Keep Up Pressure on LAPD

Star-struck Los Angeles treated Police Chief William J. Bratton like a celebrity for most of his first 1 1/2 years on the job, but the honeymoon wasn’t automatic. Hired to lead a scandal-scarred Police Department, the brash East Coast native had to woo the city first -- one distrustful critic and one demoralized cop at a time.

The chief is now entering the middle years of the marriage, and the gains are getting tougher to detect. The city’s gang-driven homicide rate, which plunged almost 25% in Bratton’s first year, has remained stubbornly high since January. And U.S. District Judge Gary Feess last week scolded LAPD and city officials for falling short on two key reforms required by a federal consent decree. He singled out continued shortcomings in the LAPD’s handling of officer-involved shootings and its failure to implement a computerized complaint system, the cornerstone of a plan to track problem officers.

The U.S. Justice Department forced the consent decree on the city in 2001 after former Officer Rafael Perez told authorities that he and other officers in the LAPD’s Rampart Division had routinely falsified evidence, framed suspects and covered up unjustified shootings. Bratton, hired the following year, promised to uphold the agreement.

Not even the Justice Department’s attorney questions the chief’s commitment to reform. But changing a reputation for corruption and brutality that is as old as the LAPD itself will take time -- as will bringing down the homicide rate. The latter goal depends on the first. Gang violence can’t be stemmed without trust and cooperation between cops and the poor, largely minority neighborhoods that bear the brunt of the city’s homicides and, too often, of police abuse.

More money, of course, would help the LAPD meet these goals; L.A. has fewer cops per capita than New York and other major cities. The civilian Police Commission’s inspector general, who lately has played a greater role in internal investigations, also needs more staff. Staff positions remain unfilled because of a citywide hiring freeze.

Though it might mean cutting other city programs, L.A. officials must see to it that staffing and other resources exist to comply with the consent decree. Now in its third year, the decree costs the city an estimated $50 million annually to administer. Feess has the authority to extend the five-year period of federal oversight if the city doesn’t show enough progress. A comparatively small investment now could save a great deal down the road. The judge is right to keep up the pressure -- on Bratton, on the LAPD and on a city that has to find the will to foot the bills.