BRATTON'S RIGHT GUY, BUT WILL HE SUCCEED?

Byline: Erwin Chemerinsky

I did not support James Hahn in his campaign for mayor. My primary reason for favoring his opponent, Antonio Villaraigosa, was my concern over police issues.

Villaraigosa, I thought, would be much more likely to replace Police Chief Bernard Parks and to choose a new chief dedicated to reforming the Los Angeles Police Department.

Hahn has proved me wrong and has shown his commitment to changing policing in Los Angeles, first by opposing Parks' reappointment and now by picking William Bratton to head the department.

Bratton, the former police chief in Boston and New York, is the right choice to lead the LAPD.

Most of all, there must be a change in the culture of the Police Department.

Over a decade ago, the Christopher Commission, formed after Rodney King was savagely beaten by LAPD officers, emphasized the need to reform the culture of the department by shifting to community-based policing and by ending the ``code of silence'' which it said prevented effective discipline.

These improvements still are desperately needed.

Bratton, in his autobiography ``Turnaround,'' published in 1998, describes his views of policing and stresses exactly the types of reforms Los Angeles needs, including implementing community-based policing and improving the disciplinary system.

In New York, Bratton significantly changed the department's internal affairs and disciplinary process after serious corruption was exposed and documented by the independent Mollen Commission.

Although the Rampart scandal revealed serious problems in the Internal Affairs division in the LAPD, which is responsible for investigating wrongdoing by officers, no reforms of that crucial part of the department have yet been made.

Bratton has the advantage of being an outsider but with substantial knowledge of the LAPD.

Picking someone from within the LAPD, and there were several excellent internal candidates, meant having a chief who was a product of the culture within the department.

An insider's primary advantage would be knowledge of the LAPD. Bratton has acquired some of that by virtue of being on the team monitoring the Police Department as a result of the consent decree agreed to by the city and the U.S. Department of Justice.

Over the last few weeks, I had several long conversations with Bratton, who I had never spoken to previously. I was tremendously impressed by his detailed knowledge of the LAPD, his recognition of the problems facing the department, and his ideas for change.

Bratton has another important virtue: He has experience managing a department as large and as complex as the LAPD.

As police commissioner in New York, he led a department with 46,000 employees and an operating budget of $2.3 billion. None of the other candidates for police chief had anything like that experience. Bratton was successful in this role.

In explaining his decision to oppose Parks for a second term, Mayor Hahn pointed to the recent sharp increases in crime in Los Angeles. There are, of course, many reasons why crime has gone up, and the nature of policing is only one factor.

But policing can make a difference, and the responsibility of a chief is to effectively fight crime while respecting and protecting civil liberties.

When Bratton was New York's police commissioner, the city experienced a 39 percent reduction in major crime and a 50 percent reduction in homicides. New York improved its ranking among the 189 largest cities from 88 in 1993 to 150 in 1995.

Previously, when Bratton was chief of the transit police in New York, there was a 35 percent reduction in major crimes and a 40 percent reduction in robberies.

The tasks facing the new chief are daunting, and Bratton may not succeed here.

There is a significant shortage of officers in the LAPD and morale remains very low. The monitoring team overseeing implementation of the consent decree has found that some of its provisions are not being followed and that some officers are openly defiant.

To be successful, the new chief must satisfy many constituencies with competing views: the mayor, the Police Commission, the City Council, the police union and many community groups.

But no one could have done better than Hahn has in taking the steps needed to dramatically improve the LAPD.

Policing is the most important service a city government provides and in 2005 when Hahn faces re-election, above all he should be evaluated on whether he has been successful in this effort.