116 3rd St SE
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401
Iowa lawmakers renew push to ban citizen police review boards, change civil service process
Republican lawmakers have previously tried to ban citizen police review boards in Iowa
Jan. 21, 2025 6:31 pm, Updated: Jan. 22, 2025 7:52 am
The Gazette offers audio versions of articles using Instaread. Some words may be mispronounced.
DES MOINES — Iowa Senate Republican lawmakers are once again trying to push forward legislation that would disband citizen review boards that provide oversight of local law enforcement like the ones created in Cedar Rapids and Iowa City.
State lawmakers on Tuesday advanced a bill that would prohibit cities with a civil service commission from establishing “a board or other entity for the purpose of citizen review of the conduct of police officers.”
Long-standing boards have existed in Dubuque and Iowa City to improve community relations. University Heights adopted one in 2019. Cedar Rapids and Coralville moved in 2020 to create these boards after the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police sparked calls for police reform nationwide.
Senate Study Bill 1010 also makes changes to the makeup of civil service commissions, based upon population, as well as the standards and procedures for the removal, discharge, demotion, or suspension of a city civil service employee.
The commissions oversee the testing, hiring, promotion and discipline for police officers, firefighters and other civil service positions.
The bill passed the Senate 37-9 last year, but stalled in the House.
Recommended Reading
A three-member subcommittee voted 2-1 Tuesday to advance to the full Senate Local Government Committee, where it’s likely to be amended.
Sens. Scott Webster, R-Bettendorf, and Dawn Driscoll, R-Williamsburg, were in favor, “to keep working on this and make sure that we provide a clear and fair process,“ Driscoll said. Sen. Janice Weiner, D-Iowa City, declined to sign off on moving the bill forward.
Weiner, who used to serve on the Iowa City Council, said “every civil servant should have a fair process and should have due process,” but shared concerns raised by city attorneys.
“I think we still have some details that need to be ironed out so that it doesn't end up being too big a burden on anyone in this process, and everybody ends up getting a fair shake,” she said.
Weiner said she also would prefer that existing citizen police review boards be grandfathered in under the bill. She noted Iowa City's board has never had the capacity to fire or discipline officers.
"They were simply reviewing things," she said.
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, a former Bettendorf City Council member, however, said the legislation is needed to defend law enforcement from political interventions by citizen review boards and the media coverage that goes along with them.
"The concern I have with those is police officers and public servants end up going in front of civilian review boards," Webster said. "And yes, those civilian review boards can't fire them, but they can put a public opinion on those particular people that is unheard of. And then, our friends in the media have a tendency to take off with that and can destroy police officers, firefighters, public works people. It makes it irresponsible."
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.
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 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.
City representatives warn bill would add costs for taxpayers
Representatives for the cities of Iowa City and Des Moines argued the bill would make civil service proceedings more costly and burdensome for taxpayers. Supporters contend the civil service system is broken and stacked against police officers, saying they often face political interference and lack of due process.
“The public expects a high degree of accountability from us, and we expect to be given fair and impartial due process in return,” Josh Van Brocklin, vice president of the Iowa Fraternal Order of Police, told lawmakers during a subcommittee hearing.
Under the bill, commissions would have to be between five and seven members, up from the current minimum of three members.
A city attorney's office would not be allowed to represent the civil service commission in instances when a city employee is appealing a disciplinary decision. Instead, the city would be required to pay the cost of an outside attorney for the commission.
And city employees who “substantially prevail” in appealing their firing, demotion or suspension would be allowed to collect attorney fees from the city.
Employees appealing disciplinary decisions before a civil service commission would also be allowed to request the production of documents and depose witnesses. Iowa Code allows decisions by a civil service commission to be appealed in court, but the bill would expand the scope of what the court could consider during an appeal.
Cyndi Pederson, a lobbyist for the Iowa Fraternal Order of Police, said the bill will "level the playing field."
"It should be a place for good due process without political ties," she said of the civil service commission process. "And currently, the way it's written provides a conflict of interest when the attorney is representing both the city and chief of police and commission all at once."
Eric Goers, city attorney for the city of Iowa City, said the bill would increase taxpayer expenses by forcing cities to hire outside counsel.
“In our city, the commission already hires independent outside counsel to advise the commission through all aspects of a contested hearing,” he said. “This provision would force taxpayers to incur the expense of yet another outside attorney to represent the appointing authority.”
Cities also would be required to prove any discipline taken against a civil service employee is “proportionate, reasonable, and just.” 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.
“Obviously, that all sounds fair enough, except,” it also would remove language in Iowa Code that allows cities to discipline employee who are “unsuitable or unfit for employment.”
“We don't think taxpayers should have to tolerate employees who are unfit for their position,” Goers said.
He asserted the bill would make the civil service commission process “so painful and expensive that local governments will simply put up with bad employees, and that should be no one's goal, and taxpayers would have to pay for it all.”
Comments: (319) 398-8499; tom.barton@thegazette.com
Daily Newsletters