Categories
Budgeting & Resources Key Questions for Boards Leadership & Governance Planning & Policy

A Cyber Insurance Briefing for Elected Leaders

In today’s digital landscape, a local government’s data—from citizen records and utility operations to internal communications—is a prime target for cybercriminals. A single ransomware attack or data breach can cripple services, drain resources, and erode public trust.

While strong cybersecurity measures are your first line of defense, Cyber Insurance acts as a crucial safety net, helping your municipality manage the massive financial fallout of a successful attack.

If your village, town, city, county, or public utility is considering or renewing a policy, here is a look at what local governments can expect, the vital differences between what is typically covered versus what isn’t, and the critical questions you must ask your municipality and your broker.


The Six Critical Questions Elected Leaders Must Answer

As an elected leader, your top priority is the continuity of public service and the protection of taxpayer funds. Cyber risk is no longer an “IT problem”—it is a governance and financial crisis waiting to happen. Before you sign a policy, your governing body must confront these fundamental questions about your municipality’s readiness and resilience.

Focus AreaThe Core Question for the Governing BodyThe Bottom Line for Taxpayers
Operational ImpactIf our critical digital systems (email, payroll, utility controls) were locked down by an attack tomorrow, what essential public service would fail immediately?We must know which services—from 911 dispatch to water quality monitoring—are immediately jeopardized. If the lights go out, your response must be immediate.
Downtime ToleranceHow many hours can our municipality sustain a complete disruption of public records and digital services before the damage to the community becomes irreversible?Every hour of downtime multiplies the cost, halts services, and directly erodes public trust. This defines your operational breaking point.
Financial CostWhat is the documented, unbudgeted cost our municipality would face for recovery, separate from any ransom demand?The true expense is in forensic investigation, legal fees, and system restoration. You need a transparent figure on the financial exposure, which often runs into the millions.
Budget ResilienceDo we have an explicitly dedicated and sufficient reserve fund that can absorb an unbudgeted recovery cost of at least $250,000?Most local governments do not. This question forces a review of whether a cyber event would force painful cuts to essential public programs.
Risk StrategyAre we relying only on our technology defenses, or have we established a financial safety net for when those defenses inevitably fail?Technology is a tool, but cyber insurance is the risk transfer mechanism. It is a layer of resilience for a modern public entity.
Governance & AccountabilityWho is the executive-level owner of cyber risk in this municipality, and is a tested incident response plan in place?Cyber risk is a leadership issue. Insurance helps ensure that the highest levels of governance have a clear, tested plan to guide the community through the chaos of a breach.

What is Typically INCLUDED in a Policy?

Cyber policies generally cover three distinct areas:

Coverage AreaWhat is Covered?Examples
First-Party (Breach Response)Who pays the costs for us to recover from the attack?Fees for forensic investigators, legal counsel, system restoration, and paying cyber extortion (ransom) demands (subject to limits).
Third-Party (Liability to Others)Who pays if we get sued or fined for exposing citizen data?Defense costs, settlements, damages from citizen lawsuits, regulatory fines, and costs for notifying all affected individuals.
E-Crime & Financial LossWho pays if a criminal tricks an employee into sending public funds to a fraudulent account?Financial loss from Computer Fraud, Funds Transfer Fraud (e.g., fraudulent vendor invoices), and Social Engineering Fraud.

What is EXCLUDED?

Exclusions can be policy-specific, but there are several common areas where cyber insurance will not provide coverage:

  • Failure to Maintain Minimum Security: Claims can be denied if the breach is traced to your municipality failing to implement a required security measure, such as an unpatched server or not enforcing Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA).
  • Property Damage or Bodily Injury: Physical damage caused by a cyber event (e.g., a hack on a utility system causing a physical failure) may be covered by a General Liability or Property policy, not the cyber policy, unless specifically added.
  • Acts of War or Terrorism: Losses stemming from hostilities or state-sponsored cyber-attacks are often explicitly excluded.
  • Cost of Hardware/Software Upgrades: The policy will pay to restore systems, but generally not for the cost of upgrading to newer technology.
  • Known Vulnerabilities: If a claim arises from a vulnerability your municipality was aware of before the policy inception date, coverage may be denied.

Where Are the Hidden Traps?

