Reforming the Iowa Civil Justice System, January 30, 2012

Executive Summary I. Survey The Task Force conducted a wide-ranging survey of more than 9,000 licensed Iowa attorneys and judges to obtain their input on a variety of civil justice system topics. The survey results helped inform the Task Force of problem areas in Iowa’s civil justice system. II. Two-Tier Justice System The Task Force recommends a pilot program based on a two-tier civil justice system. A two-tier system would streamline litigation processes—including rules of evidence and discovery disclosures—and reduce litigation costs of certain cases falling below a threshold dollar value. III. One Judge/One Case and Date Certain for Trial Some jurisdictions in Iowa have adopted one judge/one case and date certain for trial in certain cases. The assignment of one judge to each case for the life of the matter and the establishment of dates certain for civil trials could enhance Iowans’ access to the courts, improve judicial management, promote consistency and adherence to deadlines, and reduce discovery excesses. IV. Discovery Processes Reforms addressing inefficient discovery processes will reduce delays in and costs of litigation. Such measures include adopting an aspirational purpose for discovery rules to “secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action,” holding discovery proportional to the size and nature of the case, requiring initial disclosures, limiting the number of expert witnesses, and enforcing existing rules. V. Expert Witness Fees The Task Force acknowledges the probable need to revisit the statutory additional daily compensation limit for expert witness fees. Leaving the compensation level to the discretion of the trial court is one potential solution. VI. Jurors Additions to the standard juror questionnaire would provide a better understanding of the potential jurors’ backgrounds and suitability for jury service. The Task Force encourages adoption of more modern juror educational materials and video. Rehabilitation of prospective jurors who express an unwillingness or inability to be fair should include a presumption of dismissal. VII. Video and Teleconferencing Options When court resources are constrained both by limited numbers of personnel and budget cuts, it is logical to look to video and teleconferencing technology to streamline the court process and reduce costs. The judicial branch should embrace technological developments in ways that will not compromise the fairness, dignity, solemnity, and decorum of judicial proceedings. VIII. Court-Annexed Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR) Litigants and practitioners in Iowa are generally satisfied with the current use of private, voluntary ADR for civil cases. There is concern, however, that maintaining the status quo may have steep future costs. Court-annexed ADR is an important aspect of any justice system reform effort, and the Task Force perceives benefits and detriments to reforming this aspect of the Iowa civil justice system. IX. Relaxed Requirement of Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law A rule authorizing parties to waive findings of fact and conclusions of law could expedite resolution of nonjury civil cases. X. Business (Specialty) Courts Specialty business courts have achieved widespread support across the country. In addition, specialty courts provide excellent vehicles for implementing or piloting other court innovations that may be useful in a broader court system context. A business specialty court should be and could be piloted in Iowa within the existing court system framework of the Iowa Judicial Branch. Appendix included as a separate document, is 176 pages.

Investigation of Des Moines Police Department, use of force in the Arrest of Larry Milton, 1992

Investigative report produced by Iowa Citizens' Aide/Ombudsman

Iowa’s Drug Control Strategy, 2008

The 2011 Iowa Drug Control Strategy is submitted in satisfaction of Chapter 80E.1 of the Code of Iowa which directs the Drug Policy Coordinator to monitor and coordinate all drug prevention, enforcement and treatment activities in the state. Further, it requires the Coordinator to submit an annual report to the Governor and Legislature concerning the activities and programs of the Coordinator, the Governor’s Office of Drug Control Policy and all other state departments with drug enforcement, substance abuse treatment, and prevention programs. Chapter 80E.2 establishes the Drug Policy Advisory Council (DPAC), chaired by the Coordinator, and consisting of a prosecuting attorney, substance abuse treatment specialist, law enforcement officer, prevention specialist, judge and representatives from the departments of corrections, education, public health, human services, public safety and human rights. This report and strategy was developed in consultation with the DPAC.

Iowa’s Drug Control Strategy, 2010

The 2011 Iowa Drug Control Strategy is submitted in satisfaction of Chapter 80E.1 of the Code of Iowa which directs the Drug Policy Coordinator to monitor and coordinate all drug prevention, enforcement and treatment activities in the state. Further, it requires the Coordinator to submit an annual report to the Governor and Legislature concerning the activities and programs of the Coordinator, the Governor’s Office of Drug Control Policy and all other state departments with drug enforcement, substance abuse treatment, and prevention programs. Chapter 80E.2 establishes the Drug Policy Advisory Council (DPAC), chaired by the Coordinator, and consisting of a prosecuting attorney, substance abuse treatment specialist, law enforcement officer, prevention specialist, judge and representatives from the departments of corrections, education, public health, human services, public safety and human rights. This report and strategy was developed in consultation with the DPAC.

