Voters will decide whether to give LAPD chief the right to fire officers – Daily News

Lina Portman2 weeks ago

0 3 minutes read

Los Angeles Police Chief Dominic Choi speaks during a memorial ceremony for fallen officers at Los Angeles Police Headquarters, Tuesday, May 28, 2024. (Photo by Sarah Reingewirtz, Los Angeles Daily News/SCNG)

The Los Angeles City Council agreed Tuesday (June 25) to place a measure on the November ballot that would change the police disciplinary process and expand the chief's ability to fire officers for serious misconduct.

In an 11-2 vote, council members ordered the city attorney's office to place a measure on the November ballot that would make the proposed changes to the city charter.

Council members Hugo Soto-Martinez and Eunisses Hernandez voted no, and council members Marqueece Harris-Dawson and Kevin de León were absent during the vote.

Currently, the police chief can recommend that an officer be fired, but ultimately the decision is left to the Board of Rights, a three-member panel that serves as a quasi-judicial body, hearing evidence related to allegations of misconduct and determining guilt and deciding on penalties.

The new proposal would allow the chief to outright fire officers who engage in sexual misconduct, fraud, excessive force or abuse in the line of duty, among other violations listed in SB 2, a state law that highlights the means by which officers can be decertified.

Soto-Martinez and Councilman Tim McOsker teamed up last year to help formulate the proposal, but they ultimately disagreed during Tuesday's vote, with Soto-Martinez raising concerns about limiting such violations to this which is described in the law.

“I don't think this gets us to what we originally wanted: the ability to fire police officers when they engage in misconduct,” Soto-Martinez said. “But I think the voters will have the final say, and we'll see where the stakes are in November.”

McOsker, who voted in favor, said: “Based on these facts, this language gives us more clarity, not less clarity, because we now know the list of things, the types of things the chief can do , and they are very expensive to shoot immediately or directly.

“It is very clear that if the chief wishes, he can send someone to the Rights Board with a recommendation for dismissal, if the amount is less than that. We strengthen the power of the leader without diminishing it.”

Additionally, the proposal would change the composition of the LAPD Rights Council from two sworn officers and one civilian member to one sworn officer and two civilian members. And it would repeal an option that gives officers facing disciplinary action the right to request an all-civilian panel at the Rights Council.

Again, Soto-Martinez criticized this aspect of the proposal because he fears it could create a “two-tiered system,” in which some officers could be fired, but many officers who committed serious misconduct would keep their jobs. According to the councilman, the Board of Rights process has proven to be an “absolute disaster” over the years.

The councilman requested that the proposal be sent back to committee to address his concerns, but his motion to do so did not garner enough support.

The Rights Council was created by voters after the 1992 riots.

The new proposal would create an appeals process if officers are fired by the chief, in what's called binding arbitration — similar to court proceedings in which evidence is presented and a judge makes a decision.

The council seeks to fix elements of Charter Amendment C, approved by voters in May 2019. One of its goals was to increase police accountability, but a nearly four-year analysis of Rights Council hearings have shown that the opposite is true—with all—civilian boards fire fewer officers found guilty of serious misconduct. All-civilian commissions have also been more lenient in reducing penalties, according to a report from the city attorney's office.

Council members also want to address the issue of “problem officers” who keep their jobs and continue to collect paychecks while being prevented from performing their regular duties – often placed in desk or administrative work.

The proposal was recently criticized by members of the Los Angeles Board of Police Commissioners.

Commissioner Rasha Gerges Shield said last week that she wanted a greater opportunity to provide input on the proposal. She took issue with the use of binding arbitration, which she called “controversial,” to resolve disciplinary cases.

Commissioner Maria Calanche added: “It is regrettable that the commission was unable to weigh in on these discussions. There are a lot of things we deal with that could have provided some insight.

The Los Angeles Police Protective League, the union representing the department's rank-and-file, previously said it supports binding arbitration.

“The council voted to maintain a civilian majority on the Board of Rights panels that adjudicate police officer discipline matters,” the LAAPL board said in a statement Tuesday. “They also codified the state’s definition of serious misconduct in the proposed ballot measure, and officers terminated by the chief for serious misconduct will have the benefit of binding arbitration as part of their due process for appealing that termination.”

“We believe this strikes a fair balance,” the statement continued.