Top LAPD Officials Agree to Submit to Random Drug Tests

The Los Angeles Police Department will begin mandatory random drug testing of all 93 of its captains, commanders and deputy chiefs on May 1, Police Chief Daryl F. Gates and the Command Officers Assn. announced Friday. The testing program is believed to be the first of its kind in the nation.

Under the $250,000 program outlined at a news conference at Parker Center, command officers will be selected randomly by a police computer and undergo urine tests for several illicit narcotics--including cocaine, marijuana and PCP. Gates said he, too, will be tested.

Those who test positive for illegal drugs face being fired, Gates said.

“Our policy is that they have no place in the Police Department,” the chief said. “We would do our very best to fire them.”

The Police Department began similar testing of cadets in August, 1988. Since then, Gates said, only two cadets have been dropped from the force for testing positive for drug use.

The department fires about 10 police officers a year for drug abuse, said Cmdr. William Booth. The department has roughly 8,000 officers and supervisors.

Spokesmen for the Command Officers Assn. maintained that none of their members use drugs, but they have consented to be tested without advance notice to set examples for both rank-and-file officers and the city.

“We want to demonstrate to the community that they have the right to feel some confidence in the Los Angeles Police Department,” said Cmdr. Larry Kramer, one of the directors of the Command Officers Assn.

Gates said he hopes the drug-testing program will encourage the Los Angeles Police Protective League, the police officers’ union, to support his plan to begin random testing of all of the department’s officers by June 1.

In an attempt to block his plan, the 7,800-member union filed a complaint with the city Employee Relations Board in February charging the chief with unfair labor practices.

“We are trying hard to discuss this with the union,” Gates said. “Somehow, we have not been able to reach an agreement. . . . I’m hopeful this example shown by the leadership here will start the ball rolling.”

A union spokesman said the Police Protective League does not oppose drug testing, but fears Gates is trying to use the issue to reopen contract negotiations prematurely.

“That’s exactly what he’s trying to do,” said George Aliano, the president of the union. “Drug testing is not the issue. The contract is the issue. But I can tell you that, confidentially, less than 80% of the officers support mandatory random drug testing.”

Gates said the latest program will test every command officer at least once a year, but there will be no limit on the number of times an officer can be tested.

During the test, Gates said, two urine samples will be taken. The police lab will examine one sample for traces of illegal drugs. If that sample tests positive, the second sample will be taken to an independent lab and tested.

If the two test results conflict, a third analysis at a private lab will be conducted to resolve the discrepancy.

“I don’t know of any program like this in the country,” the chief said, referring to the testing of top brass. “I have heard that other places are contemplating this, but we’re the only police department that I know of to actually do it.”

During the news conference, Gates also addressed reports that scores of misdemeanor drug cases were not prosecuted by the city attorney’s office in 1988 because an LAPD policy permitted officers to bypass preliminary testing of suspected narcotics.

In September, 1988, officers were told they could skip the preliminary test because the police crime lab would fully analyze seized substances. But the lab results did not come back in time for prosecution.

Because there were no available tests to show that many of the confiscated substances were illicit drugs, many drug arrests were never prosecuted, officials said.

“I’m extremely unhappy over this whole issue,” said Gates, who last September rescinded the order permitting preliminary tests to be bypassed. “The fault is both on our side and the city attorney’s side. We retested those cases, took them back to the city attorney’s office and were assured that they would be filed. They have not been.”

But officials at the city attorney’s office said about 50 cases were affected by the order, and that all eventually were filed.

“(Gates) is 100% wrong,” said Alice Hand, the supervisor of the filing and arraignment branch of the city prosecutor’s office. “As far as I know, they have all been filed. . . . Gates . . . has bad information.”