Voters Give Council Last Word on Gates

Approval on Tuesday of a ballot measure that allows the Los Angeles City Council to review and overturn decisions of citizen commissions has given the council new authority over the future of Police Chief Daryl F. Gates.

Passage of Charter Amendment 5 grants the council unprecedented power over the city’s 40 commissions, including the controversy-ridden Police Commission. The commission, City Council and Mayor Tom Bradley have been at odds since April, when the panel tried to place Gates on leave pending an investigation of the police beating of Rodney G. King.

“The council could now set aside, alter or in some other way modify any action of the Board of (Police) Commissioners,” said Assistant City Atty. Byron Boeckman, who advises the five-member commission. “It is an authority the council has never had before.”

Under the new law, which takes effect in several weeks when Tuesday’s election results become final, the council can review any commission decision if 10 council members vote to do so. The council can overrule with a simple majority vote.

Previously, the council did not have the authority to become involved in Police Commission actions, although the City Charter allows the council to review certain decisions of some commissions, such as water rate increases and large lease agreements.

The council became so infuriated about its inability to intervene when the Police Commission placed Gates on leave in April that it resorted to an unusual legal maneuver to block the action. With passage of Charter Amendment 5, city officials said, such creative tactics will not be necessary.

“It gives the council more real authority to override commissions like the Police Commission on hiring and firing decisions,” said Councilman Michael Woo, the only council member to call for Gates’ removal. “It does seem to strengthen the council’s hand.”

Council members moved quickly Wednesday to dispel fears that they will use their new power to further politicize the Police Commission and the controversy surrounding Gates. Several members said they intend to use the law judiciously to provide “checks and balances” on decisions by commissioners, all of whom are appointed by Bradley.

“It is really unlikely that (Charter Amendment 5) will ever be used except in an egregious situation,” said Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky. “I don’t think there is anything wrong with the commissioners knowing that there is another arm of government that is going to be a check on their behavior.”

Police Commissioner Michael Yamaki, who like most of the city’s 244 commissioners opposed the charter amendment, said the new law means commissioners will have to work “with someone looking over your shoulder and second-guessing you.” Yamaki, who joined the Police Commission last month, described the new arrangement as inefficient and intrusive.

“I think the checks and balances were already there by the council being able to either confirm or not confirm an appointee to the commission,” Yamaki said. “I really believe that it should be left up to the commissions to decide individual issues.”

Councilwoman Joan Milke Flores, who wrote the amendment, predicted that it will improve strained relations between the Police Commission and the City Council by providing a formal means of communication. Currently, the commission acts independently of the council, except when a new member appears before the legislative body for confirmation.

“I don’t see anything that it can do but improve the situation,” Flores said. “We have been talking through headlines and we have been talking through 60-second sound bites on television, and that is no way to settle an argument, it is no way to settle differences, and it is no way to reach conclusions.”

Yamaki and others who opposed the new law warned that the council’s new power brings new responsibilities, including the burden of sharing the blame for unpopular decisions.

“As I see it, once we make a decision, we are out of it,” Yamaki said. “The council is going to be ultimately responsible and have the fingers pointing at them.”

Other commissioners said they fear the new law will politicize commission actions by inviting special interests to go before the council to appeal them.

“Once they decide to review a decision, all of the lobbyists in the world will descend upon them to change our decisions,” said Johnnie L. Cochran Jr., president of the Airport Commission.

Bradley, who wrote a ballot argument against the amendment, said Wednesday that its passage will have “a tremendous impact on the commission system of government” in Los Angeles by allowing “intermeddling” and “nit-picking” by the council. Bradley strongly opposed the measure and intended to veto it, but it was placed on the ballot Tuesday after the mayor mistakenly signed it.

Bradley has challenged a court ruling that allowed the measure to appear on the ballot, and a spokesman said Wednesday that the mayor will pursue the legal challenge despite the vote Tuesday.

“The appeal is moving forward,” said spokesman Bill Chandler.

Flores said the challenge is a mistake.

“The final authority, the ultimate authority in a democracy, has spoken,” Flores said. “It would be foolish of anyone at this point to pursue it beyond that.”