Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Risk Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Law Department says settlements aren’t admissions as committee presses for training, benchmarking
Summary
The Law Department told Detroit’s Internal Operations committee that most settlements reflect First Amendment or alleged unlawful-seizure claims and are not admissions of fault; members pressed for benchmarking against peer cities and more detail on training and disciplinary measures to reduce recurring payouts.
The Law Department presented the Internal Operations committee with its quarterly risk-management report and a confidential memorandum reviewing recent settlements and litigation trends. Attorney Anderson, who spoke for the department, said many matters involve alleged violations of First Amendment rights or claims of unlawful seizure and that settling a case does not amount to an admission of fault.
"Settlement is not an admission of fault by any means," Anderson said, explaining that some cases are settled because trial costs and the unpredictability of juries can make litigation more expensive than a negotiated resolution.
Council members pressed for more concrete steps to reduce repeat payouts. Member Santiago Romero said a deeper look at training and accountability is needed, particularly where police conduct is implicated. "I'm concerned of police who have power ... who will then use their power and hurt residents," she said.
LPD and the Law Department acknowledged constraints: union protections can limit disciplinary options for some employees and judicial backlogs—exacerbated since COVID—mean cases often remain unresolved for years. Anderson and others recommended benchmarking Detroit’s settlement costs and incidence rates against similarly sized U.S. cities and acknowledged that changes in policy or practice may not show savings immediately.
Council member Corley said the city spends roughly $60 million a year on risk management on average and urged ongoing efforts to identify reforms that would reduce pressure on the general fund.
Committee members asked the administration to return with more detailed information on training programs, measurable targets, and whether additional oversight or contract terms could improve outcomes. The committee voted to receive and file the report, and members signaled they expect follow-up sessions.
