Full Review on Police Discipline

Today the City Council may consider a series of amendments to the Los Angeles charter, even though the new charter has been in effect for just 28 days. There is no reason to act so quickly, without a blueprint for change.

The 10 proposed changes under discussion emerged from contract talks between the police union and the city. All concern police discipline and if approved today could go before voters in November. On their face, some of these amendments seem like good ideas. One would lift the bar on double jeopardy, which has precluded disciplinary action for an incident in which an officer has already been investigated, even when significant new evidence comes to light. Such a change would tighten a discipline system that, in light of abuses revealed in the Rampart Division, has not served the Police Department or city residents well.

Other proposals seem to move in the opposite direction--for example, possibly granting the police chief more control over which information arising from disciplinary actions becomes part of the public record.

It’s hard to evaluate the merits of these proposed changes since there has been no public discussion of them and no final language has been made public. That’s just one of the reasons the City Council shouldn’t act now. If there is one clear message from the evidence of widespread officer misconduct emerging from the Rampart scandal, it’s that police discipline needs a thorough and very public review, not closed-door discussion and piecemeal changes.

The independent review panel appointed by the LAPD’s inspector general will report in October. Negotiations between the city and the Department of Justice over the outlines of a consent decree governing the LAPD are continuing, as is the department’s internal inquiry.

The council should let these panels complete their work, sifting from them a coherent package of discipline recommendations and presenting them in public hearings.