The real risk often lies in the fine print. You need to look beyond the general coverage summary and scrutinize the endorsements and warranties within the policy. These items can act as “trap doors” that allow insurers to legally deny a claim.

1. The “Failure to Maintain Security” Clause

This is the most common and dangerous reason for denial today. Many policies contain a clause that makes coverage conditional upon maintaining specific security controls, most notably Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA).

  • The Warranty Trap: If your municipality warrants (guarantees) in the application that 100% of privileged users or remote access points use MFA, and an attack happens through an account that didn’t have it, the insurer may reject the entire claim based on a breach of warranty.
  • The No-MFA Endorsement: A particularly insidious version of this is the MFA Exclusion Endorsement. This endorsement is added to a policy to state that the insurer will not pay any claim that arises from or is attributed to the lack of MFA on specific systems (e.g., all email, remote access, or privileged accounts).
    • What does the No-MFA Endorsement mean for our paid policy? It means you could pay your full premium for a $1 million policy, but if the claim is traced back to a compromised employee email account that lacked MFA, the insurer can legally reject the entire claim. You have the policy, but no coverage for your greatest risk.

Action: Ensure your policy defines required security controls clearly and realistically. If an MFA endorsement is present, treat it as a policy killer unless you are 100% certain every covered access point complies.

2. The Retroactive Date

All policies have a date—the Retroactive Date—before which the insurer will not cover any incident, even if the loss is discovered during the policy period. If a hacker has been in your system for six months and you purchase a policy today, you may not be covered for the full extent of the intrusion. This prevents coverage for “silent data breaches.”

3. The Exclusion for Software/Hardware “Betterment”

After an attack, forensic experts often recommend system upgrades (e.g., replacing an old server or moving to cloud services). Insurers will only pay for the cost of restoring the old system, not the cost of making it “better” or new. Your municipality must be prepared to budget for these betterment costs, which can be substantial and unexpected.


The Six Critical Questions to Ask Your Broker

Cyber insurance should be a true safety net, not a piece of paper. Use these questions to determine if your policy provides the coverage, expertise, and support your community needs.

1. What does the policy cover? What specific security controls are mandatory, and what happens if we fail to maintain them?

Demand a clear list of mandatory controls (like MFA for all remote access). Clarify if non-compliance with a warranty will void the entire policy or only exclude payment for claims related to that specific missing control.

2. What is the annual premium and deductible, and how does this fit our budget risk?

Understand the financial spread: Premiums for municipalities often range from $600 to over $100,000 annually, with deductibles from $1,000 to $100,000. Ensure these costs are sustainable and that the deductible is affordable in a crisis.

3. Does the insurer have demonstrated experience specifically with the public sector?

Government entities have unique challenges: tight budgets, complex regulatory compliance (like state breach laws), and critical services. An experienced insurer will offer tailored coverage that respects these public sector obligations.

4. What loss prevention and risk mitigation services are provided in addition to the coverage?

Look for high-value extras included in the policy: access to incident response hotlines, employee training platforms, vulnerability scans, and tabletop exercises. These proactive services reduce risk and can help lower future premiums.

5. If we report a breach, what is the guaranteed response time, and who is our dedicated contact?

Day to day or in a crisis, you need human support, not an automated line. Ask for a commitment to a response within hours, not days. Confirm you will have access to a cyber specialist or dedicated claims manager or 24/7 breach response team.

6. What is the likely impact of making a claim on our future premiums and coverage availability?

Ask for candor: Will premiums spike after a claim, or will the insurer consider non-renewal? Understanding the long-term relationship ensures you are not penalized for using the safety net you paid for.

Categories
Actionable Steps Budgeting & Resources Cybersecurity Basics Leadership & Governance Planning & Policy Press Release Tools & Guidance

Announcing the Local Government Officials Guide to Cybersecurity

We are thrilled to announce the official publication of a critical new resource: the Local Government Officials Guide to Cybersecurity (LGOGC)!

This project was developed by the Local Government Cybersecurity Alliance (LGCA) specifically to empower elected and appointed officials—from supervisors and council members to city managers and agency heads—to effectively navigate the increasingly complex world of cyber risk.

Moving Beyond the Technical Jargon

Cybersecurity is not just an IT department problem; it is an enterprise-wide, whole-of-government issue that impacts finance, legal compliance, emergency services, and public trust.

