Mayor Upholds Panel’s Reprimand of Chief : City Hall: Riordan praises Police Commission. Williams says he will appeal the discipline to the City Council.

Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan on Monday upheld the reprimand of Police Chief Willie L. Williams, who was disciplined by the Police Commission nearly a month ago for allegedly lying to the five-member panel about accepting free hotel accommodations in Las Vegas.

Williams, saying his reputation is at stake, immediately said he will appeal the reprimand to the City Council, forcing the lawmakers to choose sides in what probably will be a bitter, racially tinged fight.

Riordan’s widely awaited decision came after a daylong strategy huddle at the mayor’s Brentwood home, where Riordan met with key advisers to frame his statement on the politically sensitive, legally delicate issue. Over the weekend, the mayor had gone to his vacation home in Idaho to weigh his decision.

In a statement praising Police Commission members as “exceptional civic volunteers” whose “only agenda is the best interest of the Los Angeles Police Department and the city of Los Angeles,” Riordan said, “I will not reverse their conclusions.” He added that his commissioners were diverse “in their backgrounds and professions,” an apparent effort to blunt complaints that the matter has racial overtones.

The mayor, who left his home at midafternoon and rode with aides to City Hall, did not comment beyond the two-page statement released by his press office at 4:40 p.m.

The mayor’s decision to stick by his Police Commission puts the ball back in Williams’ court. The chief, who has vehemently denied any wrongdoing and has threatened to sue to clear his name, said at a hastily called news conference that he will now place the matter before the City Council, which he believes will treat him more fairly.

The council may, by a two-thirds vote, override the mayor’s decision. Most of its members so far have been reluctant to involve themselves in the controversy, saying they first wanted to see Riordan’s position.

“The council has 15 independently elected people that represent diverse views, wants and needs of the people of the city of Los Angeles, and I feel at this time confident that . . . I will have a fair and just review before them,” Williams told reporters.

Although Council President John Ferraro said he cannot offer an opinion about the mayor’s action because no council members have seen records of the case, some of Williams’ council supporters were quick to comment on the widening controversy.

“I don’t think the chief would keep pushing on this if he didn’t think he was right,” said Councilman Nate Holden. Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas said Riordan had missed an opportunity to resolve the matter.

“Now what we are faced with is a prolonged and heightened crisis, which I think serves no one’s interest,” Ridley-Thomas said.

Councilman Marvin Braude, chairman of the Public Safety Committee, said he too had “hoped the mayor would find a way to bring this to an end. Now, there will be a wider range of people who will see the transcript” of the investigation of Williams.

The commission’s reprimand of Williams presented Riordan with his diciest political dilemma to date.

Supporters of the city’s first African American police chief, including many influential black leaders, wanted the mayor to reverse the discipline. Many believe that the chief is the target of a campaign to oust him, and the mayor’s own apparent lack of enthusiasm for Williams’ leadership has fueled suspicions that Riordan wants the chief replaced before his contract expires in two years.

Riordan has said only that he wants the chief to succeed and that they share the goal of adding to and reforming the LAPD.

Had Riordan overturned the reprimand--the mildest discipline available to the commission--he would have risked undermining the credibility of his Police Commission, which obtained new powers to discipline a chief when voters passed a broad police reform package in 1992.

At his news conference Monday, the chief was critical of leaks to the press about the personnel action against him. “Personnel investigations are supposed to be a confidential matter,” the chief said. “I didn’t know there was any difference between the chief and the rank and file.”

Under the law, such information cannot be released without Williams’ consent, which he has declined to provide.

Although Williams’ critics have accused him of being an ineffective leader--despite his public popularity--Williams struck a defiant and determined note at his news conference.

“Let me make it very clear, my ability to lead this department has not been damaged regardless of some of the comments that have been made here,” Williams said. “I am making the decisions in the department and I will continue to make the decisions.”

The controversy that has engulfed Williams grew out of a letter that the panel received from a retired deputy chief, who contended that rumors had been circulating throughout the LAPD that Williams had engaged in various misconduct, including soliciting free accommodations and other perks in Las Vegas.

Sources said the commissioners unanimously disciplined Williams for not being forthcoming about the circumstances in which he received the accommodations. Williams said it was a misunderstanding, a problem of semantics.

In his statement Monday, Riordan, citing the confidentiality of personnel matters, said he could not comment on the substance of the report or his review. He did, however, “strongly condemn those who have created rumors and innuendo about this matter and who have sought to exploit it or politicize it.”

The commissioners, the statement continued, “merit the gratitude of our city. They have responded to this responsibility with great care and respect--and with a seriousness of purpose and a focused commitment on advancing the goal of public safety.”

Riordan said he determined that the commission acted as the reform-minded Christopher Commission had envisioned when it made recommendations leading to the voter-approved charter changes under Proposition F--”independently, judiciously, responsibly, thoroughly and fairly.”

He closed his statement with a small overture to Williams, pledging to “continue to work with Chief Williams,” the commission and the department on the Administration’s top priority of improved public safety.

The mayor reached his decision over the weekend but spent much of Monday closeted with aides framing the statement because of the “sensitivity and seriousness” of the matter, press secretary Noelia Rodriguez said. The mayor spent the day with Rodriguez; former City Atty. Burt Pines, whose law firm provided free advice; the mayor’s staff counsel, Karen Rotschafer; Deputy Mayor Robin Kramer; Police Commissioner Gary Greenebaum and Enrique Hernandez, the commission’s president.

Greenebaum said the mayor “was quite cognizant of how deliberate and responsible we were in our considerations. He recognized that five diverse individuals all came to the same conclusion.” The commission was expected to issue a joint statement today.

Before Riordan released his statement, he called Williams to inform him of the decision, Rodriguez said. The mayor also notified the rest of the police commissioners and Ferraro. The other council members received hand-delivered copies of the statement, Rodriguez said.

The Rev. E.V. Hill, a black Baptist minister in South-Central Los Angeles and a volunteer policy adviser to Riordan, said he regrets the mayor’s decision because he fears that it will encourage the chief’s enemies to “come forth with more” information that they feel will damage Williams.

“I hope my community will be patient and let the process go forward, and I hope the City Council will take a close look,” Hill said.

Some political observers said the chief is making a mistake in challenging the reprimand. “It should be a hiccup, a blip on the screen. . . . Let’s get on with the bigger agenda,” consultant Richard Lichtenstein said.

But others said the chief had no choice.

If the reprimand is allowed to stand, it “will send a signal that the commission and the mayor are not behind the chief,” said Sherry Bebitch Jeffe of the Claremont Graduate School’s Center for Politics and Economics.

Times staff writer Nancy Hill-Holtzman contributed to this story.