EDITORIAL : LOSING CONTROL CITY COUNCIL SHOULD RECONSIDER ITS SUPPORT FOR A CONSENT DECREE.

LOS Angeles officials should think long and hard before giving final approval to a consent decree that would set standards for Los Angeles Police Department hiring and promotion of women and minorities over the next 18 years.

The binding agreement, which was negotiated behind closed doors over two years without public input and then rushed forward with little public debate, was prompted by a lawsuit alleging discrimination and sexual harassment in the LAPD.

On the very day California voters were renouncing affirmative action programs based on race and gender, the City Council was approving the consent decree even though it will not spare L.A. from liability - potentially tens of millions of dollars - for past injustices if they are proven.

The consent decree would, in effect, be a legally enforceable promise by the city to do a better job of hiring and promoting women and minorities.

The agreement might have been necessary if there was any evidence that the people of Los Angeles, the City Council or the Police Commission are opposed to expanding opportunities and creating a more just society for all. But Los Angeles as a community and its institutions are so strongly dedicated to those goals that a policy reversal is unimaginable. The demographics and political climate of L.A. ensure that the council won't consider, much less tolerate, discriminatory practices.

Also, the consent decree might have made sense if it were necessary to spur the city to greater levels of improvement than it is willing to accept. But the council and the commission - and the LAPD to a large extent - are, even now, sworn supporters of genuine diversity with a record of real achievement in recent years.

More than one in four LAPD employees are Latino, for example. And the percentage of African-American employees in the LAPD exceeds the percentage in the local population at large.

Of course, there still is much room for improvement. But the question remains: Will the city make those improvements even without a consent decree? The answer is yes, based on the diversity and outlook of council members and other municipal leaders.

The flip side of the argument is whether valid reasons exist for rejecting the consent decree even though it seems consistent with city diversity goals. Yes, there are such reasons to reject it.

Chief among them are the inefficiencies, second-guessing, lower morale and management impotency that occur when outside groups not accountable to the city's voters and taxpayers - groups like the American Civil Liberties Union - get too much say in running the city's Police Department.

Even more important is the moral equation. If the City Council, in the name of the people of Los Angeles, tolerated illegal and improper conduct by LAPD officials against women and minorities, then the wrongdoing and the wrongdoers should be brought to public light.

This isn't something to be covered up in a rush in a consent decree without admission of guilt. If this wasn't an isolated incident that was alleged, but a pattern of officially sanctioned misconduct, it needs to be understood so that it can never happen again - not to women, not to minorities, not to anyone.

It was a positive step for U.S. District Judge William Keller to reassert his control over this case last week for a close look at the implications of the consent decree.

Judge Keller plans to hold a status conference on the case Tuesday. We certainly hope his intervention will afford time for a full, public exploration of these issues, and help L.A. arrive at a better answer that the public understands and supports.