Advertisement

Reno Joins in Endorsing Community-Based Police : Law enforcement: Attorney general joins local officials in saying it will build bonds between officers and the citizens they protect.

Share
TIMES STAFF WRITER

U.S. Atty. Gen. Janet Reno strongly endorsed community-based policing at a Los Angeles forum Wednesday, joining local law enforcement officials and others who say it will enhance crime prevention and build stronger bonds between citizens and police.

“I think it is imperative that we build that trust,” said Reno, who was warmly greeted by a packed audience, mostly students, at Cal State L.A. “You can’t build that trust if you see somebody driving by in a patrol car and you don’t know their name and you can’t get their badge number.”

Reno’s comments reflect the broad support for community-based policing, an idea that is widely accepted if only vaguely understood. At Wednesday’s session, the popular attorney general was joined by a United States senator as well as a number of police chiefs, sheriffs, prosecutors, a school principal, a minister and others--and none voiced opposition to community-based policing.

Advertisement

In essence, it is a philosophy of law enforcement that emphasizes crime prevention over emergency response and that measures success more in terms of reducing crime than increasing arrests. The Christopher Commission, which reviewed the policies and practices of the Los Angeles Police Department in the wake of the 1991 beating of Rodney G. King, urged the LAPD to adopt a more community-oriented approach.

Police Chief Willie L. Williams is an enthusiastic proponent of community-based policing and he too was greeted with loud applause during Wednesday’s session. The LAPD already has incorporated some elements of the philosophy.

Community input into LAPD decisions has helped the department set new priorities in some neighborhoods, Williams said. For example, officers have been encouraged to spend more time establishing safe corridors for children to go to and from school, fighting graffiti and otherwise responding to issues that do not necessarily involve serious crimes but nevertheless are of great concern to residents.

A crime bill working its way through the Congress would pay for 100,000 new police officers across the United States, and Reno said community policing is “at the core” of that bill. Reno, who called the crime bill “smart, compassionate, wise and tough on the people we need to be tough with,” said it would bolster community policing efforts nationwide.

Wednesday’s session was marked by unanimity among the 22 panelists, who arrived from across the state to discuss community policing with Reno. Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif); Nora Manella, U.S. attorney for the Central District; Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti, Los Angeles County Sheriff Sherman Block were among those participating in the session.

The day’s only sharp difference of opinion arose over the question of whether police officers should live in the communities where they work. That issue was broached by an American Civil Liberties Union report last month and since has touched off a flurry of angry reaction among police officers.

Advertisement

Laurie Levenson, a Loyola law school professor who led the discussion Wednesday, prefaced the session by noting that the issue was a “hot potato” and asking which of the panelists cared to respond. Williams volunteered and rejected the suggestion that officers should be required to live in the areas they patrol.

“It doesn’t matter where you live,” said Williams in his strongest comments on the issue. “I am far less concerned with where an officer lives than with what they do with their eight or nine hours that they’re on the job.”

Williams’ comments were greeted with a smattering of boos, and later Feinstein took issue with them.

“The more involvement an officer has with the community after hours, the better that policing will be,” Feinstein said, adding that she would have proposed residency requirements for San Francisco officers had state law allowed it. An amendment to the state Constitution prohibits such requirements for municipal workers in California.

Advertisement