THERE'S NO CONSENSUS ON CONSENT DECREE : AGREEMENT ON LAPD KEEPS CITY IN DRIVER'S SEAT, BACKERS SAY.

Byline: Rick Orlov Daily News Staff Writer

The city of Los Angeles agreed to a court-enforced decree setting out an 18-year program to achieve greater diversity in the LAPD without ever determining if the department was guilty of discrimination, according to City Attorney James Hahn.

Amid protests that the consent decree approved by the City Council on Election Day is unnecessary and may violate the new anti-affirmative action initiative, a federal judge has intervened to halt the city's agreement with the American Civil Liberties Union and other plaintiffs' lawyers from taking effect until legal questions are resolved.

Rather than investigate the allegations of sexual harassment and discrimination, Hahn's office, the City Council and Police Chief Willie L. Williams cite statistics and allegations made in the 1993 federal civil rights lawsuit as reasons to back the new decree, which was negotiated over a two-year period.

The new decree would require the department to seek more diversity in recruiting officers and to remove any unlawful impediments to women and minorities achieving promotions through the rank of lieutenant.

The proposed decree - which follows others the city has agreed to since the early 1980s affecting minorities - does not establish quotas, Hahn said in an interview Friday.

The city attorney said a ``sweeping review'' of the department to determine if there is a base line of sexual harassment and discrimination would be ``a good suggestion.''

But he said if the city attempted to do that by litigating the class action lawsuit first and the LAPD was found at fault, the court could issue an order that would be far more intrusive to the day-to-day operations of the LAPD.

``If we did the reverse and we tried them, and the plaintiffs are victorious, then they can go in and look at these terrible things and say the system cries out for reform,'' Hahn said. ``They could ask for injunctive relief and court orders, and then they're in the driver's seat; they're writing the document, you aren't.

``The difference between an order and a consent decree is a huge difference in magnitude,'' he added.

The consent decree - which has been put on hold by U.S. District Judge William Keller, who says he wants to review it more closely - does not settle the lawsuit filed by 81 women officers. So if the city loses that suit, Los Angeles could be liable for millions of dollars in damages.

Critics of the consent decree - including Mayor Richard Riordan and the Police Commission - say the city is undermining the department's proper management role without evidence of the kind of sexual harassment and discrimination that would justify a court's oversight.

Cmdr. Tim McBride, the LAPD spokesman, said the department does not condone or tolerate sexual harassment or discrimination as the plaintiffs claim.

Williams did not return phone calls seeking comment.

``It is a bad way to legislate and run government with a consent decree,'' Riordan said. ``The council has set a goal of having 43 percent of the department women and I support that, the Police Commission supports that.

``Given that, I'm not sure why we need a consent decree. All of us politicians come and go and the city changes. This City Council should not constrain a future council and a city where people might have different goals in 10 or 15 years.''

Police Commission President Ray Fisher also has said he doesn't believe the city needs to enter into the decree, pointing to anti-discrimination policies adopted by the commission - including training for all officers and recruits - as well as plans to create a Discrimination Office.

The office would have its own staff to investigate complaints and would report directly to the commission.

Hahn said that consent decrees in the past have not detracted from the Police Commission's authority to run the department, and that the proposed one only includes rules the department ``wants to live up to.''

The evidence cited as indicative of sexual harassment and discrimination within the LAPD includes statistics and past evaluations of the department, including the Christopher Commission's conclusion during its 1991 review that women faced departmental obstacles.

On the one hand, the number of women officers in the LAPD has risen from 301 in 1981 to about 1,500 - or from about 4 percent to 17 percent of the force.

The number of minority officers has grown during the same period from 1,524 to 4,431 as of the end of September - or from 22.9 percent to about 48 percent of sworn officers, according to LAPD statistics.

Some groups, however, including Latinos - which make up 29 percent of the LAPD - are represented in smaller percentages than the region's labor force.

Current attrition rates among women officers are roughly the same as for men, McBride said.

LAPD critics say that the numbers don't tell the whole story, and that similar progress has not been made in the treatment of women - including safeguarding them from discrimination and harassment.

Ann Reiss Lane, who served on the Police Commission until 1993, said those issues have never been fully addressed, and questioned the department's commitment to independently undertaking needed reforms. The Discrimination Office still isn't functioning, for instance, though it was recommended five years ago by the Christopher Commission.

``My experience, when (Chief Daryl) Gates was there, was that it wasn't controlled at all,'' Lane said. ``The attitude toward women was very patronizing. I don't think he had any concept on what it meant to support women in the department.''

She said the problem was highlighted as part of an internal LAPD study in 1987 followed by the Christopher Commission report in 1991.

The Christopher Commission said the department fostered ``a climate in which female officers are discouraged.'' Also, the Christopher Commission referred to the 1987 LAPD survey that found women officers were subjected to a double standard, harassed on the job and deprived of the usual network of support.

LAPD officials said that, through the end of October, the department had received 22 complaints of sexual harassment and discrimination. In 1995, there were 33 formal complaints.

