HIRING OF OUTSIDE COUNSEL PUT ON HOLD.

Byline: Patrick McGreevy Daily News Staff Writer

Despite warnings of ``uncertainties'' about whether the Police Commission will grant Los Angeles Police Department Chief Willie L. Williams a second term, the Los Angeles City Council balked Tuesday at a proposal authorizing the commission to hire a private attorney to advise the city on the matter.

The council postponed voting on the issue until Friday after some members questioned the propriety of hiring a private attorney - given that Williams has not even said he will sue the city.

``I think I've caused them to rethink the entire matter,'' said Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas. ``I am not persuaded that outside counsel is required or appropriate.''

Councilman Nate Holden noted that the City Council refused to give a previous Police Commission power to hire a private attorney five years ago in a battle with then-Chief Daryl Gates, forcing the panel to retain pro bono legal advice.

Holden said he is particularly concerned about talk of litigation, since the Police Commission and Williams have not even formally discussed the issue of renewing the chief's contract.

``There is no discussion and they (commission) are saying let's get a lawyer. This is crazy,'' Holden said. ``It's completely out of order.''

The council met in closed session to discuss ``significant exposure of the city to litigation'' by the chief, according to a statement read first in open session by Assistant City Attorney Gail Weingart.

``The litigation in question is the possibility, and nothing more than that, that the chief of police might bring a legal action against the city in connection with his employment status,'' Weingart said.

She told the council that while Williams has not expressly threatened litigation, the proposed $75,000 contract to hire a private law firm is thought by the City Attorney's Office to be prudent move.

``We believe that the totality of circumstances surrounding the future relationship between the chief of police and the Police Commission and other elements of city government entails uncertainties, including whether the chief will apply for a second term of office and the fate of any application, and suggests a number of possible scenarios, only one of which includes litigation by the chief against the city,'' Weingart told the council.

``The (city attorney's) office believes that prudence dictates that attention should be given to this possibility,'' she added.

The City Attorney's Office has concluded that it cannot represent the commission in a dispute with Williams, because the office has a conflict stemming from its representation of Williams in other cases.

However, Ridley-Thomas and others said they believe the City Attorney's Office can advise the Police Commission about the renewal process.

Under Charter Amendment F, approved by voters five years ago, the Police Commission has the power to decide whether the chief should be given a second, five-year term when his first term expires in July.

City sources say the chief and his attorney, Johnny Griggs, have notified the Police Commission in writing that they are questioning whether the renewal decision should be based solely on the commission's judgment of Williams' performance.

Instead, the chief and his attorney have indicated to city officials that the renewal decision should be based on the evaluation of the chief's performance under the city's year-old merit-pay program, which gives the City Council a role in deciding how well the chief has done his job, sources say.

Williams has battled with the Police Commission, including his successful drive last year to have a commission reprimand overturned, and he still has some allies on the council.

Williams and Griggs did not return calls for comment Tuesday.

But the chief's supporters are also concerned that the Police Commission plans to hire the law firm of Paul, Hastings, Janofsky and Walker - the same firm that assisted and advised the commission in its investigation of Williams and its decision to reprimand the chief for allegedly lying about accepting free lodging from a Las Vegas casino. Williams denied that he lied and appealed the reprimand to the City Council, which ultimately voted to overturn the reprimand.