Plan to Ban Gangs From Parks Hit : Laws: Opponents call proposal unconstitutional and racist. They say youths will become more frustrated.

To those who would ban gang members from Los Angeles city parks and beaches, Lupe Loera and other Boyle Heights mothers have a question.

“Where are our youth going to go?” asks Loera, a mother who heads the Committee for Peace in the Barrio, a group of parents who walk the streets on weekend evenings in an attempt to ease tensions among gang rivals. “We’re trying to improve life for our sons--we don’t call them pandilleros (gang members). Keeping them out of parks will only make them more frustrated.”

On the tough streets in and around the Pico Gardens and Aliso Village housing projects, a densely populated swath of cityscape on the Eastside, word that city officials want to keep the gangsters out of recreation areas has generated a torrent of protests, and not only from the ubiquitous young men in baggy shorts and turned-around Raiders caps.

Parents, gang counselors and Roman Catholic Church representatives have joined to challenge a proposed city ordinance that would make it a misdemeanor for gang members who have committed or attempted two or more serious crimes to enter any park, beach or playground with the intent of engaging in gang activity. “Serious” crimes, the proposed law says, include assault, murder and selling illicit drugs. Violators would be subject to fines of up to $1,000 and six-month jail terms.

“We think it’s unconstitutional--but, more importantly, it’s racist,” said Father Thomas H. Smolich, executive director of Dolores Mission’s Proyecto Pastoral, the church’s social service arm. “It’s going to be used against young men and women of color.”

The initiative’s backers, notably San Fernando Valley Councilmen Ernani Bernardi and Hal Bernson, respond that race has nothing to do with the measure, which endeavors to reduce gang violence and confront a “state of crisis” in recreational areas.

“This goes after the overall problem of gangs, whether they’re white skinheads, black, Asians, whatever,” said Greig Smith, Bernson’s chief deputy.

The proposal, scheduled to be discussed by the City Council on Tuesday, is the latest--albeit the most far-reaching--attempt to reduce Los Angeles-area gang violence by restricting gang members’ movements.

Last month, Los Angeles city prosecutors obtained a court injunction that greatly restricts activities of the Blythe Street gang in Panorama City.

The recreation area ban has attracted considerable interest from cities nationwide, despite concerns that such laws usurp constitutional guarantees, including 1st Amendment rights of assembly.

The proposed ordinance is modeled on a narrower 1991 San Fernando ordinance, no longer in effect, that sought to rid a single suburban park of two warring gangs after a woman and her three children were wounded by gunfire. The American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, which filed a lawsuit challenging that law’s constitutionality, is also opposing the Los Angeles ban.

“No one’s saying there’s not a serious problem of gang violence, but these kinds of efforts are basically publicity stunts for the interests of politicians,” said Paul Hoffman, ACLU legal director.

Not so, say supporters. They point out that the Los Angeles proposal is limited to gang members who enter recreation areas with intent to commit crimes.

“These kids are recidivist gang elements,” said Bernson aide Smith. “They’re not driving up and down the boulevard looking for something to do. They’re cruising up and down the boulevard looking for someone to rob, something to steal, or somebody to hurt.”

Putting the law into effect would be tricky. Police would have to determine who was a gang member--an imprecise science--and which gang members had entered with intent to cause trouble.

Determining intent would be “virtually impossible,” said LAPD Cmdr. John White, who recently expressed the department’s opposition to the City Council.

“I think people are fed up with violent crime, and I am as well, but I’m not about to lose my bearings by creating nonsensical legislation,” said Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas.

Community foes call it a poor substitute for social programs.

“We need to get beyond seeing the police and law enforcement as solutions to our problems,” said Leonardo Vilchis, a Dolores Mission community worker. “Let’s talk about economic development for our community, let’s talk about jobs and schools and empowerment of our youth.”

The jaunty homeboys of the Pico-Aliso district view their potential exclusion from parks and beaches as a disquieting prospect. Many speak privately of the unrelenting boredom and monotony of the street corners. “Does this new law mean I can’t take my little daughter to the park and just kick back?” asked Termite, 18. “I don’t see anything wrong with going to the park, as long as I’m not bothering anyone. What else are we supposed to do with our time?”