Holden Attacks Police Panel Over Williams

Escalating their attack on the Los Angeles Police Commission, City Councilman Nate Holden and lawyers for Police Chief Willie L. Williams alleged Monday that a member of the police panel approached Williams last November offering a settlement to leave his job.

Holden first made that comment Monday on “Which Way L.A.,” a public affairs radio program. Lawyers for the chief later said it was accurate, although they declined to identify the commission member. Other sources said the commissioner was T. Warren Jackson, the board’s only African American member, but the same sources accused the chief’s supporters of mischaracterizing the meeting.

Those sources said Jackson met with Williams because commissioners had heard the chief was a candidate for a job in President Clinton’s administration. According to the sources, Jackson wanted to know whether Williams intended to take that job, a high-level spot in the drug czar’s office.

Jackson declined to comment on what was said, adding: “I have had private meetings with the chief. I’ve had private meetings with Johnny Griggs [one of the chief’s lawyers]. . . . They were private meetings. And I assume the chief and his lawyers still want them private.”

The chief’s lawyers also declined to offer specifics about the sessions, but Holden said the approach was initiated by a commissioner, whom he declined to identify.

Asked about Holden’s account, another of the chief’s lawyers, Peter I. Ostroff, responded: “He got it right.”

Holden and the chief’s lawyers offered their comments to bolster the contention made by Williams’ supporters that commissioners already have decided the chief does not deserve a second term.

In a letter to the Police Commission sent in January, Williams’ lawyers dismissed the commission’s proposed method for evaluating the chief’s performance as a sham intended to provide “window dressing” for its true purpose: to refuse Williams a second, five-year term.

Commissioners have vehemently denied that contention. Commission President Raymond C. Fisher, a leading civil litigator and police reform advocate, repeatedly has said that the board intends to evaluate Williams’ performance and then decide whether he should be reappointed.

In an interview, Commissioner Jackson said that the meeting with Williams and the chief’s lawyers did not include any discussion suggesting that the panel had already decided not to rehire Williams.

“Nothing about those meetings evidenced any prejudgment by the commission,” he said. “There was never any discussion by the commission about Williams’ reappointment until after he applied.”

Told that Holden had characterized the session as an attempt to encourage Williams to accept a settlement and leave, Jackson said: “The council member, with respect, is just flat-out wrong.”

Holden disagreed. “I’m not saying [Jackson] was part of some clandestine effort,” he said. “But that was not part of the process, and it was not done for the purpose of having Willie Williams stay.”

According to Fisher, no decision regarding Williams has been made, and none is expected at least until the end of this week. Members of the board asked Williams to provide them with additional information and gave Williams until Thursday to respond. No vote is expected before that time.

The flap Monday over the commission’s alleged overtures to Williams is the latest in a controversy that is becoming more intense by the day.

The chief’s lawyers have prepared a lawsuit to be filed in Superior Court, and are contemplating a move to ask a court to block the commission from acting. City Councilman Richard Alatorre has met with Williams’ lawyers to discuss an amicable resolution, and sources say financial settlements of $250,000 to $3 million have been discussed.

Williams’ lawyers say Alatorre initiated the settlement talks and deny that their client has asked for $3 million. But others familiar with the talks say the chief has asked for that amount. Whether a lesser sum would satisfy him--or whether a council majority would back any payment for the chief--are open questions.

At the same time, the chief’s leading political supporters at City Hall have filed an administrative request to remove the Police Commission from the evaluation process.

In a letter to City Atty. James K. Hahn on Monday, Holden and Councilwoman Rita Walters said there is “substantial question” as to whether the commission and each of its members can “act fairly and objectively regarding Chief Williams’ employment.”

“Neither we nor the public believe that it is in the public’s interest for the commission or any of them to so act,” Holden and Walters wrote, citing a charter section that allows elected officials to recommend disqualification of any commission they suspect of bias. Besides the question of reappointment, the council members argue that the commission should be disqualified from “any and all matters relating to Chief Williams’ employment.”

If Hahn rules that the commission should be removed, the matter of Williams’ reappointment would land in the hands of the obscure Board of Referred Powers, a group of City Council members who take the place of any city commission when the commission is found to have a conflict of interest.

The current board consists of council members Alatorre, Hal Bernson, Ruth Galanter, Mike Hernandez and Mark Ridley-Thomas. Alatorre and Bernson are two of the chief’s harshest council critics; Hernandez has said he believes Williams should be reappointed. Ridley-Thomas has often supported the chief but has declined to say whether he should be granted a second term. Galanter has not revealed her position.

Mike Qualls, a spokesman for the city attorney’s office, said a response to Holden and Walters’ request would be forthcoming.

Hahn rejected a similar request from Williams last week on procedural grounds. According to Hahn, the charter allows only elected officials or commission members to request disqualification.

Times staff writer Jodi Wilgoren contributed to this story.