ANSWER IS NEEDED NOW FOR MORE POLICE IN L.A.

Byline: Bob Baker Local View

IT was a scene out of a movie - in fact it was not unlike a scene in the Los Angeles Police Department recruitment film that premiered in front of Chief William Bratton last week: A crazed, desperate man takes a pregnant woman hostage. The situation seems dire. The crowd is at a loss, but then a hero - a SWAT-trained LAPD officer - gets into position and takes down the hostage-taker, releasing the woman unharmed.

Last week's dramatic standoff at the Mexican Consulate in downtown Los Angeles was just another reminder of how good the LAPD can be.

Sgt. Hector Feliciano, a 22-year veteran of the force, was steady, controlled and an expert marksman who knew exactly when to use deadly force, and did what he needed to do. He and his fellow officers of the LAPD are among the best trained and most dedicated police officers in the world.

The only problem is that there aren't enough cops. The LAPD is woefully understaffed to patrol the sprawling city of Los Angeles. Unfortunately, our elected officials are unwilling or unable to find the money to provide an adequate amount of men and women to protect and serve us.

It appears that some politicians care more about their image than actual results. They can never say no to hiring consultants instead of cops. Talk is cheap, but action - hiring more police officers - is not.

Frustrated that a real solution to the problem could have been obtained by passage of Measure A, some of these same politicians publicly proclaimed that a simple reordering of priorities would magically supply the money needed to provide for more cops. This is what one would call extreme passing of the buck. The shame of it is that what is suffering here is not a political agenda, but the safety of our residents.

Although Measure A did not pass, by current political definitions we could say that law enforcement did get a mandate - loud and clear. Three in five voters were willing to dig into their pockets to pay for more police because City Hall has not come up with a better plan. In the city of Los Angeles, 64 percent of the voters agreed that our LAPD needs more officers.

We should applaud the efforts of City Councilwoman Wendy Greuel, who has pushed the City Council to create a ``trust fund'' from efficiency savings, which would add more money for public safety.

However, the hole in the dike of public safety will not be fixed by hiring a smattering of officers. The real solution is a wholesale infusion of funds that will allow for hiring the numbers needed to make effective policing a reality in Los Angeles. With an endless and increasing supply of bad guys - gangs, thugs, spousal abusers, drug dealers, identity thieves and carjackers - it is amazing that some elected officials are happy to have an understaffed supply of good guys.

There are cities in America where the ratio has grown out of control, where citizens don't walk down the streets at night. Fortunately, due to the diligence and skills of the officers we do have, more of our city is livable than is not. Yet, even that is less true than it was 10 years ago in areas all over this city. The only way to make sure all Angelenos can walk the streets freely is to have more officers on the street - and that will only happen when we have the budget to pay for them.

How lucky it is, that with our underfunded and understaffed police force, we have officers like Sergeant Feliciano who are there when we need them. But how long is our luck going to hold out?

It is time for Los Angeles' voters and Los Angeles' elected officials to roll up their sleeves and find a real solution to give us enough cops to keep our streets safe.