This month, the Los Angeles City Council approved a plan to ask voters to approve changes to the disciplinary system for police officers accused of misconduct. It's disappointing.
The plan, which is being drafted into a ballot measure scheduled for the Nov. 5 general election, consists of three main parts. It would allow the police chief to fire officers who have engaged in misconduct. It would restructure the makeup of the rights board: a three-member appeals panel that has the power to overrule the police chief's disciplinary decisions. And it would impose binding arbitration as the final level of appeal.
There's nothing particularly wrong with any of these changes, which together could represent a half-step forward in police accountability. But they fall far short of what is needed and what City Hall has been promising the public for at least seven years: a radical reexamination and overhaul of police practices and policies, including the disciplinary system.
Let's remember how we got here. In 2017, under the guise of toughening the police discipline system, city leaders tricked voters into weakening it.
Its vehicle was a charter amendment that allowed officers to opt into a disciplinary appeals panel made up solely of carefully selected civilian members, with no members of the police command staff. While public oversight sounds good, civilians elected to the boards tend to be overly lenient with discipline, even after discovering that officers committed egregious and scandalous misconduct.
LAPD Chief Michel Moore, who retired in February, and Chief Dominic Choi, his acting successor, ended up stuck with dozens of unfit or untrustworthy officers whom they could not fire or deploy. They are often assigned desk jobs that are better suited to less expensive civilian employees.
Charter Amendment C, as it was called, was a gift to the police union, which funds the re-election campaigns of many city officials.
In response to criticism of its deception, the council promised at the time an intensive review of all LAPD processes and procedures. But it was never fulfilled. He probably never intended to do it.
Now is the right time for current municipal leaders to deliver on their promised accountability. The department is in the midst of a once-in-a-generation transformation. Mayor Karen Bass will soon select a new police chief and other high-level police positions will also be filled. Many officers were not yet born when Rodney King was beaten in 1991 or Rafael Pérez was arrested in 1998. A new LAPD culture is emerging, with few memories of past crises.
The police disciplinary process should be examined in the context of other LAPD policies and standards that should be subject to review. City leaders should consider whether the board of rights process has outlived its purpose and whether there are better ways to balance officer accountability and due process. They should also seek changes to state laws that require police disciplinary proceedings to be closed to the public. Los Angeles residents deserve to be better informed about the types of misconduct officers are accused of and the discipline they receive.
If we are to maintain rights boards, the council should expand the composition of the pool from which civilians are selected to ensure that they are more representative of the general public, more like jurors than lawyers. It may limit the board's role to fact-finding, which would limit the board's ability to overrule the chief's disciplinary decisions.
The public wants police officers to do their jobs with skill and integrity and to be held accountable when they misbehave. They hope their city government will take care of the details.
But because police discipline is in the city charter, voters must approve changes, such as how many civilians should be on boards and what standards they should use when deciding whether to uphold the chief's recommended discipline. It can be a frustrating exercise, especially because bylaw amendments often appear to create more change than they actually accomplish.
Voters will be asked to approve these relatively minor adjustments to police discipline in November. But city leaders should think big.
