Stop-and-Frisk Controversy...Pol Might Be Overshooting the Mark

City Councilman Peter Vallone offered an interesting claim in yesterday's tab. He said a stop-and-frisk bill being considered by the council could cost the city $1 billion a year. We think he might be overstating things.

Vallone, the chair of the council's public safety committee, did not offer any basis for this estimate, according to the article in the New York Post. But he claimed the bill will make it easier for New Yorkers to sue over stop and frisk will "bankrupt the city."

"This is the most dangerous and irresponsible bill ever to be considered by the city council," he told the Post.

The comment was immediately assaulted by Joo-Hyun Kang, a spokesperson for Communities United for Police Reform. Kang said stop and frisk is already costing the city millions a year, and said the legislation will "help protect New Yorkers from abusive policing and the city from paying out millions of dollars a year due to discriminatory and unlawful policing."


"They have failed to take concrete action to curb this government-led discrimination, and reduce the already too-high human and financial costs to the city," Kang said.

The bill, Intro 800, was sponsored by 29 councilmembers, all Democrats. The language is vague, which is a problem, but it appears to declare discrimination in stop and frisk illegal, and tells folks they can sue. Law enforcement has violated the law when profiling is "intentional," there was no "government interest," fails "to prove substantial justification for such activities," etc., etc. If the person can show there was a better way to do it, the city has violated the law.

Well, folks, we don't know what that all means. It's poorly written, and it's not clear what the purpose really is. There's also a bit of nanny state feel to the bill. Let's face it, policing is a tough job, and cops need tools to do it right. On the other hand, we do have a fairly effective document called the U.S. Constitution. There are a lot of problems with stop and frisk, but this bill ain't going to solve them.

Still, based on an analysis we did in January, the Vallone estimate seems over-wrought. In January, there were 35 federal lawsuits filed on stop and frisk.

Extrapolated out, that means about 400 such lawsuits will be filed this year. Let's say they settle for an average of $50,000, a number which is likely high. Most suits against the city settle for a lesser amount. Based on that, the city will spend about $20 million to settle stop and frisk lawsuits filed this year -- far less than Vallone's number.



Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help
3 comments
adam1983tt
adam1983tt

"Stop-and-Frisk?"

What happened "Don't fk with people until you have probable cause?"

Mike
Mike

NYC spent $75 Million in 2010 and again in 2011 on illegal marijuana arrests alone.  This is only a conservative estimate and only part of the costs to the city of Stop and Frisk.  These cost savings could help to pay for lawsuits if they occur in the future.

 

My second point is, the legislation is hoping to reduce the number of cases where a lawsuit is necessary.  If the NYPD were respecting people's rights there would be very few lawsuits.  If the worry is that allowing for accountability of the NYPD and compensation for those who have been subjected to abuse would cost the city too much money, than I think it really says something about how often the NYPD is abusing their power.  I hope that these bills pass and that it helps to reform the NYPD so that there is less need for lawsuits because there are less rights violations in the future.

Now Trending

New York Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...