Chief’s Claim Draws Council Criticism : LAPD: Williams should drop $10-million action against the city or resign, several members say.

Los Angeles Police Chief Willie L. Williams came under sharp criticism Tuesday by several City Council members who said he should drop his $10-million invasion of privacy claim against the city and the Police Commission or resign.

“Instead of tearing this city apart further, he should be trying to bring it together,” Councilman Joel Wachs said in a statement that was supported, at least in part, by four colleagues. “He cannot serve the city and sue the city at the same time.

“Ten million dollars goes a long way. It’s 200 police officers that can be put on the street,” Wachs said in an interview. “I think he’s got to choose. There’s a time to drop it and move forward, and that’s now.”

Councilman Hal Bernson said Williams “should seriously consider either dropping the suit or resigning.” Councilwoman Laura Chick--who chairs the Public Safety Committee--said Wachs was “expressing an opinion that’s held by a lot of people.”

“I don’t know how he can effectively lead the Police Department and fight the city at the same time,” said council President John Ferraro. “I never want to see anybody sue their employer. I don’t think it’s in good taste--and that’s putting it mildly.”

Williams, chief of the beleaguered LAPD since June, 1992, on Monday filed a claim--the official precursor to a lawsuit--against the city, contending that his privacy was violated and that he was defamed because his confidential personnel documents were leaked to The Times. The claim follows an article in Friday’s Times detailing a Police Commission investigation into whether Williams accepted free rooms in Las Vegas and tickets to Universal Studios and then lied about it to commissioners.

The commission this year voted to reprimand the chief, but did not release its investigation. The City Council overturned the reprimand, without looking at the chief’s file.

On Tuesday, the council voted unanimously to have the city attorney investigate the source of the leaked documents--a move the chief also requested in his claim against the city--even as members blasted Williams for exacerbating the controversy by pursuing legal action.

“As this issue continues to boil, the chief will be faced with a multitude of choices. I just don’t believe that suing the people who pay his salary, the taxpayers of Los Angeles, should be one of those choices,” Councilman Rudy Svorinich said. “It’s kind of a dichotomy that he puts himself in, either to protect the people or to sue the people.

“The bottom line is, the money is going to be coming out of the pockets of the taxpayers of Los Angeles,” Svorinich said. “Ten million dollars could very easily be used to augment our public safety program.”

But some council members reiterated their stance that Williams has the right to seek redress and said Wachs’ public criticism only heightens the tension.

“I was just so dismayed to see him make that kind of statement,” Councilwoman Rita Walters said. “I don’t think that it helps.”

Williams, the Police Commission and Mayor Richard Riordan declined to comment Tuesday. Williams’ attorney, Melanie Lomax, could not be reached.

The police chief is hired and fired by the five-member Police Commission, and Williams’ five-year contract is up for renewal in 1997. But the council is the forum in which the chief can appeal any discipline by the commission, and erosion of his support there could further weaken Williams’ precarious political position.

“I think he’s certainly jeopardized the possibility of being renewed,” Bernson said.

Within the Police Department, news of the chief’s legal action prompted expressions of dismay and disbelief. Several high-ranking officers worried that the move would put Williams at odds with the city’s political hierarchy and alienate the department from the officials who supply it with funds and other support.

In addition, some sources in the department and in City Hall saw it as at least a tacit admission on Williams’ part that reappointment to a second five-year term is now a virtual impossibility.

“I think he’s probably given up and he’s going for the money,” one high-ranking official said on the condition of anonymity. “And there are people who probably want to get rid of him enough to give him the money.”

Some said Williams has effectively rendered himself a lame-duck at a time when the department is under fire and needs strong, credible leadership.

“He’s chosen his interests over the department’s,” said one veteran officer who generally supports Williams. “He’s saying he’d rather sue than lead.”

Retired LAPD Chief Ed Davis--whose views on the department still are sought by many city leaders--echoed that sentiment.

“I think it’s self-evident that it would work against any kind of close cooperation,” Davis said. “For the department to be effective, it has to be a team. This would tend to vitiate any remaining possibility of his becoming an effective chief.”

Police Protective League President Cliff Ruff also criticized Williams’ move.

“He should say, ‘I admit I was wrong, it’ll never happen again, let’s get on with business and make this a safer city,’ ” Ruff said. “His action is just going to be divisive. The chief is going to jeopardize his ability to get his contract renewed.”

Ray Watt, a Los Angeles native who now lives in Long Beach, said he called the LAPD citizen complaint hot line Monday night to file a grievance against its No. 1 officer.

“How can he go file a suit for $10 million when little kids are being killed in alleyways?” Watt asked, referring to the fatal shooting of a 3-year-old girl last weekend in Cypress Park. “I’m not a person that normally gets involved in things like this, [but] I’m just concerned about what’s happening in this city.”

The documents leaked to The Times, which are at the heart of Williams’ claim, show that the chief denied accepting free rooms, though receipts showed that he had been “comped” at Caesars Palace. Williams has contended that he did not consider the rooms free, but thought that they were “comped” in exchange for his wife’s gambling, a perk available to the general public.

Council members lamented Tuesday that their vote to overturn the reprimand without reading the file had not put the controversy to rest, as they had hoped.

“I think he did take the rooms, but I don’t think it’s as important as making the city safer,” Wachs said. “Now it’s not whether you went to Las Vegas or not, now it’s like you’re suing your own people.”

Though Wachs and others questioned the chief’s ability to continue doing his job effectively while pursuing legal action against the city, Williams attended a routine Police Commission meeting Monday and held a news conference in Cypress Park to discuss the tragic weekend shooting.

“He’s still meeting with everybody, he’s still doing his job,” said Councilman Nate Holden, Williams’ strongest ally. “I don’t think it’s deterred him.”

*

Times staff writers Jim Newton, Jean Merl and Jeff Leeds contributed to this story.