The Ineptitude of L.A. Government : Bumbling and bureaucrats: a city struggling for control

Los Angeles is not covering itself with glory these days. The ugly LAPD furor triggered by the videotaped beating case threatens to disgrace the city. The competent and measured performance of a political system is a prerequisite to stability--and a necessary bedrock of prosperity. But in recent weeks, Los Angeles’ system has failed the test. Under mounting pressure, it has performed with neither grace nor effectiveness.

The latest contretemps over the Police Commission’s involuntary suspension order illustrates the decline. Last week the Police Commission, by a unanimous vote of the Mayor Bradley-appointed commissioners present, ordered Chief Daryl Gates to be suspended with pay for 60 days, pending its investigation of the abhorrent police beating of a speeding motorist. The merits of that decision are certainly debatable. Supporters of the chief believe that the suspension was a kind of summary judgment. Critics of the chief believe that the commission’s 60-day cooling-off period would have been well-advised.

But what cannot be denied is the right of the Police Commission to make that decision. That is precisely what it was set up to do. It is the civilian controller of the LAPD and has not only the right but the responsibility to exercise its judgment.

Today, the Police Commission stands rebuffed by the machinations of the City Council and the city attorney’s office. They outmaneuvered the commission in court and blocked its move. The net result is that the chief is back on the job, the Police Commission has been told to take a back seat and the governmental process has been undermined by political factionalism.

It is the very process of governing that is at risk in this crisis. The city’s elaborate civil service system offers department heads, such as the chief of police, enormous protections from political overlordship. But what the system does not do is protect the city from the potential arrogance of top civil servants and from the debilitating effects of bureaucrats accountable to no one. The system needs to be reformed; it has been flawed for a long time but the cracks have now become painfully obvious.

The current impasse puts a special responsibility on three major players in this civic drama to rise above any propensity for posturing and politics and, for the good of the city, look for a wise way out. The first player, of course, is the mayor, who found himself in the unaccustomed, and uncomfortable, position of having to take a high-profile stand on a high-profile issue; he finally said that the chief must resign. The second player, of course, is the chief of police, who has said that he won’t. And the third is the City Council, which must understand that the stakes in this crisis are greater than almost any it has ever dealt with. At risk is nothing less than the bond of trust people in this city feel toward each other, and toward the men and women sworn to protect them from crime. So the usual jostling for political advantage, the playing to constituencies, the back-room deals--all the traditional tools used at City Hall--must be put on the shelf now for the good of Los Angeles. To this end, the peace-making press conference Tuesday between the mayor, the council president and the police chief is all to the good.

Here’s the story: Daryl Gates looks to be the chief of police until the Police Commission, having completed its investigation, reaches the irreversible conclusion that there are overwhelming grounds for his removal. Or Gates remains chief until he realizes that he has become an impediment to progress and steps down--as The Times has already urged. But until either one of those determinations is made, Los Angeles needs to try going about its business without becoming the laughingstock of the country. The situation is almost out of control. It is the job of the political Establishment to get its act together.