The LGOGC cuts through technical jargon to focus on what matters most to community leaders: governance, accountability, and resilience. This guide was truly built by and for local government professionals, ensuring every concept is practical and immediately relevant to your fiduciary duty to protect the systems that serve your communities.


What the Guide Will Help You Achieve

The LGOGC provides a clear, actionable framework to help local leaders translate responsibility into practical action. Inside, you’ll find guidance to:

  • Integrate cybersecurity into your strategic and budget planning.
  • Strengthen oversight and reporting mechanisms.
  • Align your efforts with nationally recognized frameworks, such as NIST CSF 2.0.
  • Build a culture of cyber resilience that spans all departments and elected offices.

Download and Share Your Feedback

We believe that making cybersecurity governance as natural and necessary as financial oversight is achievable in every county, city, town, village, and district. This guide is a huge step toward that goal.

Download the Local Government Officials Guide to Cybersecurity (LGOGC) now.

We invite your feedback! Tell us how your jurisdiction is addressing these challenges and what resources would be most valuable to you next in our community forum or white paper.

Categories
Leadership & Governance

Governing AI: Ethical Use and Oversight in Local Government

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming how local governments operate—from automating administrative tasks to enhancing public safety and improving service delivery. But as these technologies become more embedded in public systems, so too does the need for thoughtful governance.

AI offers tremendous promise, but it also raises important questions about fairness, accountability, transparency, and privacy. Without clear ethical guidelines and oversight, even well-intentioned AI applications can lead to unintended consequences, such as biased decision-making or erosion of public trust.


Why AI Governance Matters

AI systems often make decisions that affect people’s lives—whether approving permits, prioritizing maintenance, or analyzing public data. Local governments must ensure these systems are used responsibly and align with community values.

Good governance helps:

  • Prevent misuse or overreach.
  • Ensure transparency in how decisions are made.
  • Protect civil liberties and privacy.
  • Build public confidence in digital services.

Key Elements of an AI Governance Framework

1. Ethical Principles

Start with a clear set of guiding values—such as fairness, accountability, transparency, and respect for individual rights. These principles should inform every stage of AI development and deployment.

2. Oversight and Accountability

Establish internal oversight bodies or designate responsible officials to review AI projects. Oversight should include legal, technical, and community perspectives to ensure balanced decision-making.

3. Risk Assessment

Before deploying AI, assess potential risks—such as bias, data privacy concerns, or unintended consequences. Consider how the system might impact different populations and whether safeguards are in place.

4. Transparency and Explainability

Residents should understand how AI systems work and how decisions are made. Use plain language to explain what data is collected, how it’s used, and what rights individuals have.

5. Public Engagement

Involve the community in discussions about AI use. Public input can help shape policies, identify concerns, and ensure that technology serves the public interest.

6. Training and Capacity Building

Ensure staff and leadership understand AI capabilities and limitations. Provide training on ethical considerations, data stewardship, and responsible procurement.


Tools and Frameworks to Guide Implementation

Local governments can draw from established frameworks to guide their AI governance efforts, including:

  • NIST AI Risk Management Framework: Offers a structured approach to identifying and managing AI risks.
  • OECD AI Principles: Promote inclusive growth, human-centered values, and transparency.
  • State and local AI task forces: Some jurisdictions have developed their own guidelines tailored to municipal needs.

These resources can help governments build policies that are both practical and principled.


AI is not just a technical tool—it’s a governance issue. As local governments adopt AI to improve services and efficiency, they must also ensure that these technologies are used ethically and transparently. By establishing clear frameworks, engaging the public, and investing in oversight, municipalities can harness the benefits of AI while safeguarding public trust.

Categories
Cybersecurity Basics

Know Your Enemy: The 8 Types of Cyber Threat Actors

Cybersecurity is no longer a niche concern—it’s a frontline issue for local governments. From ransomware attacks that paralyze public services to data breaches that expose sensitive resident information, the threat landscape is growing more complex and dangerous. At the heart of this digital battleground are the cyber threat actors, often referred to as “bad actors.” These individuals or groups exploit technology to conduct malicious activities such as hacking, phishing, and malware deployment.

