COUNCIL OKS LAPD DECREE.

Byline: Rick Orlov Staff Writer

The Los Angeles City Council, bowing to the threat of a Justice Department lawsuit, agreed in principle Tuesday to a federal court consent decree over the Los Angeles Police Department.

The 10-2 vote came after a second consecutive day of lengthy debate over the impact of the consent decree, which is expected to come back to the council for final approval next week if it is accepted by federal officials.

``I think we have a good package, with broad consensus and now we'll see what the Justice Department does,'' said City Attorney James Hahn, who headed the city's negotiation team on the agreement, which will include a federal monitor to audit the LAPD and report to a federal judge.

``I think they will agree to the changes we want and then we will get on with reforming the Los Angeles Police Department.''

The cost of the consent decree to the city is estimated at $25 million in start-up costs and as much as $45 million a year after that.

The 84-page document detailing procedures the LAPD must comply with is to be in effect for a minimum of five years and will be lifted only after the city proves it is in compliance for two years.

Deputy Mayor Kelly Martin, who represented Mayor Richard Riordan on the negotiating team, said she believes the mayor will sign off on the package if the Justice Department agrees to the changes.

``I think we have done the best we can and I believe everyone will be satisfied with this,'' Martin said.

Justice Department officials last week indicated they would support modifications sought by Riordan to limit the role of the federal monitor - to oversee the LAPD, not operate the department.

Under the proposal suggested by Riordan, council President John Ferraro and Councilman Alex Padilla, the role of the federal monitor would be limited to reviewing audits and the progress of the LAPD in achieving the goals of the consent decree.

``This monitor will not be running the Police Department,'' Councilman Mike Feuer said. ``We are not giving up local control. The Police Commission will continue to oversee the Police Department along with the mayor and council.''

Among the concessions being sought is that the monitor would report on any problems in complying with the consent decree to the Justice Department rather than to the federal court to allow corrections to be made before the city is held in contempt.

In addition, there will be an effort to cap the amount to be spent for the monitor and any staff the person has, as well as allowing for the city and Justice Department to agree on who is selected as monitor.

However, not all officials were pleased with the proposal, and council members Hal Bernson and Nate Holden voted against the consent decree.

``We don't need this,'' Holden said. ``I am telling you that this will come back to haunt the city. We are capable of doing these reforms ourselves and I wonder why the Justice Department is seeking this now, under this chief of police who has done more to discipline officers than any chief we have had.''

Bernson said he resented having to vote for the decree under intense pressure from the federal government.

``I think before the Justice Department tells us how to run our department, they ought to clean up the departments under them,'' Bernson said.

As part of that argument, the council approved a proposal from its three Latino members - Mike Hernandez, Nick Pacheco and Padilla - asking the Justice Department to work with the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the FBI so those federal agencies would be held to the same civil rights standards as the LAPD.

The three council members who did not vote on the consent decree Tuesday were Pacheco, who was away on city business in Washington, D.C.; Rudy Svorinich Jr., who had an excused absence; and Mark Ridley-Thomas, who had left the council meeting when the vote was taken.

The consent decree came out of a four-year Justice Department investigation into a ``pattern and practice'' of discrimination by the LAPD. However, the Justice Department's civil rights division did not press forward until after the Rampart scandal, which included accusations that members of the LAPD Rampart Division's anti-gang unit assaulted and planted evidence on individuals and lied in court to win convictions.

Other main features of the agreement include development of a computerized tracking system of officers based on their records and complaints filed against them, and increased independence and scope of work for the Inspector General's Office, which the council agreed will continue to report to the Police Commission.

During Tuesday's debate, Councilman Joel Wachs won a short-lived victory in his efforts to require the LAPD to restore the senior lead officer program as part of the consent decree.

Because of objections from the Police Department, however, the council reversed itself after receiving assurances that the Police Commission was close to a decision on the issue.

A bitter Wachs, who along with Hahn is a candidate for mayor next year, said he will continue to press the issue.

``That's the way it works around here,'' Wachs said. ``You put in something the people want but the department doesn't, and the department wins. That's why it was so important to get this into the consent decree to force the department to return one of the more important parts of community-based policing.''