Charter Panel Rejects LAPD Union Proposal

Siding with an unusual coalition of Los Angeles Police Department leaders and reformers--and against the city’s police union--representatives of two City Charter reform commissions Wednesday rejected a move to overhaul the system for disciplining officers.

The unanimous vote of a committee charged with making final changes in the proposed City Charter all but ensures that it will not include a provision to reconfigure the composition of police boards of rights. Union leaders, including elected charter commissioner Dennis Zine, had pressed for replacing one of the members of the three-member boards, dropping a command officer and replacing that person with a representative of the rank and file.

At first, a majority of the elected charter commission went along with that proposal, in part because members of the panel were bothered by allegations that command officers tended to impose unfairly harsh discipline to please Chief Bernard C. Parks. But a broad coalition emerged to challenge the proposal, contending that it would undermine accountability and hamstring the chief.

Among others, Mayor Richard Riordan, Parks and longtime police reform advocates such as Rabbi Gary Greenebaum, Christopher Commission lawyer Mark Epstein and American Civil Liberties Union leader Ramona Ripston urged the commission to reconsider. The full elected commission will take the matter up at its meeting next week, but the rejection by the drafting committee, combined with the earlier rejection by the appointed charter panel, appear to make prospects extremely dim.

Wednesday’s vote represented a victory for Riordan in the waning weeks of the charter reform debate. But it was a rare victory, as the same panel turned down the mayor on issue after issue.

In fact, Riordan had submitted a list of more than 40 proposed changes to the draft charter. Of those, said Riordan chief of staff Kelly Martin, just seven were incorporated into the document presented to the drafting committee Wednesday.

From the start, it was clear that there were significant differences between the mayor’s office and at least some members of the committee.

When it was her turn to speak, Martin said she was there to “express my disappointment.”

“I think we have a lot of work to do to make this draft reflect the conceptual agreement that the mayor agreed to support,” she said.

During a break, a visibly angered George Kieffer, chairman of the appointed commission, said Martin and the mayor appeared to be using the drafting deliberations to reopen areas that had been settled during the two years of debate over the proposed charter.

When the meeting resumed, so did the tension.

At one point, Kieffer questioned a proposal involving the composition of a special task force that would review one aspect of the charter reforms seven years from now. Misspeaking slightly, his comment implied that mayoral appointees and neighborhood council representatives did not need to be included on the panel because it was a “review by the government.”

Martin jumped up from her seat and asked to be recognized. “I can assure you, George, that the mayor is a part of the government,” she said.

Kieffer rolled his eyes slightly but did not respond directly. He and other commissioners then voted to allow the mayor to appoint some of the members of that task force.

Commissioner Bill Weinberger, a member of the elected panel who has emerged as an influential Riordan ally, urged the drafting committee to look more closely at some of the changes endorsed by the mayor and others, including a pair of consultants hired by the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce. The proposed changes ranged from the relatively picayune--the mayor’s office wants reports of the controller to be sent to the mayor, not just the council--to the far more significant, most notably the effective date of the new charter.

Under the proposed draft, the charter would not take effect until July 1, 2001, one day after Riordan leaves office. Supporters of that delay contend that time is needed to ready the government for the new rules and note pointedly that Riordan has often argued that the charter is being drafted for future mayors, not for him.

Critics counter that voters, having been promised reform, should not be asked to wait for two years before seeing results.

That debate has raised hackles on both sides, and commissioners remain far enough apart that they decided to delay a vote until next week.

In the meantime, Kieffer said he intends to meet with Martin and other representatives of the mayor’s office to see whether more of their proposed changes should be incorporated into the final draft.