PERSPECTIVE ON THE LAPD : Don’t Delay Naming a Successor to Gates : A new police chief must be named next month. The department’s reform can be adjusted to the City Charter vote in June.

It is a travesty that the Los Angeles City Charter’s insider preference rules eliminated qualified Latino candidates from the final list for appointment of a new chief of police. These rules can and should be changed by adopting the Christopher Commission reforms that will be on the June 2 ballot. But it would be a far greater travesty to postpone action on the appointment until after the election, as the City Council will be asked to do today. Such a delay would accomplish nothing more certain than releasing Police Chief Daryl Gates from his commitment to retire in April. It also would enable him to keep his promise to use his office to campaign against the reforms.

On May 29, 1991, Chief Gates said that he would retire if the Christopher Commission faulted his leadership after completing its investigation of the implications of what happened to Rodney King on March 3, 1991. The commission did find fault in several major aspects of his leadership and urged him to retire to permit a new generation of leadership to take over the LAPD.

At first, Gates backed off his promise to retire, but in July, in a letter to the mayor and City Council, which he also read via videotape to his department, Gates declared that he would retire in April, 1992. Gates set only one condition: that his successor be appointed first, which meant that the selection would be under the old rules.

Supporters of the Christopher Commission reforms accepted Gates’ terms once it was agreed that the proposed new tenure rules for that office--including a five-year renewable term--would apply to the new chief if they were adopted within one year of his or her appointment. The selection process then proceeded, with a goal of meeting Gates’ own April deadline, while the reforms were placed on the June ballot. Two weeks ago, the selection process reached the point of narrowing the field of candidates to six men--five of them from the LAPD.

Now, Councilman Richard Alatorre is urging that the selection of the new chief be put on hold because the insider-preference rules eliminated a top-scoring Latino candidate from the county Sheriff’s Department. Unfortunately, this obscures the real issues that affect all minority communities.

Because of a history of discrimination in hiring and promotion in the LAPD, there is a dearth of Latino insider candidates at the required commander level. This pattern of discrimination, exemplified by the statement Gates once made that Latinos were not promoted because they are “lazy,” was broken only by a series of successful lawsuits during Gates’ 14-year tenure.

Thus, the absence of a Latino on the final list of candidates vividly illustrates the need both to alter the selection process and to replace Chief Gates and other command-level officerswith a new generation of officers who will enthusiastically enforce the civil-rights laws.

If the selection process is delayed until after the June election and the reforms are then adopted, the entire process, which has already taken six months, will have to start from scratch under an entirely new set of rules--extending Gates’ stay in office indefinitely. Meanwhile, Willie Williams, an African-American and the only outsider to qualify by outscoring all of the insider candidates, may have to withdraw. Williams cannot continue indefinitely in his position in another city while being a candidate here.

Conversely, if there is a delay and if the reforms are not adopted, then the process will resume, but still without Latino candidates. Worse yet, Gates will claim a mandate to stay on. We will have accomplished absolutely nothing.

The best course is to choose Gates’ successor in April. If he reneges on his written pledge to retire, in defiance of the mayor, the City Council and the Police Commission, that would provide telling evidence in favor of changing the system to ensure the accountability of the police chief. Moreover, Councilman Marvin Braude, who did not support Gates’ ouster last April, has stated that a majority of the City Council and Police Commission would act if Gates reneges on his commitment.

The replacement of Gates is the necessary first step to the appointment of an entirely new generation of command officers, one that would include a fair representation of minority officers and, overall, be committed to community-based policing and vigorous enforcement of all civil rights laws. Latinos and African-Americans in particular need the immediate and certain replacement of Gates with an individual committed to broad reforms so that the city will have police officers who are routinely responsive and respectful to all.

These goals must be pursued regardless of what happens at the polls in June. All of the people of this city would benefit by proceeding with the appointment of a new chief of police in April and holding Gates to his commitment to retire at that time.