2 Bias Suits May Be Settled

The city of Los Angeles has reached tentative settlements worth about $650,000 with two homosexual Los Angeles Police Department officers who alleged in civil lawsuits that they had been discriminated against because of their sexual orientation.

Officer Alan Weiner, 45, who alleged he was harassed while serving as a training officer in the Van Nuys Division, would receive about $450,000, according to his lawyer and a spokesman for the city attorney’s office.

Sgt. Robert Duncan, a Medal of Valor winner who alleged his career was destroyed after fellow officers learned he was gay, would receive more than $200,000, his attorney said.

Both settlements must be approved by the City Council.

If approved, they would bring to nearly $3 million the total amount the city has agreed to pay to eight gay officers. In 1993, the LAPD agreed to a court settlement mandating a wide range of personnel and training changes designed to produce a discrimination-free workplace.

“To me, it was very clear that Alan was singled out over a series of years because of his sexual orientation. That’s wrong and it’s also illegal,” said Brad Gage, Weiner’s attorney. “When a police department breaks the law, that’s especially outrageous.

“The department is learning slowly that it has to treat everybody absolutely equal.”

Jon Cantor, Duncan’s attorney, said the LAPD’s efforts to end discrimination against gays have been inadequate. “A gay male police officer absolutely should not apply to work for LAPD. He will not be treated fairly,” Cantor said.

An LAPD spokesman declined to comment. At a national police chiefs conference in November, LAPD Chief William J. Bratton said gay officers in Los Angeles have been forced to sue the department to end discrimination against them.

“For gay members of the organization to make change, they have had to engage in lawsuits,” Bratton said. “Lawsuits have forced the department to do things it should be willing to do on its own.”

Bratton said the department has pushed forward on issues related to gay and lesbian officers.

“We’ve come a long way in a short time,” he said. “As we continue, there are going to be bumps in the road, there are going to be curves and detours that we are going to have to take. But I think the most significant thing is that the journey has begun.”

At a seminar during the convention on ending discrimination against gay cops, Bratton said that he was sensitive to the issue because he has a sister who is a lesbian.

City Councilman Tom LaBonge, in an interview, expressed concern that the LAPD continues to be sued by gay officers, given its commitment “to having a workplace free of discrimination.”

Referring to the number of gay officers who have alleged discrimination and won money from the city, LaBonge said: “Is eight too many? One is too many.”

The city’s 1993 court agreement to end discrimination against gays in the LAPD came in a lawsuit filed by retired Sgt. Mitch Grobeson and two other officers. They received a $770,000 settlement.

The agreement mandated recruiting in the gay community and expanding instruction to include topics related to sexual orientation. It said discrimination investigations must be handled with discretion and sensitivity, and it banned disqualifying applicants for promotion because of sexual orientation.

“We certainly don’t benefit the public by spending money on unnecessary lawsuits to defend acts of discrimination,” Grobeson said in a recent interview. “It’s an unnecessary waste of taxpayers’ dollars when the money should instead go to paying for more officers for safer streets.”

Despite the 1993 agreement, sixteen homosexual officers who were interviewed for a recent Times story said that being openly gay slowed promotions and endangered careers. They also alleged that openly gay officers are not welcome to work in specialized units such as vice, juvenile, metro, SWAT, organized crime or anti-terrorism.

City Councilman Bernard C. Parks, who served as police chief before Bratton, said gay officers faced hurdles similar to those confronted by every minority that has pioneered its way into the agency. It was the same, he said, for black and female officers.

“There are still some issues that exist in the department that deal with acceptance of gay officers,” said Parks, who is also a mayoral candidate.

During Parks’ five years as chief, which ended in 2002, he made efforts to reach out to the gay community, creating a forum to elicit gay and lesbian community response to policing efforts. He regularly participated in the annual Gay Pride Parade.

But for most gay officers, the most significant step that Parks took was promoting an openly gay officer, David Kalish, to the rank of deputy chief.

Kalish was the department’s highest-ranking openly gay officer until he retired in March amid allegations that he had molested three Explorer Scouts 25 years earlier. Kalish has denied the allegations and has not been charged.

The allegations surfaced after Kalish announced his bid to become chief of police, a job that was eventually won by Bratton, former New York City police commissioner.

For nearly a year, Kalish was under orders by Bratton to stay at home with pay.

Kalish filed a claim against the city, saying it had defamed him, illegally searched his home and violated his privacy. City officials agreed to a confidential settlement in March and said they would pay for his defense against lawsuits by the former Explorer Scouts, which are still pending.

It allowed Kalish to retire with full benefits, including a pension of nearly $10,000 a month.

The handling of Kalish’s case by the LAPD, Parks said, “set back relations with gay officers by 15 or 20 years.”

The department now has no high-ranking, openly gay officer.

Such an omission sends a message about tolerance to the rank and file, said Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force in Washington. Foreman pointed to the San Francisco Police Department as a leader against discrimination because it has high-ranking gay and lesbian officers.

Duncan, 42, whose tentative settlement with the city was completed last week, was not known to be gay by fellow officers until he was accused of harassment by an ex-lover.

Duncan was placed under surveillance for two weeks by an LAPD team of special operations officers. Although the harassment accusation leveled by his ex-lover never warranted internal disciplinary action, Duncan was accused of leaving work early on three days and relieved of duty. At a disciplinary hearing, a three-member panel concluded that Duncan had left work early on one afternoon and received a full day’s pay. He was suspended for five days and told that his former job no longer existed.

Duncan sued the city in August 2003, alleging that despite repeated assurances, high-ranking LAPD officers failed to keep their investigation confidential and outed him as a gay officer. Duncan also alleged intentional emotional distress and a hostile work environment.

The complete terms of his tentative agreement with the city are confidential. Now on administrative leave, Duncan will remain on the payroll for several months until he reaches 20 years with the LAPD, at which point he can retire and receive his pension.

Weiner, who reached a tentative settlement with the city earlier this month, also alleged discrimination in his lawsuit. His attorney said he had been denied due process and demoted. He subsequently faced two administrative hearings.

In the first hearing, Weiner was accused of making inappropriate remarks about sodomy and searching crotches for guns in a one-on-one conversation with a probationary officer. Two witnesses, who weren’t present at the time of the alleged exchange, testified against Weiner. The rookie testified that he experienced a “brain meltdown” and could not remember details of his conversation with Weiner. Weiner denied the allegations and was found not guilty by a unanimous verdict.

In the second hearing, initiated by superiors based on information from the first hearing, Weiner was accused of two counts of failing to follow directions.

Weiner had earlier been told that “due to his very open sexual orientation, there may be times he could not use the same training techniques that heterosexual officers could,” the charges said. Despite this, according to the charges, Weiner asked another probationary officer to conduct a prohibited search.

Again, Weiner was found not guilty by a unanimous verdict.