NEWS ANALYSIS : Leaders for Police Reform Seek Rallying Cry : City government: Despite widespread demands for a shake-up of the department after the Rodney King beating, the task will not be easy. There already is organized opposition to changing the charter.

Less than a year after the videotaped police beating of Rodney King traumatized the city, the leaders of a drive to reform the Los Angeles Police Department are searching for a compelling message to rally voters and help turn a campaign into a cause.

Supporters of a historic change in the City Charter recommended by the Christopher Commission have about four months until the June 2 election to persuade voters that Los Angeles would be better governed--as well as safer from criminals and rogue police officers--if City Hall were given greater authority over the Police Department. But despite widespread demands for a shake-up of the department immediately after the King beating, supporters of the police reform measures now acknowledge that they have their work cut out for them.

They already face an organized opposition that seeks to preserve a charter that has granted the Police Department and its chief cherished independence from City Hall for the better part of this century. These opponents have a potentially popular message: The proposed charter change is more likely to politicize the LAPD than reform it.

Several local political analysts say the opponents of a charter change may have an easier time arousing the emotions of voters by raising the specter of cops taking orders from crooked politicians “Chicago-style.”

“Among the people who vote in this town, emotion is on the side of strong law enforcement,” said consultant Joe Cerrell.

The message that politicians should butt out of police work will have a combative resonance to it if it is delivered by Police Chief Daryl F. Gates, who survived the mayor’s efforts to move him aside after the King beating last year.

Gates, who said he plans to retire in June, declined to say what role he will play during the campaign over charter reform, which he opposes.

“I know the chief is going to speak out,” said one of the leaders of the organization opposed to charter change.

As the campaign for charter reform gears up, those close to it say they will focus on the issue of accountability.

“I would think the focus will be on the fact that ours is the only police chief in a major city who is not accountable to elected officials and, therefore, to the public,” said lawyer Gilbert Ray, a member of the Christopher Commission that investigated the Police Department after the King beating.

Warren Christopher, the eminent lawyer and former statesman who headed the Christopher Commission, will chair the campaign for charter reform. The campaign’s leadership will be drawn from an electoral establishment of business executives, civil rights leaders and clergy that has come to dominate Los Angeles politics since Tom Bradley was elected mayor nearly 20 years ago.

With Christopher, Roy A. Anderson, chairman emeritus of Lockheed Corp., will co-chair the campaign committee. Bondie Gambrell, owner of Ubisys Inc. and a leading black political fund-raiser, will serve as treasurer. Other campaign directors are to be named next week.

Directing the opposition is a group headed by actress Peggy Rowe Estrada; lawyer Jay Grodin, who is Gates’ attorney; and businessman Don Clinton, the owner of Clifton’s Cafeterias. The group, known as Citizens for Integrity and Viability in the City Charter, or CIVIC, also includes former Mayor Sam Yorty, Republican U.S. Senate candidate Bruce Herschensohn and former U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Julian Nava.

The group is made up of lawyers, business executives, members of the clergy, prosecutors and former police officers. It is geographically and ethnically diverse, including the head of the Black Americans for Family Values, the president of the Watts Century Latino Organization and the state chairman of the Congress of Racial Equality.

Christopher’s committee hopes to raise at least $1 million. It also will come fortified with much scholarly opinion favoring charter change. In essence, its thesis is that any charter that puts the police chief beyond the reach of elected leaders is at odds with democratic rule. Such a charter, goes the argument, is especially wrong for multiethnic Los Angeles, where so many emerging communities want a bigger stake in municipal government.

But academic arguments can make for dull politics. Some people involved in the campaign for charter reform worry that their efforts could suffer the fate of many so-called “good government” campaigns that fail to fire up the voters.

“Constitutional issues don’t win unless they have a head and a heart to them,” said one adviser to the reform campaign who asked not to be named. “Our challenge is to give it that dimension.”

Ironically, the Christopher committee’s campaign for reform could be handicapped by the earlier successes of the Christopher Commission.

“If people feel that enough has been accomplished, and that we don’t need to go in now and tinker with the machinery of government, then obviously we’ve got a problem,” the campaign adviser said.

In the aftermath of the King beating, the commission’s investigation of excessive force by the Los Angeles Police Department led to several key recommendations that did not require changing the charter and that have been carried out.

The commission called for new leadership at the top of the department and Gates soon after indicated he would retire. The commission recommended that the department institute community policing to improve its relations with those who have felt victimized by police abuse. A new community policing program is now in the works.

Last July, shortly after the Christopher Commission released its findings, a Los Angeles Times citywide poll found that 77% of residents approved of the commission’s recommendation to give the city’s Police Commission, the mayor and the City Council more power over the Police Department.

Last week, the City Council tentatively agreed to place that recommendation and others on the June ballot.

Final approval by the council, which is expected, would pave the way for the most far-reaching referendum on police powers in nearly 70 years. The ballot proposals would limit the police chief to two five-year terms and give the civilian-controlled Police Commission the authority to fire the chief, with the mayor and the council entitled to reverse the commission’s action. The proposals also would give the council authority to fire the chief by a two-thirds vote.

Under the present system, the chief’s job is protected by Civil Service unless he is found guilty of misconduct.

Partisans on both sides of the issue of charter reform say the campaign runs the risk of igniting the same divisive passions that erupted after the King beating when liberal and conservative activists battled over the mayor’s efforts to oust Gates.

“I imagine the opponents will really have their gloves off when it comes to talking about the ACLU and the liberal members of the Police Commission,” said Republican political consultant Paul Clark, who does not have a role in the campaign. “I would also expect a portrayal of the mayor as a guy with not-so-clean hands trying to take over the Police Department.”

Clark and others said the campaign could turn into a trial run between Bradley and Gates, neither of whom has discounted running for mayor in 1993.

Analysts agree that Gates could have a pronounced effect on the tone of the campaign if he chose to play a prominent role. But they say it is hard to predict whether the chief will mobilize as many hostile voters as friendly ones.

“Daryl Gates could turn it into a referendum on Daryl Gates,” said Cerrell, “whether you stand behind the tough cop or go with the politicians and the do-gooders.”

Backers of charter reform point to negative public opinion polls which, they say, indicate that most voters are not likely to be swayed by the chief.

Those responding to a Times poll last July gave Gates a strong disapproval rating. Just under 65% said they did not like the job he was doing.

But Bradley’s presence also could backfire. In a Times poll last April, 60% of those queried said Bradley’s efforts to remove Gates were motivated by politics and not because the mayor thought it would be good for the city.

Voters will have a lot to think about between now and June 2. The race for the presidency along with a very busy Senate primary season is likely to stimulate turnout. Forty-two percent of the city’s electorate voted four years ago in the last presidential primary, at least double the turnout that can be expected when local issues are all that are at stake.

Then, scheduled to start next month, is the trial of the four police officers facing criminal charges in the Rodney King beating. It will revisit the events captured on the now-famous videotape.

Confronted again with those flickering images of blows raining on a downed man, “people can wrestle with the intellectual choices that charter reform presents,” said one local analyst, “or they can take sides like they did last year.”