The cost of Issue 24

The proposed charter amendment (Issue 24) pushed by the Citizens for a Safer Cleveland is not only excessive, it is expensive too.??The costs are hidden using clever language.??Spending more money on entities (Citizens Police Review Board and Community Police Commission) that do not affect crime rates, will not make Cleveland safer.??Due to the nature of this column, my comments are as a resident of Cleveland and based on my personal research, training, education, and experience.??

Proponents of Issue 24 state that if it is implemented, it will save the city money.??According to the Citizens for a Safer Cleveland website, “Since 2014, the City of Cleveland has paid out $24 million in settlements arising from police misconduct.”??In addition, it states the amendment will “stop wasting taxpayer dollars on settlements for police wrongdoing.”??For clarity, those settlements are from allegations of misconduct and are not based on the officer’s guilt or innocence.?

Settlements paid by the city are based on several factors: cost to defend (court & filing fees), cost to the city’s image for defending officer, cost of employee involvement (time off job), and the potential financial penalties.??All these costs are combined, resulting in a total financial price of fighting the allegations in court.??For example, the city believes the defense effort and potential judgement against the city will cost $1 million.??The city will negotiate a settlement for an amount less than the $1 million.??If less than the $1 million is not accepted, the city will fight the allegation.??It is a simple cost benefit analysis common across governments, businesses, and industries.??Issue 24 will not stop the ambulance chasing attorneys from filing lawsuits against the city because any settlement is in the attorneys’ favor.??Issue 24 will not eliminate lawsuit settlements, but it will expand and increase another type of settlement.?

The ability of the Civilian Police Review Board (CPRB) and Community Police Commission (CPC) to overrule the police chief, safety director, and mayor for discipline causes other problems.??An appointed commission of civilians can override the trained and duly elected professionals while exposing the city to liability the elected officials cannot stop.??Consider an officer that the CPC or CPRB terminates and is reinstated by arbitration or court order.??Under the current charter and contracts, the officer is entitled to back pay only because it is not a constitutional right issue.??Issue 24 will make those terminations constitutional right issues, specifically due process.??Those ambulance chasing attorney will now be chasing the terminated officers offering to help sue the city.??Federal lawsuits result in back pay and punitive fines that take years to settle.?

With a police budget of $218 million, Issue 24 requires the city to spend at least an additional $4.2 million annually (1% of police budget for CPRB and Office of Professional Standards, $1 million for CPC, and .5% of police budget for CPC grant making).??The annual $4.2 million multiplied by the 7-year period listed on the Citizens for a Safer Cleveland website totals $29.8 million.??Issue 24 proposes to pay AT LEAST $29.8 million (assuming no future settlements) to correct the $24 million.??In other words, the Issue 24 solution costs the residents of Cleveland an additional $5.8 million.??To make that scarier, the elected officials (mayor & council) cannot oversee how that money is spent.???

The question for Cleveland residents about Issue 24 is, where do you think $4.2 million annually is best spent???In a town with a history of money mismanagement, can we afford to trust an appointed commission more than our elected officials??