City Hall Shouldn’t Slap the Hands That Protect and Serve Angelenos

At the end of July, two Los Angeles City Council members who are also reserve LAPD officers got into a scuffle with a suspect at a car dealership in North Hills. Dennis Zine and Greig Smith, who between them have 40-plus years of law enforcement experience, joined with other officers to make the arrest, but they also made headlines and created a controversy at City Hall.

Now some city leaders are questioning whether they should be allowed to act as reserve officers while also on the City Council.

Such questions should be put to rest, along with an effort to bar elected officials from the reserve officer corps. That effort is shortsighted and fueled by misunderstanding. The most important factor in considering these issues is the critical role now played by the LAPD’s reserve officers in policing the city.

As the department frets over the retention of experienced police and the recruitment of new cadets, its reserve officer program plays a vital role in filling the gaps in the thin blue line that protects Los Angeles.

There are currently 747 members in the reserve corps, including numerous retired LAPD officers. The program, which began in 1947, now requires reserve officers to complete a state-approved training program and to work a minimum of two duty shifts per month. They handle a variety of assignments in the LAPD’s 18 divisions, including patrol, air support, vice and gang suppression details. This is volunteer work, though reservists do receive a small stipend, $50 a month, for expenses related to the job.

According to LAPD figures, during fiscal year 2002-2003, reserve officers contributed more than 4,000 hours to the program, the equivalent of 104 full-time officers. One reserve officer working just two shifts a month provides over $11,000 of police services each year.

The program paid out in stipends last fiscal year only $242,000, with an overall city expenditure -- including stipends -- of less than $500,000 for the entire program. This is an amazingly good return on investment.

All of this makes it difficult to understand why some city leaders would propose barring anyone from participating, particularly experienced officers like Zine and Smith.

Some on the City Council contend that allowing elected officials to be in the reserves will increase the city’s liability exposure. But this is a nonissue: Whether Los Angeles officials are in the City Council chambers or in an LAPD patrol car, the city’s responsibility for their actions is the same.

Another concern is the potential conflict of interest created by council members serving in the police force and also overseeing its budget, or the balance of power when a city official dons an LAPD uniform: For example, will a full-time LAPD supervisory officer be reluctant to give orders to a City Council member who is a reserve officer?

This reasoning ignores the fact that being in the reserves would give an official a firsthand understanding of the demands and dangers of the job -- just as it does for the other professionals who opt to serve as reserves.

And no matter what their full-time jobs, reserve officers are a part of the LAPD structure in which all members work in tandem to protect the city.

If those who disagree with council members being reserve officers are successful, a logical next step will be to target other legislators who also fill dual roles.

Teacher-legislators could be barred from the classroom, or elected officials who are real estate developers could be prevented from selling property. In these circumstances and many others, legislators rule on budgets, grants or government resources that apply to their work situations.

Rather than criticizing elected officials who put their lives on the line to serve the public and who get little in return, grandstanders should get off their soapboxes and offer their energy in a city where every helping hand is needed.