Amid legal battle, Cedar Rapids to drop racial requirement for Citizen Review Board membership

CEDAR RAPIDS — The city of Cedar Rapids is preparing to eliminate a rule requiring that five of the nine-member Citizen Review Board identify as people of color. The move comes after a federal judge blocked enforcement of the policy pending the outcome of a lawsuit alleging the rule is racially discriminatory.

According to a draft policy shared with the board Thursday, the amended ordinance states the mayor and City Council shall “strive to include members from a diverse background,” including people who identify as a racial or ethnic minority. The change will do away with the requirement that the board include a specific number of people who identify as people of color.

U.S. District Court Judge C.J. Williams issued a ruling last week that bars enforcement of the rule pending the outcome of Cedar Rapids man Kevin Wymore’s lawsuit against the city and Mayor Tiffany O’Donnell. Wymore, a white man, asserts in his lawsuit that the rule about who can serve on the board is racially discriminatory.

“There are no facts that show white citizens are unaffected by police brutality and misconduct, are not concerned about the issue, or are unqualified or biased and cannot review complaints,” Williams wrote in his ruling. “The provision reflects an inherent belief that only people of color care about the issues facing people of color and that white people do not care about people of color. That is a presumption based on bias.”

Wymore v. City of Cedar Rapids Order by Gazetteonline on Scribd

Advocates for Social Justice, the nonprofit that pressed the city and worked with staff to craft the ordinance creating the police oversight board, called for its creation to address systemic racism in law enforcement. The goal was to include more voices from marginalized populations who are disproportionately affected by policing.

In Iowa, the ACLU in 2020 reported that a Black person is 7.3 times more likely to be arrested than a white person for marijuana possession, even though both groups use marijuana at about the same rate. And even though just approximately 4 percent of Iowans are Black, a Black person in Iowa is 11 times more likely to be incarcerated than a white person.

The amended ordinance states that in making appointments to the board, the mayor and council “shall ensure that members represent a diversity of age, socioeconomic status, gender, geographic residence and work experience.”

Proposed Cedar Rapids Ordinance by Gazetteonline on Scribd

Under the proposed amendments, that diversity includes but is not limited to:

Appointment of new chair will wait

The preliminary injunction takes effect as the board’s chair, Star Smith, has resigned — leaving one vacancy on the panel. India Snow-Watt has now assumed the role.

City Attorney Vanessa Chavez told the board that staff are recommending the City Council get the new ordinance language in place first before making another appointment so that the elected officials are “not appointing under an ordinance that is partially unenforceable.”

At its Oct. 25 meeting, the council is slated to set a public hearing date of Nov. 8. After that first reading, a second and possible third reading will be on the Nov. 22 meeting agenda. That means a new appointment could take until the end of the current year.

Judge takes issue with quota

In a hearing Oct. 4, Williams questioned why the ordinance lays out a quota for board members who identify as people of color. The panel was created in the wake of George Floyd’s murder by Minneapolis police in 2020 in an effort to provide oversight of local law enforcement, promote equitable treatment of citizens and remedy policing trends rooted in bias.

Williams suggested the city could have considered race as a factor in making board appointments without requiring that a certain number of board members be people of color.

The proposed ordinance also would require:

Those factors were previously considered in the board’s membership composition. What’s different is the use of “at least” in place of a requirement of a specific number of licensed attorneys, members of the general public and people affiliated with racial justice organizations or service providers. This allows flexibility to add additional members who meet that criteria, Chavez said.

Chavez said those requirements are valid because they refer to experience instead of one of the suspect classes — race, religion, national origin and alienage — prohibited by the Constitution.

Changes being made to the Cedar Rapids ordinance are similar to modifications the city of Madison made after facing a similar lawsuit over racial quotas in its panel, Chavez said.

Asked by one board member if Advocates for Social Justice had seen the proposed changes, Chavez said the board was the first to see the changes before they come to the council for consideration.

“We are sensitive to the interests of the community, but right now what we have to do is be in compliance with the constitutional requirements, and this is the way to do it,” Chavez said.

Comments: (319) 398-8494; marissa.payne@thegazette.com