attack or swelling in the area that could potentially lead to asphyxiation
or death." The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention defines tear gas, or riot control agents, as
"chemical compounds that temporarily make people unable to function by causing irritation to the
eyes, mouth, throat, lungs, and skin."
(htt s://www.usatoda .com/stor /news/factcheck/2020/06/06/fact-check-its-true-tear- as-chemical-
weapon-banned-war13156448t101 /)
It is because of this well -established harm that "the 1925 Geneva Protocol categorized tear gas as a
chemical warfare agent and banned its use in war shortly after World War I." This ban was
strengthened by the U.N.'s Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) that outlawed the use of riot
control agents in warfare and went into effect in 1997.
If an officer believes that he/she must cause harm in order to protect the public, that should be a
solemn thing. However, some of the Officers in the tape seemed to be excited to have the opportunity
to deploy munitions, and the laughter, insulting and dehumanizing comments, and remarks about how
"amazing" and "neat" the gas was gave the appearance that some officers were detached from the
harm they were causing. This leads to questions and concerns about the culture of the department.
While the changes made to the Use of Force Policy following this incident are beneficial steps that will
hopefully prevent a recurrence of ICPD involvement in teargassing non -combative protesters, the
internal climate portrayed in the body -cameras of officers involved in this incident should be
addressed.
Complaint #21-01
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.
Double check things like violations of SR-22 before telling someone that they are required to have
SR-22 Insurance.
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.
Complaint #21-03
While most of the Board felt the use of force was justified, some Board members found it
concerning that the complainant was handcuffed by an officer who walked up behind the
complainant without announcing the officer's presence or telling the complainant in advance that
the officer was going to do so, or that the complainant was being taken into custody. At least one
Board member views that scenario as a questionable action that likely led to an unnecessary
escalation of the incident.
Additionally, there are concerns over Officers not following city and institutional mask
mandates. At the time of the incident, the City of Iowa City had a mask mandate in place that
stated "every person in Iowa City must wear a face covering that covers their nose and mouth
CPRB Annual Report FY 2022 — DRAFT 10/01 /2022 — 9
when in a public place. That includes anywhere out -doors in public when one cannot stay six
(6) feet away from others. The University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics also had (and still has)
a policy mandating masks in its buildings. Regardless of this, body camera videos of incident
showed officers inside of the emergency room at University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics
unmasked. Officers are expected to consistently follow policies and laws. When they don't, it
brings to question how they can be tasked with enforcing policies and laws if they do not
consistently follow them themselves.
Complaint #21-07
While the Board finds this complaint to be not sustained, the Board does have some serious concerns
about what it witnessed in the body cam footage of this incident. The most problematic of those is that
the last thing that was said by one of the officers before the recording ended after the conclusion of
the incident was "I kind of hoped she was gonna run." This seems to indicate that this officer was
eager for a chase or a fight, and that is not the type of attitude that someone wielding the power of a
police officer should have. Additionally, some Board members expressed concerns about the use of
curse words by one of the officers while conversing with the complainant and their companion while
on duty and in uniform. A higher level of professionalism is expected from officers.
Name -Clearing Hearings
The ordinance requires that the Board not issue a report critical of the conduct of a sworn officer until
after a name -clearing hearing has been held. During this fiscal period, the Board scheduled one
name -clearing hearing.
Complaint Histories of Officers
City ordinance requires that the annual report of the CPRB must not include the names of
complainants or officers involved in unsustained complaints and must be in a form that protects the
confidentiality of information about all parties. In the 14 complaints covered by the FY22 annual
report a total of 20 officers were involved with allegations against them.
ICPD Internal Investigations Logs
The Board reviewed the quarterly ICPD Internal Investigations Log, provided by the Chief of Police.
COMPLAINT DEMOGRAPHICS
The following is demographic information from the eleven complaints that were completed in this fiscal
year. Because complainants provide this voluntarily, the demographic information may be
incomplete.
Age:
(4) 18-25, (5) 26-35, (1) 36-45, (1) 46-55, (1) 56-64, 65+
Disability:
(1) Physical (2) Mental (8) None
Annual Househoid Income:
(2) 100K 75-99K 50-75K 25-49K (7) Under 25K
Gender:
(10) Female (1) Male (1) Other
Sexual Orientation:
(5)LGBTQ (2) Heterosexual (3) Other
Ethnic Origin:
CPRB Annual Report FY 2022 — DRAFT 10/01/2022 —10
(1) Black/African-American (2) Hispanic (1) Asian/Pacific Islander (7) White/Caucasian
(2) Other
Were you born in the United States?
(9) Yes (2) No
Religion:
(1) Muslim (3) None
Marital Status:
(2) Married (9) Single
* Information is reported as presented by the person completing the form.
BOARD MEMBERS
Amanda Nichols, Chair
Orville Townsend, Vice -Chair
Theresa Seeberger
Melissa Jensen
Jerri MacConnell
Saul Mekies
Ricky Downing
Stuart Vander Vegte
CPRB Annual Report FY 2022 — DRAFT 10/01/2022 — 11
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
OFFICE CONTACTS
September 2022
Date Description
None
October 11, 2022 Mtg Packet
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
COMPLAINT DEADLINES
CPRB Complaint #22-09
Filed:
Chief's report due (90 days):
Chief's report filed:
Complainant's response to the Chief's report
(21 days to respond, no response received)
Chief/City Manager response to the
Complainant's response (10 days to respond):
CPRB meeting #1 (Review):
CPRB meeting #2 (Review):
--------------------------
CPRB report due
(90 days from the date of the Chief/City
Manager's response to the complainant
or Complainant's response deadline if
no response received)
CPRB Com,pfaint #22-10
Filed:
Chief's report due (90 days):
Chief's report filed:
Complainant's response to the Chief's report
(21 days to respond, no response received)
Chief/City Manager response to the
Complainant's response (10 days to respond):
CPRB meeting #1 (Review):
CPRB meeting #2 (Review):
CPRB report due
(90 days from the date of the Chief/City
Manager's response to the complainant
or Complainant's response deadline if
no response received)
07/04/22
10/17/22
??/??/22
??/??/22
??/??/22
??/??/22
??/??/22
09/18/22
12/17/22
??/??/22
??/??/22
??/??/22
??/??/22
------------
??/??/22
TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE
November 8, 2022
December 13, 2022
January 10, 2022