The Iowa Public Information Board
COMES NOW, Charlotte Miller, Executive Director for the Iowa Public Information Board (IPIB), and enters this Dismissal Order:
On July 1, 2026, Nicholas Bargren filed formal complaint 26FC:0172, alleging the Iowa City Police Department violated Iowa Code Chapter 22.
Facts
In the initial complaint to IPIB, the complainant stated that “information should be non-privileged.” It listed the Iowa City Police Department as the entity involved but provided no further information.
On July 6, 2026, IPIB staff contacted complainant to collect additional information. The email stated:
You filed a complaint with IPIB on July 1, 2026. The only information provided in the complaint was the respondent agency and the statement "the information should be non-privileged". Your allegation provides insufficient information for IPIB to complete a facial review of the matter. Please provide the details and context of the alleged violation so our agency can conduct a facial review. If we don't receive enough details to process the complaint, it will be rejected. Please feel free to reach out with any questions.
IPIB received no response. On July 20th, staff again followed up with the Complainant giving him until the end of the month to provide additional details: “We have received no further information from you regarding your filing. If IPIB doesn't receive further information by July 30, 2026, our agency will have to facially dismiss your complaint at the August IPIB board meeting.”
On July 21, 2026, the Complainant responded, “And why is that? It seems like you’re just “accepting” their answer, is that correct?” IPIB staff responded the following day.
I haven't spoken to the respondent at all & I don't have enough context from your filing to understand what you're referring to. Legally, it is the Complainant's obligation to provide sufficient information to IPIB to be able to assess whether, if everything Complainants allege is true, the allegation would state a violation of Chapter 21 or 22 within IPIB's jurisdiction. If the Complainant cannot or chooses not to provide that information, the complaint is facially dismissed as legally insufficient. If you have questions about what you need to put in an IPIB complaint, please feel free to reach out and we are happy to help the public with our administrative process.
Complainant then stated, “This complaint was referenced IPIB #26FC:0068.” IPIB staff responded and explained that the communication is in reference to #26FC:0172 and attached a copy of his filing. IPIB received no further response. On August 4, 2026, IPIB staff informed the complainant they intended to submit a facial dismissal because we had been unable to collect sufficient information to determine that the allegation stated a violation of Chapter 22 that occurred within 60 days of the complaint filing.
Applicable Law
“Upon receipt of a written complaint alleging a violation of Iowa Code chapter 21 or 22, the board shall either: (a) Accept the complaint, following a review of the allegations on their face, having determined that the complaint is within the board’s jurisdiction, appears legally sufficient, and could have merit; or (b) Dismiss the complaint, following a review of the allegations on their face, having determined that the complaint is outside the board’s jurisdiction, appears legally insufficient, is frivolous, is without merit, involves harmless error, or relates to a specific incident that has previously been disposed of on its merits by the board or a court.” Iowa Code § 497-2.1(2).
Analysis
Chapter 22 only delegates enforcement power to this Board when a complaint appears legally sufficient on its face. The allegations posed by the Complainant, even if true, do not provide enough information to determine that a violation of Chapter 22 occurred within 60 days of filing this complaint. Therefore, the matter should be dismissed by IPIB as legally insufficient.
Conclusion
Iowa Code § 23.8 requires that a complaint be within the IPIB’s jurisdiction, appear legally sufficient, and have merit before the IPIB accepts a complaint. Due to failure to state a violation of Chapter 21 or 22, it is found that this complaint does not meet those requirements.
IT IS SO ORDERED: Formal complaint 26FC:0172 is dismissed as legally insufficient for IPIB to proceed with an investigation pursuant to Iowa Code § 23.8(2) and Iowa Administrative Rule 497-2.1(2)(b).
Pursuant to Iowa Administrative Rule 497-2.1(3), the IPIB may “delegate acceptance or dismissal of a complaint to the executive director, subject to review by the board.” The IPIB will review this Order on February 19, 2026. Pursuant to IPIB rule 497-2.1(4), the parties will be notified in writing of its decision.
By the IPIB Executive Director
___________________________
Charlotte J.M. Miller, J.D.
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
This draft document was sent via email on August 13, 2026, to:
Nicholas Bargren, Complainant