Iowa’s Drug Control Strategy, 2012

The 2011 Iowa Drug Control Strategy is submitted in satisfaction of Chapter 80E.1 of the Code of Iowa which directs the Drug Policy Coordinator to monitor and coordinate all drug prevention, enforcement and treatment activities in the state. Further, it requires the Coordinator to submit an annual report to the Governor and Legislature concerning the activities and programs of the Coordinator, the Governor’s Office of Drug Control Policy and all other state departments with drug enforcement, substance abuse treatment, and prevention programs. Chapter 80E.2 establishes the Drug Policy Advisory Council (DPAC), chaired by the Coordinator, and consisting of a prosecuting attorney, substance abuse treatment specialist, law enforcement officer, prevention specialist, judge and representatives from the departments of corrections, education, public health, human services, public safety and human rights. This report and strategy was developed in consultation with the DPAC.

Iowa’s Drug Control Strategy, 2009

The 2011 Iowa Drug Control Strategy is submitted in satisfaction of Chapter 80E.1 of the Code of Iowa which directs the Drug Policy Coordinator to monitor and coordinate all drug prevention, enforcement and treatment activities in the state. Further, it requires the Coordinator to submit an annual report to the Governor and Legislature concerning the activities and programs of the Coordinator, the Governor’s Office of Drug Control Policy and all other state departments with drug enforcement, substance abuse treatment, and prevention programs. Chapter 80E.2 establishes the Drug Policy Advisory Council (DPAC), chaired by the Coordinator, and consisting of a prosecuting attorney, substance abuse treatment specialist, law enforcement officer, prevention specialist, judge and representatives from the departments of corrections, education, public health, human services, public safety and human rights. This report and strategy was developed in consultation with the DPAC.

Iowa Pseudoephedrine Control Law, March 22, 2005

This law is intended to reduce the number of hazardous methamphetamine labs in Iowa, by controlling meth cooks’ access to the key meth-making ingredient: pseudoephedrine. In 2004, Iowa law enforcement agencies responded to a record 1,472 meth lab incidents. Below, please find links to: Senate File 169 (Iowa’s pseudoephedrine control law); an Iowa meth fact sheet; a brief overview of the law; and general compliance guidelines for consumers, pharmacies, retailers and law enforcement. Most provisions of this law, pertaining to pseudoephedrine sales, are effective May 21, 2005. However, two other provisions were effective immediately—March 22, 2005—upon the Governor’s signing of this measure into law: (1) removal of exceptions on the Schedule V Controlled Substance status for ephedrine [all ephedrine products now may only be sold in licensed pharmacies…no retail sales of ephedrine permitted]; and (2) addition of a requirement that bailable defendants charged with manufacture, delivery, possession with the intent to deliver, or distribution of methamphetamine, shall, in addition to a substance abuse evaluation, remain under supervision and be required to undergo random drug tests as a condition of release.

Governor's Office of Drug Control Policy Five-Year Strategic Plan July 1, 2003-June 30, 2008

The Office of the Drug Policy Coordinator is established in Chapter 80E of the Code of Iowa. The Coordinator directs the Governor’s Office of Drug Control Policy; coordinates and monitors all statewide counter-drug efforts, substance abuse treatment grants and programs, and substance abuse prevention and education programs; and engages in other related activities involving the Departments of public safety, corrections, education, public health, and human services. The coordinator assists in the development of local and community strategies to fight substance abuse, including local law enforcement, education, and treatment activities. The Drug Policy Coordinator serves as chairperson to the Drug Policy Advisory Council. The council includes the directors of the departments of corrections, education, public health, public safety, human services, division of criminal and juvenile justice planning, and human rights. The Council also consists of a prosecuting attorney, substance abuse treatment specialist, substance abuse prevention specialist, substance abuse treatment program director, judge, and one representative each from the Iowa Association of Chiefs of Police and Peace Officers, the Iowa State Police Association, and the Iowa State Sheriff’s and Deputies’ Association. Council members are appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The council makes policy recommendations related to substance abuse education, prevention, and treatment, and drug enforcement. The Council and the Coordinator oversee the development and implementation of a comprehensive State of Iowa Drug Control Strategy. The Office of Drug Control Policy administers federal grant programs to improve the criminal justice system by supporting drug enforcement, substance abuse prevention and offender treatment programs across the state. The ODCP prepares and submits the Iowa Drug and Violent Crime Control Strategy to the U.S. Department of Justice, with recommendations from the Drug Policy Advisory Council. The ODCP also provides program and fiscal technical assistance to state and local agencies, as well as program evaluation and grants management.

