Council Sets Goal of 44% Female LAPD in 8 Years : Police: Plan would make the chief responsible for ending sexual bias in department. It requires mayor’s OK.

In what feminists are calling an historic accord, the Los Angeles City Council on Wednesday unanimously approved a package of initiatives that would require the Police Department to hire thousands of women and increase the ranks of females on the force to 44% by the year 2000.

The sweeping measures also:

* Urge the Police Commission to make the police chief personally responsible for eliminating gender discrimination, gender bias and sexual harassment in the department, where women make up 13% of the work force.

* Order the Civil Service Commission to include women candidates, women interviewers and issues of sexual discrimination and harassment in the selection process for police chief.

* Call on the Police Department to make attitudes toward women an additional criterion in making hiring and promotional decisions.

* Request Mayor Tom Bradley to “adhere strictly to a policy of gender balance” in making appointments to the police and other commissions. Four men and one woman now sit on the Board of Police Commissioners.

Spokeswoman Valle Bunting said Bradley supports the spirit of the measures but is waiting to see the final wording of the ordinances before deciding whether to sign them.

“The mayor is pleased that this issue is now receiving the recognition it deserves,” said Bunting. “But this is only the beginning. It is still very difficult to recruit female officers, and the city will continue to engage in an active campaign to increase the ranks of female officers.”

The council action follows recommendations of the Christopher Commission, which found widespread sexual discrimination and harassment in the LAPD. Formed in the wake of the Rodney G. King beating, the commission also determined that female officers are better equipped to peacefully resolve potentially violent situations.

“We want to have women police officers because they have a new style of policing: open communication, less use of force and de-escalation of violence,” Councilwoman Joy Picus said.

The city could save millions of dollars annually because of lower legal costs if the ranks of female officers are expanded, said Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky, who co-authored the motions.

“I cannot recall one case of a female officer being involved in an excessive force (lawsuit),” said Yaroslavsky, noting that the city annually pays tens of millions of dollars in settlements and court judgments in such cases.

LAPD Commander Ronald C. Banks, a spokesman for Police Chief Willie L. Williams, said the chief is “fully in support of the language and spirit” of the measures.

Banks called the goals “realistic and attainable,” though some officials noted that a city hiring freeze could delay implementation of the plan.

Women’s rights advocates said the new policies will make the LAPD unique among big-city police departments.

“By taking these steps today, the city will . . . make the LAPD a model for cities throughout the country,” said Jenifer McKenna, managing director of the California Women’s Law Center.

Officials said the percentage of female officers in the LAPD is about the same as in the New York, Chicago and Miami police departments.

Katherine Spillar, national coordinator of the Fund for the Feminist Majority, said the council action will put the LAPD “on notice--we won’t be satisfied with the foot-dragging and same old excuses. . . . The word must go out: Women are needed and welcomed on the LAPD.”

Before Wednesday’s action, the LAPD was operating under a 12-year-old civil rights consent decree, which mandated that female recruits make up at least 25% of each new academy class and set a goal that the entire force become 20% female. The ranks of female officers have swelled from 2% of the force to the current level during that period.

Some women officers said the measures approved Wednesday are just one step needed to turn around the male-dominated department.

Sgt. Carol Aborn-Goldstein, president of the Los Angeles Women Police Officer’s Assn., endorsed the reform measures, but noted that women represent only 3% of officers with the ranks of sergeant and above in the 8,000-officer department.

The new measures set a female recruiting objective of at least 30% for each new class and an ultimate goal of 44% female officers overall--equal to the percentage of women in Los Angeles’ general work force--by the end of the decade.

The hiring results are to be reviewed by the City Council each year and the recruiting percentage is to be increased when necessary to reach the ultimate staffing goal, officials said.

Ann Reiss Lane, a member of the Board of Police Commissioners, pledged to personally see that the measures are implemented. “The times are changing,” Lane said. “There are plenty of women who are eager to join the LAPD.”

But Lane also noted that there is no additional funding for new Police Department hires once the current class of 30 recruits, which is 28% female, is brought on board. City budget woes have forced all city departments to impose an indefinite hiring freeze.

Still, Yaroslavsky held out hope that hiring could be resumed soon. He said that if a measure on the November ballot is approved by voters, a rise in property taxes would pay for 1,000 more police officers.

Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas, co-author of the measures, said they represent “a fourth wave in the reform movement” at the LAPD.

Ridley-Thomas, a critic of the LAPD, said passage of gender-parity measures ranks with other important reform efforts during the past year: expansion of community-based policing, selection of a new police chief and voter approval in June of Proposition F, which increased the control of elected officials over the police chief.

Although the measures passed unanimously, City Councilman Ernani Bernardi voiced reservations about the direction of LAPD reform.

“There’s a war in the streets, the city is under siege and we are more concerned with gender balance than the people in the street. . . . , “ Bernardi said. “We’re going in the wrong direction, and we are paying the price for it.”