I spent 1998-2010 crusading against police misconduct in the courtroom and the media in Minneapolis. Later, I joined Communities United Against Police Brutality in its campaign to put police misconduct insurance on the ballot. (Malpractice insurance puts dangerous doctors out of business. Why not apply the same concept to cops?) Unfortunately, the Minneapolis Police Federation kept it off the ballot.

Here we are, about a decade later. What's changed? Minneapolis has acquired an international reputation as the epicenter of bad policing in America, and Minneapolis voters have seen their tax bills skyrocket. Those tax bills will no doubt jump even higher when the inevitable Amir Locke civil case is settled. Soon, many of us will no longer be able to afford to live in Minneapolis.

Where do we go from here? Defunding the police went down to defeat, and rightly so. We need police, but we don't need bad policing. We can all agree on that.

Here's an idea: The Minneapolis Police Department, the police union, the mayor, the City Council, the business community and Minneapolis voters should come together to create a workable police misconduct insurance plan that prices bad cops out of a job but protects the lives of our people, so there are no more cases like those of Justine Damond, George Floyd and Amir Locke. We owe it to ourselves, our city and everyone in Minneapolis. Amen.

Jill M. Waite, Minneapolis

•••

Newly elected Council Member Elliott Payne is restarting an attempt to form a Department of Public Safety following the failure of this proposal in the November election ("MPD replacement push renewed," Feb. 11). The path to approval is apparently daunting as it requires unanimous council approval, mayoral approval and approval from the Charter Commission.

Instead of trying to restart this discussion, if this path to amend the charter truly is to work, Payne should instead turn his efforts to an amendment to overturn the outdated minimum force requirements for the MPD. The mayor has said he doesn't believe that belongs in the charter, and some Charter Commission members and council members agree. Had this been presented to the voters as a clean amendment it may have actually passed. While this move could be used by political opportunists as a claim that it will "defund the police," this can be addressed by confirming that these minimum requirements do not appear in the charter of other cities (which are not being accused of defunding the police).

Alternatively, to give citizens confidence that a future police-abolitionist-majority council could not do something dangerous, the amendment could reframe the minimum staffing based on population to be not just sworn officers but rather total public-safety focused employees. This would give the city more flexibility to staff a collection of sworn officers and other professionals but provide some assurance the city would continue to invest appropriately in this area, which would help in an era when City Hall needs to rebuild credibility with the public. This amendment could bring the flexibility everyone says they want to reform who is interacting with the public for different kinds of calls and services, eliminating minimum sworn officer requirements that appear outdated based on most recent studies.

The fact the charter can possibly be amended without a public vote will probably come as a surprise to many. This change could be defined more quickly (and thus enable reform decisions faster) than a new Public Safety Department, which, as we saw in November, requires details to be credible.

The new City Council should put its efforts into widely supportable changes that could quickly enable reform under the framework the voters chose in November and not become mired in trying to overturn that outcome.

Mike Hess, Minneapolis

•••

The editorial "A rocky start for interim MPD chief" (Feb. 11) is misleading, inflammatory and leaves out several key facts about Interim Chief Amelia Huffman and David Garman, who she appointed to lead training for the MPD. The Star Tribune Editorial Board is quick to criticize the profession of law enforcement, but let me lend some insight based on my personal and professional experience working with Huffman and Garman. For more than 25 years, I have worked as a community and nonprofit leader on issues related to homelessness, sexual exploitation and racial equity. In my experience, various members of the MPD have been great partners through the years in this work. Like many, I was horrified when George Floyd was brutally murdered by members of the MPD. Soon after, I approached Huffman, then 5th Precinct head, with an ambitious proposal: to put the entire MPD (as in every single officer) through a mandatory racial equity training program starting with the MPD leadership team and to have four to six MPD officers ranked sergeant or higher complete the racial equity certification training program so that they could continue training MPD officers. Huffman enthusiastically agreed and convinced then-Chief Medaria Arrandondo to adopt the idea. She also set up a meeting with me and Garman, who agreed to complete the racial equity certification program, a time-consuming undertaking on top of his other duties but one that he saw as beneficial to turning the corner on police culture around racial equity. In this capacity, he also agreed to play a key role in convincing other officers to get on board with this racial equity approach.

His support and commitment to racial equity training combined with his more than 24 years of experience with the MPD are among key reasons why Huffman appointed him to this key role.

Huffman herself has more than 27 years of service to the city of Minneapolis and the MPD and is a resident of Minneapolis. Without doubt, the MPD needs to change, and Huffman would be the first to say this, but before the Editorial Board sensationalizes her leadership, it should look for facts and give her a chance to show what a great leader she is and can be as the permanent chief.

Michelle Basham, St. Paul

•••

We've got a job for you! We think we know who killed a Black man several days ago. The suspect is probably armed and may have a gun that can fire bullets that can pierce your body armor. You will go to the apartment we think the suspect is in, politely knock on the door and tell the suspect that you are a police officer there to arrest him. Instruct the suspect to please open the door, and put all of your guns away. How about you, are you up for it? I'm thinking I'd want a no-knock warrant.

Bruce Anderson, Burnsville

As a Minneapolis Public Schools social worker, once again I'm supporting students who are reeling from the violence in our community that has taken the life of Deshaun Hill ("North High student, 15, dies day after shooting," Feb. 11). And I'm angry. Our mayor, Jacob Frey, and our Police Department are failing to keep our community safe. Parents worry their children may not make it home from school alive. Students stand in fear at the bus stop, knowing that even being on the bus isn't going to protect you from gun violence. Parents are keeping their children home from school. Families are leaving the city for safer communities. Meanwhile, the city of Minneapolis has spent 18 months arguing about the MPD and its budget, the role of the mayor and the responsibilities of the city council, but at the end of the day, they all bear responsibility for the failure to ensure that Minneapolis children can access their education safely and without harm. Every student has the right to a free and appropriate public education. Right now, the city of Minneapolis is failing the children of this city.

Kayci Rush, Minneapolis

We want to hear from you. Send us your thoughts here.