116 3rd St SE
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401
State law prompts planned dissolution of Cedar Rapids citizen police review board
City staff say work is underway to identify ‘alternatives’ to continue progress in community policing
Jul. 22, 2025 7:08 pm, Updated: Jul. 23, 2025 7:18 am
The Gazette offers audio versions of articles using Instaread. Some words may be mispronounced.
CEDAR RAPIDS — The Cedar Rapids City Council this week voted to disband the city’s citizen police review board, albeit begrudgingly.
In an effort to comply with state law, the council on Tuesday voted 7-2 to advance a staff proposal to eliminate the section of the city’s municipal code outlining the makeup and responsibilities of the citizen review board.
Final approval of the move will be required at the council’s Aug. 12 meeting — mere days before the enactment of Senate File 311, a new law that prohibits cities with civil service commissions from establishing “a board or other entity for the purpose of citizen review of the conduct of police officers.”
Community Development Director Jennifer Pratt told council members that repealing the relevant code will bring the city into compliance with that law and give city staff time to identify next steps.
“We do want to assure the council and the public that we are actively exploring alternatives which meet the needs of the community and the police department,” she said. “We are committed to maintaining the process we have made” through the work of the citizen review board.
The Cedar Rapids Citizen Review Board was created after racial justice advocates, led by the nonprofit Advocates for Social Justice, pushed for stronger civilian oversight of local law enforcement in 2020 following the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis.
Recommended Reading
The board itself was formed in 2021 with a focus on public engagement, advising the city on department policies and practices, reviewing citizen complaints and serving on the committee that hires a police chief. It has no direct disciplinary authority over officers.
Those responsibilities are outlined in Chapter 74 of the city’s municipal code — which city staff have recommended be repealed in its entirety.
“The legislative intent was clear,” Pratt told council members. “Repealing all of chapter 74 will bring the city in compliance without appearing to be circumventing the purpose of Senate File 311.”
But some disagree.
Advocates for Social Justice President and Democratic state Rep. Angel Ramirez was present at Tuesday’s meeting and characterized the repeal of Chapter 74 and dissolution of the citizen review board as a “devastating loss” for the broader community.
ASJ members have been in conversations with city officials in recent weeks to discuss the future of the citizen review board. Ramirez categorized those conversations as positive, but noted that the two entities disagree on the best path forward.
She said ASJ understands changes are needed to come into compliance with state law, but argued that certain functions of the CRB still could be allowable under the terms of the legislation.
As such, the group pushed for a more targeted amendment rather than a total repeal of Chapter 74.
“We believe that repealing Chapter 74 entirely would over-comply with the state legislative actions and dismantle our community’s good reforms that came from the (advocacy and collaboration) that followed the murder of George Floyd,” Ramirez said.
For example, the board could continue to review departmental policies and quarterly data reports — two responsibilities outlined in the current code — without reviewing the conduct of individual officers.
Several others echoed those points during public comment at Tuesday’s meeting with residents noting the strength of the collaborations that went into initially forming the citizen review board and lauded its meetings as opportunities for trust, transparency and context into community policing.
While “disappointed” in the outcome of Tuesday’s meeting, Ramirez said Advocates for Social Justice remains committed to engaging in such conversations on how best to ensure community policing.
In a rare showing for a public hearing, each of the council’s nine members made verbal comments at Tuesday’s meeting. All lamented the need to alter the citizen review board’s operations at all, but recognized the need to comply with state law.
Council members Ashley Vanorny and David Maier cited concerns similar to those of citizen speakers in voting against the motion to repeal Chapter 74. Both highlighted the robust, community-oriented nature of the work done to establish the code in the first place and questioned the need for a full repeal.
“One of my life lessons learned is that when forced to deal with difficult situations, oftentimes the easy way out is not the right answer,” Maier said. “That’s what city staff is recommending” with a full repeal, to me.
The remaining seven council members voted in favor of repealing Chapter 74 with promises to ensure an intentional, community-driven process to identify ways to best maintain the responsibilities and priorities of the review board not affected by the new law.
Pratt said city staff intend to interview outgoing citizen review board members as part of that process, as well as host focus groups with area nonprofits and advocacy groups to gain feedback on potential next steps.
That process is expected to take the remainder of the summer and early fall with recommendations tentatively set to return to council in late September or early October.
“You trusted us once to work together … and make sure we’re doing what we need to do. I beg you please to trust us again,” Council member Ann Poe told meeting attendees. “We can make this work, and we can do it together just like we did in 2020.”
Comments: grace.nieland@thegazette.com
Daily Newsletters