Independence of LAPD Oversight Questioned

Seeking to protect the integrity of the Los Angeles Police Department’s inspector general, two key Los Angeles City Council members took the unusual step Wednesday of openly and pointedly questioning police commissioners about her independence.

Before going behind closed doors to discuss the salary of the Police Commission’s new executive director, council members Jackie Goldberg and Laura Chick called on the two commissioners and their executive director to publicly explain the role of Inspector General Katherine Mader and how she fits into their chain of command.

The answers, however, left the council members even more concerned. As a result, the council agreed in closed session to ask the charter reform commissions to examine whether the charter needs to be changed to give the inspector general more autonomy, according to several council members.

Police Commission President Edith Perez and Commissioner Gerald L. Chaleff said the inspector general is hired and fired by the commission, but supervised by the executive director, Joe Gunn. Perez and Gunn are allies of LAPD Chief Bernard C. Parks, whose administration Mader is charged with scrutinizing.

“Everybody in government and who follows government understands an inspector general means a semi-autonomous position,” Goldberg said after the closed-door council meeting. “When does a semi-autonomous position have to ask the executive director and commission for permission to do an investigation?

“Many council members made it quite clear to the commissioners who were present that we’re very concerned about this issue,” said Goldberg, who chairs the council’s personnel committee.

But Perez, Chaleff and other city officials said the voter-approved charter amendment that created the inspector general on the recommendation of the Christopher Commission intended the job to be supervised by the executive director.

“That’s what the voters put in,” Chaleff told the council. “The inspector general is our staff person.”

An undercurrent of the discussion Wednesday appeared to be some council members’ concerns about the ability of Perez and Gunn to objectively review Mader’s work, including her reports and investigations.

“They [the Police Commission’s members] don’t need to be at war with the chief, but they also don’t need to be in bed with him either,” said one source who was concerned about the inspector general’s independence.

Gunn, a former Los Angeles commander and a former deputy mayor, said in an interview that he supports the inspector general’s role and that he will scrutinize Mader’s work to ensure it is factual and objective.

“I and the commission fully support the position of the inspector general,” Gunn said. “It’s imperative that any report that comes out of her office--or from any other office--be of the highest quality and factually correct. . . . I don’t consider that censorship.”

Chick, who chairs the council’s Public Safety Committee, said she too wants to ensure that the position is as autonomous as it can be.

“I think there has been a lot of confusion,” Chick said. “I was one of those people who perceived the position differently.

“I think the inspector general and the Police Commission were intended to empower the civilian oversight of the department,” Chick said. “That is not being at war with the Police Department or its chief. It is true-blue independent oversight and constant scrutiny.”

Mainly because Gunn oversees Mader, who makes $100,000 a year, the commission promised him a higher salary.

Under the city’s administrative rules, Gunn, who made $72,000 as a deputy mayor, would jump to $92,937, the first step on the executive director’s salary scale.

But the commission wanted Gunn to be hired at the top step of that pay scale, $115,466, a 59% pay raise. As a result, the commission needed a special ordinance from the council.

A compromise effort, made in closed session, to pay Gunn $109,369 failed. Instead, the council voted 12-2, with Goldberg and Walters dissenting, to give Gunn the top salary.

“My concern was less about the salary and him [Gunn] than it was about making sure we have the same set of rules for everybody,” Goldberg said. “It should not be based on whether we like the guy or whether he’s someone’s friend or how long he’s been around. . . . We should stick to the rules.”