`WE FAILED' ON LAPD, CITY SAYS.

Byline: Greg Gittrich, Beth Barrett and Alexa Haussler Staff Writers

Backed into a corner and embarrassed by U.S. Justice Department threats, Los Angeles officials admitted Tuesday that they have failed to reform the LAPD and needed federal help.

City leaders, however, stopped short of saying the city should give up control of the police force to federal authorities through a consent decree that would allow a judge or another monitor to oversee LAPD operations.

``We have essentially blown it and that's why the Justice Department has come in because we haven't done our job,'' said Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas.

``We have to acknowledge that we have failed. We have failed to push forward an agenda of reform of this city that the citizens . . . said in clear terms was a mandate,'' the councilman said.

As the day passed, it became increasingly clear that the city's legal wiggle room is extremely limited unless local politicians demand to see the details of the threatened federal civil rights lawsuit or are willing to fight the action in open court.

The only option the city has been given to hold off the lawsuit is to enter into a consent decree with the federal government, according to a letter that Bill Lann Lee, acting chief of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division and a former Los Angeles civil rights lawyer, hand-delivered to City Attorney Jim Hahn.

If the federal government's demands in previous consent decrees are any indication, the voluntary settlement would include stripping final control of the LAPD away from the mayor, the Police Commission and the City Council, and placing it in the hands of a federal court-appointed monitor.

Mayor Richard Riordan, in Washington, D.C., to meet with congressional representatives and other officials on a variety of issues, argued that local leaders - not federal authorities - should reform the LAPD and continue to control the force.

Standing firmly behind Police Chief Bernard C. Parks, Riordan said in a telephone interview: ``I think there's no one better to make reforms than the chief, the command staff, the Police Commission, the inspector general, the independent task force, the council and myself.

``My preference is local control. I'm convinced we can solve our own problems,'' Riordan said.

Despite those tough words, the mayor refused to say whether he would oppose federal control over the LAPD if it meant avoiding a civil rights lawsuit that would bring out the full record of allegations of how the department has ``a pattern and practice'' of violating civil rights.

He also wouldn't take a stand on a consent decree.

``It's too early to be certain,'' Riordan said. ``I'm not afraid to work with anybody to resolve our problems. While I'm convinced we can solve our own problems, we welcome working with the Justice Department.''

Parks, also in Washington, D.C., could not be reached for comment.

The chief sat silent throughout a two-hour meeting of Justice Department and city officials Monday and has not spoken publicly about the threat to sue the city unless a consent decree can be negotiated.

The details and strength of the Justice Department's case against the city remain unspecified.

Lee's four-page letter charged that lax supervision within the LAPD has prompted police officers to engage ``in a pattern or practice of excessive force, false arrests and unreasonable searches and seizures.'' The violations go well beyond the alleged abuses by Rampart Division officers who are now at the center of the worst police corruption scandal in city history.

``Serious deficiencies in City and LAPD policies and procedures for training, supervising and investigating and disciplining police officers foster and perpetuate officer misconduct,'' Lee wrote.

A four-year federal review of the Police Department also found citizen complaints of officer misconduct are not responded to properly; poorly trained officers are not identified for retraining or counseling; and the Police Commission and inspector general do not have the resources to conduct meaningful oversight of the LAPD in a consistent, ongoing manner.

City officials thus far have not asked to see the details of the federal case, although meetings with the Justice Department to discuss the threatened lawsuit are scheduled to begin next week.

Hahn said the LAPD's problems are well documented from the Rodney King beating to the findings of the Christopher Commission to the recent internal Board of Inquiry report compiled in the wake of the Rampart scandal.

``It's hard for us to argue Los Angeles doesn't have problems,'' he said.

``Clearly the Justice Department says there is a history of those problems back to Rodney King; and the Christopher Commission found that there were numerous problems. We still haven't implemented all the Christopher Commission reforms. Then you pile on top of that the Rampart scandal,'' Hahn said.

He said a court fight would be risky since a federal judge could order even more stringent controls.

By contrast, a consent decree, which the City Council could enter into at any time, could be worded to give the city a role in selecting a monitor to oversee the reforms, he said.

``Just because there's a monitor doesn't mean you don't have a police chief,'' Hahn said. ``The department continues to function and the chief is in charge. If the monitor isn't satisfied, they can go in and ask for the (case) to be reopened and other steps can be taken.''

Hahn said Justice Department officials have offered the consent degree as a way to bring credibility to the process of reform. Similar consent decrees have been signed by Pittsburgh and Steubenville, Ohio. New Jersey politicians also have signed a voluntary agreement with the Justice Department to give up local control of the state police.

Calling the loss of local control less than desirable, Hahn said, city and federal officials share the same commitment to police reforms and getting to the bottom of the Rampart scandal.

Hahn said any federal lawsuit would likely rely heavily on materials the city and LAPD have provided the Justice Department over the past four years. ``There's no dispute we've had problems,'' Hahn said. ``Whether that rises to the level that establishes a pattern and practice (of civil rights violations), is something we'll evaluate further. We can't be in a position of denying there have been significant problems.''

The Police Protective League, the police labor union that represents most LAPD officers, has taken no position on federal control of the department.

``We have said from the very, very beginning that this all is about management, oversight, and accountability. When you look at this, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if the feds have come in they have repudiated LAPD management,'' said PPL President Ted Hunt.

``The feds are saying, LAPD management, we don't trust you. You can't do the job. We have met with the Justice Department for quite a long time now. We know that they listen to what we have to say. We are not pals, but have a cordial professional relationship in which we have an excellent dialogue.''

Following a briefing by Hahn, the City Council discussed the issue with some members blaming their own leadership for the LAPD's failings and others attacking the Justice Department.

``The Department of Justice has just given a very clear message to us that it is not comfortable with the laissez faire approach that we have been taking,'' Councilwoman Laura Chick said. ``They are saying good intentions are not good enough and that they want to see action.''

Councilman Joel Wachs said the council and mayor need to push forward on reforms in a public form.

``If the Justice Department was happy with what we're doing in cleaning our house, they wouldn't come here in the first place,'' Wachs said. ``They are here basically to tell us that we haven't done the job and that they are here to make sure the job gets done.''

Councilman Nate Holden, however, called the letter a smear tactic that lacks any new revelations.

``This letter, in my view, is a boilerplate accusation that could be used against any police department in the country,'' Holden said.