Mayor’s Speech Seen as Part of Careful Strategy : Politics: He tried to put maximum pressure on Gates, set stage for Police Commission action, sources say.

Throughout his political career, Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley has been known as a man who likes to wield power behind the scenes, particularly when it comes to ousting high-ranking city officials.

Until Tuesday, the script on Police Chief Daryl F. Gates appeared to be following much the same course as Bradley pursued last year in forcing out former city Planning Director Ken Topping and former Community Redevelopment Agency Administrator John Tuite. The script seemed to call for politically cautious public comment even as Bradley and Deputy Mayor Mark Fabiani privately were marshaling the forces of change.

“He’s made it very clear that he has no intention of leaving,” Bradley said of Gates scarcely a week ago, explaining why he was not calling for the chief’s resignation in the wake of the March 3 police beating of black motorist Rodney G. King. “I don’t believe in engaging in fruitless activities.”

The turnabout was especially surprising to many Tuesday, when Bradley went on television to appeal to Gates to resign. The immediate question at City Hall--and elsewhere--was why Bradley acted now, nearly a month after King was stopped by 15 Los Angeles officers and beaten while prone and apparently helpless. Why was Bradley suddenly taking this stance only a day after appointing his own commission to look into the controversy?

Sources close to the mayor described Bradley’s speech as part of a “carefully planned” strategy to apply “the maximum possible pressure” to force Gates’ resignation.

Bradley’s speech was meant to help the Police Commission lay political groundwork for action against the embattled chief, according to two sources.

Reached for comment, Commissioner Melanie Lomax would only say that the commission is considering a number of options. “I think the Police Commission has an additional burden based on the mayor’s statement and the current climate (to decide) how it views the performance and continued leadership of Daryl Gates,” Lomax said.

“It is squarely before us,” she said. “. . . It places an extra burden on us to address this issue with all deliberate speed.”

Several sources said that one option being explored is to order Gates to temporarily surrender his duties while the investigations are being conducted. Should Gates refuse, the commission might be able to bring a charge of insubordination, possibly setting the stage for disciplinary action.

One source said that the Police Commission will meet in a special session Thursday to discuss the issue.

According to the same sources, a number of pieces have fallen into place in the campaign for Gates’ removal. First, Bradley nominated a civil libertarian, Stanley K. Scheinbaum, to the Police Commission, giving the panel another strong political ally of Bradley. The mayor’s office then ordered his appointees on the Police Commission to work with Gates to release transcripts of the controversial statements made by officers before and after the King beating--transcripts that included racial slurs.

Next, Bradley’s office forced out a member of the Civil Service Commission--which ultimately could decide Gates’ fate with the city--and brought in labor lawyer Larry Drasin, a longtime supporter of the mayor.

Bradley’s office then made overtures to council members, hoping to persuade them to come out publicly against Gates. The only one to do so to date has been Councilman Michael Woo.

Finally, the mayor’s office established the so-called Christopher Commission to run an independent investigation into police use of force, perhaps setting the stage for the Police Commission to ask the chief to step aside pending the probe’s outcome.

Woo has acknowledged conferring with Bradley’s office on the Gates issue in the past, but he insisted Tuesday that he was not consulted about Bradley’s call for Gates to resign. Even so, Woo seemed to agree that the stage was now set for further Police Commission action.

“I think the Police Commission is moving in the direction . . . of considering the removal of the chief,” Woo said. “I think the mayor wants to make his position clear in advance of the Police Commission action. It’s appropriate (for the commission) to look to him for leadership.”

Woo declined to elaborate on why he believes the commission will move against Gates.

Woo, a potential mayoral candidate, made Easter visits to churches in the black community, where outrage over the King beating and demands for Gates’ resignation have been particularly strong. But he dismissed any link between those visits and the timing of the announcement by the mayor, who has not ruled out the possibility of seeking a sixth term.

Polls indicated that there was virtually no political risk for Bradley in calling for Gates to step down at this time, according to City Hall sources.

Political observers say the move may reflect an increasing determination on the part of the mayor, who has been criticized for being indecisive, especially by blacks. Bradley has faced the risk of being upstaged by other local politicians who were quicker and more aggressive with their condemnations of Gates.

In addition, the harsh national spotlight on Los Angeles has not dimmed in the weeks since the police beating; if anything, the city’s reputation has worsened as Gates has doggedly clung to his $168,000-a-year job.

Bradley’s call for Gates’ resignation could have important political repercussions in the City Council elections next Tuesday, especially in the heavily black inner-city districts. In the 9th District, for example, Bradley has endorsed Rita Walters for the seat once held by the late Gilbert W. Lindsay. Some candidates have been critical of the mayor’s unwillingness to directly call for Gates’ ouster, but now that may diminish as an issue and help candidates supported by Bradley, sources said.

“It shows he’s trying to lead,” said longtime political consultant Joe Cerrell of Cerrell Associates. “The problem is, it would seem a little inconsistent since he just appointed a commission to look into the matter. . . . Why doesn’t he wait to see what the commission has to say?

“I know he’s under pressure to do this, I’d say primarily from the black community and the liberals.”

Cerrell, however, doubts that Bradley will make politician gains in largely black council districts. If anything, he said, Bradley will be fortunate to make up ground on candidates from rival camps. In those districts, he said, “it’s a matter of who can massacre Gates more than the other guy.”

Initial reaction in the black community to Bradley’s announcement was positive. The Rev. Cecil L. Murray of First African Methodist Episcopal Church said, “I think that it was inevitable, necessary and good. I think the mayor . . . has come to the conclusion that there is no exit other than direct demand.

“I’m sure now that he has demanded the police chief’s resignation he will follow through on his demand,” Murray said, “because a sizable portion of his constituency feels that their well-being is at stake.”

The Rev. Frank Higgins of Trueway Baptist Church criticized Bradley for taking so long to call for Gates’ removal, and described anti-Gates sentiment in the black community as “snowballing.”

As president of the 400-member Baptist Ministers Conference of Los Angeles and Southern California, Higgins was a part of a group called the Black Forum which met periodically last year with Gates to talk about relations between police and blacks. But Higgins dropped out late last year, unhappy with the effectiveness of the meetings.

“In some regards we appreciate Bradley’s decision” to call for Gates’ resignation, Higgins said. “But he could have done something sooner. We need a radical change of leadership to address this situation. Bradley said he couldn’t fire (Gates). Well, he should have fired him anyway.”

Council President John Ferraro, who is supporting Gates, said Bradley’s stand will sway some public opinion against the chief, but it would not change the positions of other city elected officials. “I don’t think there will be any significant difference,” he said.

Times staff writers Glenn F. Bunting, Rich Connell, Paul Feldman and John Mitchell contributed to this story.