Councilwoman Ruth Galanter said the consent decree seeks to protect the women now on the police force.

``All of us come and go, particularly with term limits,'' Galanter said. ``It seems to me we have an obligation to the women who are now on the force that in 10 years they will be treated fairly.''

Galanter also said that while the city was not admitting any guilt in the consent decree, a number of cases of harassment and discrimination have come to the council creating the view among many members of ongoing problems in the department.

``No one wants harassment or discrimination,'' Galanter said. ``But when it comes to sexual discrimination, a lot of members feel funny dealing with it. This (consent decree) is a way to resolve that. We've had to pay out a lot of money for these cases.''

Among the alleged examples of either sexual harassment or discrimination cited in the lawsuit:

The LAPD has failed to standardize promotion procedures, so men still get ahead faster than women.

Women don't get the same opportunities for cross-training, seminars and other means of career enhancement.

``Through the failure to develop and-or fairly implement adequate procedural and training protections, the LAPD has condoned rapes and other sexual assaults of women by male officers. Supervisors have demanded sexual favors in exchange for favorable job treatment.''

The LAPD allows a sexually hostile environment to exist. Among the examples cited are ``male officers brushing up against women employees, making lewd gestures . . . (placing) files continuing explicit sexual graphics in the computer drives of women employees.''

Carol Sobel, the lead ACLU attorney, said federal court oversight is needed.

``Not on a daily basis, not running the Police Department,'' she said. ``The interesting thing is the only way this department has moved forward is under court orders.''

The LAPD was forced to confront the issue of women and minorities 15 years ago by former Sgt. Fanchon Blake, who had come out of the Army as a major and was determined to rise in the police ranks. Frustrated in her efforts, she filed a class action lawsuit, resulting in a consent decree that set goals for 20 percent of the department to be female and for African-American and Latino officers to be hired at a rate to reflect the general working population. The department also dropped its 5-foot-8-inch height requirement.

``All the city has done has been public relations,'' said Officer Liz Hatter, who last worked in the Devonshire Division. A member of the class action suit, she is now seeking a disability pension.

``It all looks good on paper, but it's a bunch of rhetoric and a lot of public relations ploys. Nothing has changed. The staffing command remains as entrenched as it ever was.''

Many of the consent decree provisions were contained among 173 recommendations made by the Women's Advisory Council to the Police Commission in its ``Blueprint for Implementing Gender Balance.''

``Over the past decade, the LAPD has failed in recruiting and promoting significant numbers of women within its ranks,'' the report states. ``Women still hold only a token status in the department. The LAPD is not alone among law enforcement agencies in its failure to integrate women.''

Among the recommendations in the study were a survey of officer attitudes, creation of the discrimination office, increased recruitment of women officers and establishment of gender-balanced panels to facilitate the promotion of women officers.

Figures provided by the LAPD show there are 17 women at the rank of captain or lieutenant out of 272 positions, for 6.2 percent, while at the sergeant level, women represent 2.9 percent - 96 of the 3,294 jobs.

The jobs are also overwhelmingly held by white males: 38 captain positions and 155 of the lieutenant jobs.

Hahn said he believes the department ``is going in the right direction.''

The 1981 consent decree was agreed to by the City Council and former Mayor Tom Bradley when Ed Davis was chief.

In an interview, Gates said he agrees with having a diverse police department, but doesn't believe it should come through a court order.

``These are quotas, whether you like it or not,'' Gates said. ``If you don't meet those quotas, the plaintiffs will be back in court saying the city did not meet its good faith efforts.

``But I have to tell you I get a little upset with the crybaby attitude of some women who are hired to protect you and me and the citizenry out there and then go around saying they can't protect themselves from their partners. That's nonsense. There are so many avenues to complain - Internal Affairs, a woman's coordinator.''

The Blake decree was the first, followed by the Hunter-LaLey case in 1991 that dealt with promotional opportunities for African-Americans and Latinos.

At that time, the council also voluntarily agreed to include Asian-Americans and increase the hiring goal for women to 43 percent.

The decree included $400,000 for tutoring programs, and $1 million to be distributed to plaintiffs adversely affected by pay-grade advancement practices or procedures, in addition to job counselors, affirmative action training and other programs.

To Blake, who is now 75 and living in a suburb outside of Seattle where she has written a book about her experiences, ``The Silent Force,'' the modern stories sound familiar.

``I can tell you that in my time, which was 1948 to 1974, there was an accepted open discrimination practiced against women officers,'' Blake said in a telephone interview. ``And it was carried out in an ugly and nasty fashion.''

She retired after her lawsuit was filed. Once the consent decree was settled in 1981, she received $50,000 out of the total $2 million settlement. The remaining funds were divided among other participants in the lawsuit.

``I felt like my life was in danger. I knew my telephone had been bugged. I was tailed, I was given the silent treatment. I was treated like I didn't exist at all. All my privileges were taken away. I was even supposed to get permission to go to the lavatory,'' Blake said.

``The thing about all this that really upsets me is why police management and the Police Protective League cannot get the message that society has changed and we won't tolerate this kind of abuse.''