LAPD Chief of Police Voices Disappointment At LaLey’s Move to Not
Support Him
"LAPD Chief of Police Voices Disappointment At
LaLey’s Move to Not Support Him"
Los Angeles: In a surprise move on Monday, March 11,
2002, the Latin American Law Enforcement Association ("LaLey")
announced that they would not support Chief of Police Bernard C. Parks’
bid to lead the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) for a second
consecutive term. Chief Parks, upon hearing of the Association’s decision,
expressed disappointment. "When you consider the facts and look at the
accomplishments of the LAPD over the last five years, as they pertain to
diversity in the organization at all levels by all minorities [not just
Hispanics], it is unconscionable for the leadership of LaLey to issue their
recent statement," stated Chief Parks. Chief parks continued, "The
facts simply do not support their position."
LaLey cites the Chief’s failure to implement the
Federal Consent Decree as one of the reasons why they do not support his
re-appointment.
FACT: The Department has earned two favorable
reports from the Independent Federal Monitor, the person tasked by the
Courts to monitor and report on the Department’s progress on
implementation of the Consent Decree.
Chief Parks stated, "This assertion by LaLey is an
affront to the hard working men and women of the Consent Decree Task Force
who have been putting in thousands of hours to ensure compliance; who have
earned excellent ratings from the Monitor; now to be told by Laley that they
are not doing their job."
Laley cites the Chief’s failure to implement the
Hunter/Laley Consent Decree as another reason for their non-support. To
support this contention, they offer, "Although there are over 3,000
Latinos in the LAPD . . ., we did not see a meaningful increase in the
number of Latinos in the senior command staff and we do not see any
indications that it will increase under Chief Parks’ administration."
FACT: The Hunter/LaLey Consent Decree does not
only apply to Hispanics; it also includes Blacks, Asian Americans, and
females. Additionally, the suggestion that the Hunter/LaLey Consent Decree
applies to "senior command staff" positions is not true. The
Decree only applies to officers in the civil service classifications of
Police Detective, Police Sergeant, and Police Lieutenant, and paygrade
advancements to Police Officer III, Detective II, Detective III, Sergeant II
and Lieutenant II. That notwithstanding, a comparison between the number of
Hispanic officers in the Department between June 1992 (the year that the
Hunter/LaLey Consent Decree was filed with the Courts) and June 2001
reflects that Hispanic officers in the Department increased by approximately
70% (from 1,782 to 3,026). In June 1997 (just prior to Chief Parks taking
office in August 1997), there were 29 Hispanic Lieutenants; as of January
2002, that number has grown to 35. In June 1997, there were 181 Hispanic
Sergeants in the LAPD; as of November 2001, that number has increased to
248. In June 1997, there were 66 Hispanic Detectives III; as of November
2001, that number has increased to 72. In June 1997, there were 142
Detectives II; as of November 2001, that number has increased to 190.
Interestingly enough, in December 2001, the Hispanic Law
Enforcement Administrators (HLEA), the Hispanic staff and command officers
association, along with six other LAPD Employee Organizations, signed a
letter expressing support for the Chief of Police. It is important to note
that all current Hispanic officers of the rank of Captain and above have
been, either promoted and/or upgraded, by Chief Bernard Parks. In June 1997,
there were six Hispanic Captains; as of January 2002, that number has grown
to nine.
LaLey cites the Chief’s failure to ". . .root out
and correct the problems that plagued the LAPD under prior
administrations" as another reason why they do not support the Chief’s
re-appointment. They stated, "the results of his failed policies are
evident in his handling of the Rampart situation."
FACT: This position by LaLey appears somewhat
contradictory to their previous position. In fact, in a letter to the Los
Angeles Times Editorial Pages, in April 2000, LaLey was one of ten LAPD
Employee Organizations who expressed support for Chief Parks’ efforts to
rid the Department of corruption and for his handling of the Rampart
corruption scandal.
LaLey cites the Chief’s refusal to adopt the compressed
work schedule.
FACT: The Department has adopted the Compressed
Work Schedule (CWS). As of today, there are 13 LAPD patrol and traffic
divisions that are on a CWS. Additionally, a plan is in place to have all of
the Department’s patrol and traffic divisions on a CWS by May 2002.
The earlier three-year CWS Pilot Project was disbanded in
1997 by interim Chief of Police Bayan Lewis. Since becoming Chief of Police
in August 1997, Chief Parks has articulated many reasons why the Department
should not adopt a CWS. These views were also shared by the previous Police
Commission, Former Mayor Richard Riordan and the Los Angeles City Council.
With input from the current Mayor, the current Police Commission directed
the Department to implement a CWS and the Department is complying.
This press release was prepared by Lieutenant Horace
Frank, Officer in Charge, Media Relations Section, 213-485-3586.
|