Just one month into the year, the city already has run through well over half of the $82 million that Mayor Brandon Johnson set aside for 2025 to cover police misconduct settlements and judgments. And more than 220 lawsuits are still pending for just three ex-cops.
The challenge there would be you’d be uniting both bad cops and good cops against implementing professional insurance initially. This would also be a challenged to adoption if the city is paying the base premiums initially. Those base premiums would be likely high right out of the gate. It would be a great talking point good/bad cops would use against this idea to taxpayers “look at how much this is costing you to pay this high insurance base. We should get rid of it entirely” the cops would say.
oh im sure cops would be against it but I bet it would do stellar in a voter referendum.
Have you seen our voters lately?
Why not get good cops on your side in getting this in place first and let the actuarial tables be built from those experiences that reflect the system in place?
I think you missed the part of my post where I communicated the city/department would pay the base premium for the officers. So good cops would pay nothing. Only bad cops that got higher rates from judgments against them would have to fork out the overage in premiums to continue practicing law enforcement.
My thing is insurance is based on actuarial tables and so cops should effect the rates of other cops. It would be a powerful self policing incentive.
The challenge there would be you’d be uniting both bad cops and good cops against implementing professional insurance initially. This would also be a challenged to adoption if the city is paying the base premiums initially. Those base premiums would be likely high right out of the gate. It would be a great talking point good/bad cops would use against this idea to taxpayers “look at how much this is costing you to pay this high insurance base. We should get rid of it entirely” the cops would say.
oh im sure cops would be against it but I bet it would do stellar in a voter referendum.
Have you seen our voters lately?
Why not get good cops on your side in getting this in place first and let the actuarial tables be built from those experiences that reflect the system in place?
Mainly because good cops won’t likely go for it. This is something that definately needs to be done top down at the government level.
I agree it will be from the top down government level, but why do you think good cops won’t like it?
for the same reason any other person would not want to carry insurance if they did not have to. It will cost them money.
I think you missed the part of my post where I communicated the city/department would pay the base premium for the officers. So good cops would pay nothing. Only bad cops that got higher rates from judgments against them would have to fork out the overage in premiums to continue practicing law enforcement.
I actually do not like that idea. I think its good for all of them to see the line item and be concerned about it growing.