Bad Actors vs. Defenders: The Asymmetry of Cyber Conflict

The economic dynamics of cybersecurity are starkly imbalanced. Attackers only need to succeed once, while defenders must be flawless every time. This asymmetry creates a daunting challenge for local government cybersecurity teams.

  • Low Cost of Entry for Attackers: The barrier to entry for launching cyberattacks has never been lower. On the dark web, malicious tools and services are readily available for purchase or rent. For example:
    • Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS) platforms allow even non-technical criminals to deploy sophisticated attacks.
    • Phishing kits with pre-built templates and spoofing tools can be bought for under $50.
    • DDoS-for-hire services can be used to overwhelm public websites or internal systems for as little as $200.
  • High Cost for Defenders: In contrast, defenders must secure every endpoint, every user, and every system—24/7. Even a single overlooked vulnerability can lead to catastrophic consequences. For local governments, this means:
    • Maintaining up-to-date patches across legacy systems that may not be easily upgradeable.
    • Training staff to recognize and report phishing attempts, despite high turnover or limited cybersecurity awareness.
    • Monitoring networks for anomalies, often without a dedicated security operations center (SOC).
    • Complying with regulations and reporting requirements, which add administrative overhead.

This uneven playing field means attackers can afford to be opportunistic, while defenders must maintain constant vigilance.

The Imbalance in Risk and Reward

This asymmetry creates a risk-reward imbalance:

AspectAttackersDefenders
CostLow (tools are cheap or free)High (tools, staff, training, compliance)
EffortOne successful exploit is enoughMust defend all vectors, all the time
RiskOften anonymous, low legal riskHigh accountability, legal and reputational consequences
ScaleCan automate and replicate attacksMust tailor defenses to each system and user

For defenders, the cost of failure is steep:

  • Financial Losses: Ransom payments, recovery costs, and lost revenue.
  • Reputational Damage: Loss of public trust, especially if resident data is compromised.
  • Operational Disruption: Downtime in essential services like emergency response, utilities, or public records.
  • Legal and Regulatory Penalties: Non-compliance with data protection laws can result in fines and audits.

Types of Cyber Threat Actors

Understanding the motivations, capabilities, and tactics of cyber threat actors is essential for building resilient defenses—especially for local governments that manage sensitive data and critical infrastructure. These actors vary widely in sophistication, intent, and impact, but each poses a unique risk to public sector organizations.

Type of ActorWho They AreWhat They DoMotivation
Nation-StatesGovernment-backed groups with extensive resources and strategic objectives.Launch Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs), conduct espionage, disrupt infrastructure, and manipulate political systems.Espionage, geopolitical advantage, economic disruption.
Organized CrimeSophisticated criminal syndicates operating like businesses.Deploy ransomware, steal data, commit fraud, and sell stolen credentials.Financial gain through extortion, blackmail, and identity theft.
HacktivistsIdeologically driven individuals or groups.Deface websites, leak sensitive data, disrupt services to promote causes.Political activism, social justice, retaliation.
InsidersEmployees, contractors, or vendors with privileged access.Leak data, sabotage systems, or unintentionally expose vulnerabilities.Grievance, financial reward, coercion, or ideological alignment.
Script KiddiesInexperienced individuals using pre-made tools.Launch DDoS attacks, deface websites, or breach systems for fun.Recognition, boredom, curiosity.
Cyber TerroristsExtremist groups seeking to cause fear and disruption.Target critical infrastructure, emergency services, and communication networks.Ideological warfare, political destabilization.
Foreign Intelligence ServicesState-sponsored espionage units.Steal sensitive data, conduct influence operations, and manipulate public opinion.National security, economic advantage, political leverage.
Terrorist OrganizationsRadical groups using cyber tactics as part of broader warfare.Attack infrastructure, disrupt governance, and spread propaganda.Retaliation, ideological extremism, destabilization.

Each actor type presents unique risks, and their tactics evolve constantly. Defenders must understand the Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTPs) used by adversaries to stay ahead.

What Local Government Leaders Can Do

To counter this imbalance, local government must:

  • Prioritize cybersecurity as a strategic risk, not just an IT issue.
  • Invest in layered defenses, including endpoint protection, network segmentation, and incident response planning.
  • Foster a culture of security awareness across all departments.
  • Leverage partnerships with state and federal cybersecurity agencies for threat intelligence and support.