Davenport Civil Rights Commission votes to send legal memo to city council after months of disputes with staff

The Davenport Civil Rights Commission voted 4–1 on June 10 to send a written memo to the city council and city legal staff clarifying the relationship among city policy, municipal ordinance and state law and to request a meeting to resolve a string of personnel- and process-related disputes.

The vote followed a lengthy director’s report and discussion in which Director Lacey described ongoing problems with city staff “usurping the commission and the director’s authority,” missed responses to commission requests, unresolved internal complaints and a paused hiring process. “We are still working on reaching some resolution with the city council regarding the city staff members' actions in usurping the commission and the director's authority,” Director Lacey said during her report.

The memo’s mover, identified in the meeting as Commissioner Church Taylor, proposed that the memo explain legal precedence and request a sit-down meeting; the motion was seconded and carried with four ayes and one no (Commissioner Holly). The commission authorized Director Lacey, Commission Chair Guster and an additional commissioner, if needed, to attend follow-up meetings with city staff.

Why it matters: commissioners say the disputes have blocked hires, delayed a salary assessment for AFSCME positions and left important procedural questions unresolved — such as whether city personnel policies may be interpreted by some city lawyers as superseding ordinance or state law. Director Lacey repeatedly told the commission that legal guidance promised after previous joint meetings was not received on schedule.

In the discussion members recounted three recent joint meetings with council (April 15, May 20 and June 3) that were intended to clarify the commission’s authority and operations. Several commissioners said council members acknowledged the commission’s concerns during those meetings but council did not add a resolution directing staff to stop interfering with the commission; at least one commissioner described the mayor interrupting council members when they attempted to give that direction. Commissioner remarks also referenced an EEOC complaint and ongoing litigation naming the mayor, which one commissioner said raised questions about impartiality in resolving the dispute.

Commissioners identified several unresolved items the memo or meeting should address: a salary metric and formal process for setting AFSCME-position pay (an email asking the commission to decide a salary was reportedly sent with less than 24 hours' notice), an incomplete salary assessment for two commission positions, an unresolved posting/rescission of an investigator position, stalled HUD-related certification work, and two internal workplace complaints submitted on 2023-12-20 and 2024-04-11 that remained without findings. Director Lacey also said attorneys representing the commission in both an ICRC matter and separate litigation have not been paid by the city's legal department for several months.

The commission debated next steps: some members urged sending the memo first to put the legal position in writing; others supported holding another face-to-face meeting with the city administrator and corporation counsel. Chairman Guster (referred to in the meeting as Commissioner Guster) and others emphasized trying a final direct meeting before pursuing litigation; one commissioner said court action (a declaratory judgment) remained a possible option if council and staff did not act.

The commission also agreed to pursue scheduling a fourth joint commission–council meeting in July, and confirmed its next regular meeting for July 8. Several commissioners said the delay risks losing the current fiscal-year staffing funds when the city’s fiscal year begins July 1.

Votes at a glance • Motion to approve the meeting agenda — approved, unanimous. • Motion to approve minutes for April and May — approved, unanimous. • Motion to send memo to city legal counsel and city council requesting clarification of law, requesting a meeting, and authorizing Director Lacey and commissioners to attend — passed 4–1 (nay: Commissioner Holly). Motion mover recorded in the meeting transcript as Commissioner Church Taylor; second recorded as Commissioner Boyd. • Motion to adjourn the meeting — approved (second and mover recorded in transcript).