Interim Cedar Falls public safety director named, as City Council agrees to external review of PSO model

At a Monday evening work session to discuss the issue — a follow-up to a Feb. 21 meeting — the City Council again agreed to maintain the status quo while hiring a third-party firm to conduct an external review of the Public Safety Department.

In the meantime, an interim public safety director has been appointed because Public Safety Director Jeff Olson retires Friday. The city will begin the hiring process for a permanent replacement for Olson.

Misunderstanding was most evident Monday during a back-and-forth between the council and its legal staff.

Councilors Dave Sires and Simon Harding learned from City Attorney Kevin Rogers that the traditional “firefighter” job classification still exists. They believed since a conversation in 2020 that it had been abolished.

The topic came up in discussions about Mayor Rob Green’s Public Safety 2022 plan, which he proposed during his campaign for re-election as a hybrid between the two sides of the debate on whether or not to cross-train police officers and firefighters.

Item one was “Restore the Firefighter Job Classification” so “law enforcement and fire/rescue are two separate professions. Firefighters will not be required to become police officers as a condition of employment and vice versa.”

In response, Rogers said, “For number one, ‘restore the firefighter job classification,’ there’s no need to do that because that never left. It’s still on the books. There’s nobody in the position right now.”

Amid all the questions, and calls from Councilor Kelly Dunn and others to cease the discussion because it is tearing the city apart, creating turnover and limiting the job pool, here were the major takeaways from the 90 minute meeting:

• No immediate changes will be made to the public safety program. However, the council agreed 4-3 to have an outside consultant complete an external review of public safety operations to build trust from the public and address any concerns. Sires noted the work could cost between $50,000 and $100,000. Details weren’t ironed out Monday.
• Police Chief Craig Berte, who also serves as assistant public safety director, will lead the Public Safety Department in the interim. Berte plans to recommend an acting police chief by the end of next week.
• The city will move forward with the hiring process for a replacement for Olson, although there was some hesitation in doing that before knowing the results of the external review.
• Both internal and external candidates will be considered, although City Administrator Ron Gaines noted his preference for an internal candidate for the sake of “stability.” The position will be advertised within the next month. Berte is interested in applying.
• Green brought his Public Safety 2022 plan to the floor. The plan was not created or endorsed by the city’s staff. It’s possible the plan comes to the floor again in the future after the third-party review. Green said: “I had a goal of having them considered, and I really appreciate that council did look through them … I still will have them available for additional discussion, especially as part of this external review and audit.”
• An employee workplace climate audit is already slated to happen later this year. Employees will anonymously take surveys in order for the city to get a better feel for their satisfaction in their current roles, make changes and avoid future turnover.

Asked about his message to the community, Berte said: “My biggest concern is the ongoing political controversy and the perceived lack of support for our employees,” later adding, “I look forward to serving in the interim. I’ve spent nearly 32 years here in Cedar Falls, and have served in almost every capacity.”

He noted he’s been cross trained as a firefighter since 2005, and one of his goals is to improve the messaging to the public.

At the Monday meeting, for a second time, there were about a dozen public safety employees in attendance. Multiple times, councilors thanked the men and women for their service to the community.

The meeting did not offer the opportunity for public comment.

How the meeting unfolded

The Monday work session began with council revisiting a consensus vote it had taken regarding whether to move forward with “status quo” for its Public Safety Department.

Schultz originally “broke” the consensus, which he, along with Dunn and Councilors Daryl Kruse and Susan deBuhr had supported Feb. 21. That’s why ultimately PS-22 came to the floor for consideration.

Throughout the evening meeting, there was debate at the dais as the council learned more about the public safety director position.

The mayor in his PS-22 plan proposed the director position be a “supplemental duty” of the police or fire chief, contending the change would “increase the city’s resiliency in a disaster, and save more than $150,000 in salary and benefits each year.”

In addition to all the questions about the director position, the leadership structure, promotions, training and cost, Harding, who made the initial referral to have a discussion on public safety, sparked the desire to bring in an outside company, in part, so he and others could “gather and analyze metrics and data” to compare with the ones provided by its city professionals

However, he emphasized about the Public Safety Department: “I haven’t seen an issue. I think we are doing well.”

The disagreement stemmed from some councilors arguing the cities’ “experts,” which are continually questioned, haven’t highlighted any significant issues with the public safety model. But councilors, like Harding, contend there is distrust and concerns, whether warranted or not, from the public.

The review’s findings would be one way to restore the faith, build a unified council, grow community positivity, while identifying if indeed there are “deeper” issues, he said.

“I think it would behoove us to have an external audit and it’s not a solution in search of a problem,” said Councilor Dustin Ganfield. “I believe the problem there is … there’s been a breach of trust in some measure because of some of the politicking that’s gone on, some of the things the misinformation that has been spread from whatever party.

“I’ve talked to intelligent individuals on both sides of this issue and I see their perceptions and I see how they got to them. I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle on some of the issues. I only reference that because I don’t intend to rehash what’s happened in the past with this external audit of sorts. I would rather see an assessment with much more granularity.”

But there’s a belief from others that not as many people are concerned about the direction of public safety and it would be in the best interest of the community to end the conversation.

“I think it’s about 75% of our registered voters in our community didn’t vote. What that shows me, and you can take that lots of different ways, that shows me contentment,” Dunn said. “We are here to serve the majority of citizens in Cedar Falls regardless of who they voted for or how they will vote. At some point, we need to recognize what this continued discussion is going to cost our community.

If we aren’t getting people to apply, if we aren’t getting people to stay, if we’re getting turnover, we risk safety, we risk rising costs. A third party review – I’m a pretty big proponent of consultants when there’s a reason for it. I haven’t found a reason other than hearsay that’s put out on social media or from disgruntled former employees, I have not heard reasons to continue this discussion.”