Investigation Into Leaks of Police Chief’s Personnel File Gets Under Way : LAPD: Council member criticizes city attorney’s warning that odds of finding the source are slim. Inquiry began after Williams agreed to drop $10-million claim.

One day after Los Angeles Police Chief Willie L. Williams promised to drop his $10-million invasion-of-privacy claim, the city attorney’s office Thursday released some details of its fledgling investigation into the source of leaks from the chief’s confidential personnel records.

Assistant City Atty. Charles Goldenberg of the Special Operations Branch is leading a team of four attorneys and one investigator, with the option of adding more members later, according to office spokesman Mike Qualls.

The office began gearing up last week, after the City Council directed City Atty. James K. Hahn to find out who gave information to The Times about Williams’ performance review and the Police Commission’s investigation into his receiving free hotel accommodations in Las Vegas.

But pressure on the office got turned up Wednesday with the highly public promise by most council members to get to the bottom of the leaks. Standing with Williams as he announced that he was dropping his plans to sue the city, 11 council members took turns praising Williams for his decision and decrying the unauthorized series of releases of information about the chief.

At least one council member took Hahn to task for his noting that the odds of finding the perpetrator were long, given that reporters are protected by state law from having to reveal their sources.

“We seem to be getting a mixed message from the city attorney,” Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas said, adding that he will call for the council to hire its own investigator if Hahn seems equivocal. “I want to see what the level of his resolve is,” Ridley-Thomas added.

However, Councilman Nate Holden, who asked for the city attorney investigation last week, said he has Hahn’s assurance that the city attorney “will do everything he can to get to the bottom of this.”

Although the office would reveal little about the investigation, it was clear Thursday that it had begun. Preliminary inquiries about the leaks have been made to some police commissioners and others, sources said.

It is unclear whether the city attorney’s office has authority to subpoena witnesses and put them under oath, Qualls said. The City Charter gives such authority when it comes to investigating ethics and campaign contribution violations, but the office has never had cause to test whether it can expand that power to other types of investigations, Qualls added.

Under city law, it is a misdemeanor for any current or former city officer or employee to reveal confidential information obtained in the course of official duties. The penalty is six months in jail or $1,000 fine, or both.

Hahn was not available for comment Thursday, but he has said his remarks about the low probability of finding the culprit were meant as a reality check and did not signify any lack of effort on his part.

“Do we know today who Deep Throat was?” Hahn asked in citing a key informant in the hottest leaks in the history of American journalism, the Watergate investigation of the 1970s that brought an end to Richard Nixon’s presidency.

”I started on this the first day I was assigned the task,” Hahn said, “but I thought I should lower everybody’s expectations and point out that it is very difficult to track down” the sources of leaks.

Williams’ withdrawal of the claim, which can be done in a letter to the clerk or attorney, had not been received by the close of business Thursday.

The chief refused to discuss the matter further. “It’s over, it’s done, I’m not going to talk about it any more,” Williams told reporters at a kickoff event for the city’s anti-truancy law. His attorney, Melanie Lomax, did not return phone calls.

Times staff writer Efrain Hernandez Jr. contributed to this story