ATTORNEYS CONDEMN POLICE PANEL AS UNFIT TO EVALUATE WILLIAMS : COMMISSION REACTION.

Byline: Patrick McGreevy Daily News Staff Writer

Attorneys for LAPD Chief Willie L. Williams accused the Police Commission of bias Thursday and asked City Attorney James Hahn to disqualify the commission from deciding whether the chief should get a second term.

Escalating the conflict between the chief and his civilian bosses, the lawyers said commissioners had demonstrated ``open hostility'' toward Williams in closed-door meetings, leaked ``selectively negative'' parts of the chief's confidential personnel records to the media, and failed to follow the law with respect to the chief's evaluation.

``Chief Williams believes that the commission is unable to act fairly and objectively regarding his employment and, therefore, it is not in the public interest for the commission to take any action relating to his employment,'' said the Feb. 27 letter to Hahn from attorneys Peter I. Ostroff and Johnny D. Griggs.

Hahn, who publicly announced two months ago that he supports Williams for a second term, said through a spokesman that he would not comply with the chief's request.

``Under the City Charter the chief of police does not have a right to ask for such an opinion,'' said Hahn spokesman Mike Qualls, adding that the charter allows only commissioners and elected officials to request such a determination.

City Councilman Nate Holden, who previously has charged that the Police Commission already had made up its mind to fire Williams, said he would consider joining with other council members to make the request after he reviews the evidence the chief has submitted regarding bias.

``I would like to look at the evidence,'' he said.

Holden appeared Thursday at City Hall with a group of community leaders including Sherman Oaks Homeowners Association President Richard Close and Bishop Charles Blake calling for the commission to extend Williams' tenure.

The group also asked for the City Council to summon the commission for a review of its decision once it is made.

``If they determine to fire Chief Williams, they need to come to the public and to the council and explain their decision,'' Close said. ``Without that explanation there will be major problems in the city as people wonder why he was fired. Is this politics?''

Police Commission President Ray Fisher reacted angrily to the letter from Williams' attorneys, accusing the chief and his attorneys of running a smear campaign against the commission.

``This escalation is not at all warranted,'' Fisher said, adding it appears the letter is an attempt to circumvent Charter Amendment F, which was recommended by the Christopher Commission and approved by city voters in 1992 giving the Police Commission complete discretion to decide on a second term for the chief.

``My reaction to that is it's an attack on the integrity not only of the Police Commission but of the Christopher Commission reforms,'' Fisher said. ``They basically are waging a campaign to discredit the (police) commission. It's very regrettable.''

The Police Commission plans to fire back today by issuing a statement refuting each allegation of bias contained in the letter from the chief's attorney, according to commission spokesman Ken Ferber.

The lawyers invoked a section of the City Charter prohibiting city commissions from acting on issues when it is not in the public's best interest because there is evidence of bias.

The section requires the city attorney to make the determination if an issue of bias is raised, and gives him the power to disqualify a commission from acting on a matter and transferring it to the City Council's Board of Referred Powers.

The letter was filed hours before the Police Commission resumed its deliberations in closed session Thursday on the chief's application for another term. The panel has scheduled another meeting for today and could announce a decision as early as Tuesday, officials said.

Some city officials said privately that the chief's attorneys may just be creating a large written record of the bias allegations in preparation for the chief filing a lawsuit against the commission.

Griggs said in an interview that the commission has failed to follow proper procedures in evaluating the chief.

``We are prepared, if necessary and appropriate, to test that issue in court,'' he said.

Council powers

If the Police Commission is disqualified, the matter of the chief's appointment would go to the City Council's Board of Referred Powers.

That panel includes council members Hal Bernson, Richard Alatorre, Mark Ridley-Thomas, Mike Hernandez and Ruth Galanter.

Alatorre has been the chief's staunchest critic. Ridley-Thomas, Hernandez and Galanter have voiced support for the chief in the past, although they have not publicly committed to voting for his reappointment.

Griggs said in an interview that the request to have the matter transferred to the council board was simply to get a fairer hearing.

``I don't know the disposition of the members of the board,'' he said.

Bernson, the board's chairman, said Hahn should not disqualify the commission from deciding the chief's fate, because the panel is specifically given wide discretion to make the decision by Charter Amendment F.

``The intent of the voters was that the Police Commission should make the decision,'' Bernson said.

Bernson said the chief's attack on the Police Commission is ``ill-advised'' and may hurt his chances of being reappointed.

Concerns about the Police Commission being biased against the chief also were voiced by another group of Williams' supporters who staged a rally in the Crescent Heights area Thursday night to announce that they have secured 5,000 letters from residents calling for the chief to be reappointed.

Williams also stepped up his dispute with a Latino police officers association Thursday, writing the group to dispute its criticism that he has not promoted enough Latinos, but also saying he will not allow anyone to ``dictate'' who he promotes.

Meanwhile, the chief's application for another term was further complicated by the department's release of a survey of the LAPD's command staff that said most of the staff believes there is ``no vision'' for what the department should do to move toward community-based policing.

BIAS CHARGES

Attorneys for Police Chief Willie L. Williams listed seven points Thursday in their letter alleging that the Police Commission is biased against the chief. They are:

A January 1995 memo from the commission's then-president, Enrique Hernandez Jr., saying that at the time, the panel did not intend to renew the chief's tenure after the first term expired.

A May 1995 reprimand of the chief that the chief's attorneys said ``the commission manufactured'' over allegations that the chief lied about accepting free lodging at a Las Vegas casino.

``The commission's unwillingness to accept the city (council's) decision to overturn the purported `reprimand,' illustrated by its persistent reference to the `reprimand' after it had been overturned.''

``The commission's role in the campaign against Chief Williams including . . . consistently providing the media with selectively negative `leaks' of Chief Williams' confidential personnel files.''

``The overt hostility demonstrated by certain commissioners during the course of previous meetings'' on the reappointment process.

The ``hostility'' demonstrated by commissioners toward Williams in the media, ``including, for example, publicly stating that Chief Williams is not truthful.''

The commission's ``consistent failure and refusal to follow the law with respect to the evaluation process and other procedural safeguards applicable to Chief Williams.''

CAPTION(S):

Box: Bias Charge (see text)