Quick Facts, June 2009

A "Quick" view of facts and figures for Iowa's Department of Corrections Prisons and Community Based Corrections.

Quick Facts, January 2010

A "quick" view of facts and figures for Iowa's Department of Corrections Prisons and Community Based Corrections.

Insight into oversight : how information commissioners contribute to the achievement of access-to-information policy objectives

This thesis examines how oversight bodies, as part of an ATI policy, contribute to the achievement of the policy's objectives. The aim of the thesis is to see how oversight bodies and the work they do affects the implementation of their respective ATI policies and thereby contributes to the objectives of those policies using a comparative case study approach. The thesis investigates how federal/central government level information commissioners in four jurisdictions - Germany, India, Scotland, and Switzerland - enforce their respective ATI policies, which tasks they carry out in addition to their enforcement duties, the challenges they face in their work and the ways they overcome these. Qualitative data were gathered from primary and secondary documents as well as in 37 semi-structured interviews with staff of the commissioners' offices, administrative officials whose job entails complying with ATI, people who have made ATI requests and appealed to their respective oversight body, and external experts who have studied ATI implementation in their particular jurisdiction. The thesis finds that while the aspect of an oversight body's formal independence that has the greatest impact on its work is resource control and that although the powers granted by law set the framework for ensuring that the administration is properly complying with the policy, the commissioner's leadership style - a component of informal independence - has more influence than formal attributes of independence in setting out how resources are obtained and used as well as how staff set priorities and utilize the powers they are granted by law. The conclusion, therefore, is that an ATI oversight body's ability to contribute to the achievement of the policy's objectives is a function of three main factors: a. commissioner's leadership style; b. adequacy of resources and degree of control the organization has over them; c. powers and the exercise of discretion in using them. In effect, the thesis argues that it is difficult to pinpoint the value of the formal powers set out for the oversight body in the ATI law, and that their decisions on whether and how to use them are more important than the presumed strength of the powers. It also claims that the choices made by the commissioners and their staff regarding priorities and use of powers are determined to a large extent by the adequacy of resources and the degree of control the organization has over those resources. In turn, how the head of the organization leads and manages the oversight body is crucial to both the adequacy of the organization's resources and the decisions made about the use of powers. Together, these three factors have a significant impact on the body's effectiveness in contributing to ATI objectives.

Winner's curse in toll road concessions

We empirically assess the effect of the winner's curse in auctions for toll road concessions, taking into account, to our knowledge for the first time, problems of commitment and enforcement, using a unique dataset of 49 worldwide road concessions.

Annual Infrastructure Report 2011, January 15, 2012

Major maintenance; health, safety, loss of use; and Americans with Disabilities Act deficiencies at the Capitol Complex and statewide for twelve agencies and divisions participating in the Vertical Infrastructure Program in collaboration with the Governor's Vertical Infrastructure Advisory Committee, including the Department of Administrative Services; the Department of Commerce, Alcoholic Beverages Division; the Department of Corrections; the Department of Cultural Affairs; the Department of Education, including Iowa Public Television and Iowa Vocational Rehabilitation Services; the Department of Human Services; Iowa Law Enforcement Academy; the Department of Public Safety; Terrace Hill; Iowa Veterans Home and Iowa Workforce Development. The advisory committee meets on a monthly basis to review the progress of the work and to make recommendations on procedures and priorities.

Toolbox of Countermeasures to Reduce Red Light Running Final Report, April 2012

Red light running (RLR) is a problem in the US that has resulted in 165,000 injuries and 907 fatalities annually. In Iowa, RLR-related crashes make up 24.5 percent of all crashes and account for 31.7 percent of fatal and major injury crashes at signalized intersections. RLR crashes are a safety concern due to the increased likelihood of injury compared to other types of crashes. The research team developed this toolbox for practitioners to address RLR crashes. The Four Es—Engineering, Enforcement, Education, and Emergency Response—should be used together to address RLR problems. However, this toolbox focuses on engineering, enforcement, and education solutions. The toolbox has two major parts:  Guidelines to identify problem intersections and the causes of RLR at intersections  Roadway-based and enforcement countermeasures for RLR

The Compendium of Scheduled Violations and Scheduled Fines, 2012

This Compendium of Scheduled Violations and Scheduled Fines is designed and published by the Iowa Department of Public Safety and the Department of Natural Resources. It is intended for the use of all courts, law enforcement officers and agencies of the State of Iowa. The cost of this publication is paid out of the budget of the Department of Public Safety and the Department of Natural Resources.