Los Angeles: On November 26, 2001, the Los Angeles Police Protective League (LAPPL) issued a press release stating that the Department was refusing to work with the LAPPL. This latest effort by the League is yet another, as part of their continuing efforts to launch unfair attacks on the Department, while purposely misleading the community. These actions by the League serve no other purpose than to undermine the hard work and efforts of the men and women of the Los Angeles Police Department and instill divisiveness within the Department.

These issues raised by the League are old issues that have already been addressed by the Department. One cannot help but opine that the League has run out of credible issues to address and now see the need to raise old issues and provide misleading comments to Los Angeles Police Officers and the public at large. In a recent mailer to officers, the League stated, "The League has requested permission to attend roll calls Citywide to address your concerns; however, the Chief of Police has denied Directors access to roll calls." These types of representations by the League are totally irresponsible, to say the least, since the Department, on two occasions, gave specific approval to the League President to address roll calls at specific areas, as she requested, to discuss specific issues. This approval was memorialized in two separate correspondences to the League President, on November 9, 2001 and on November 21, 2001.

Regarding the subject of Senior Lead Officers, it should be noted that the Department and the league were engaged in the meet and confer process on this matter. Subsequently, the League agreed to significant enhancements to the Senior Lead Officer (SLO) program and at a March 13, 2001 news conference with the Chief of Police and then Los Angeles City Mayor Richard Riordan, voiced support. These enhancements represent the current format of the SLO program.

Regarding the matter of the recruitment process, the Department addressed these same issues previously raised by the League, in their "Four Point Plan". This response was in a detailed press release dated July 24, 2001, titled "LAPD To Continue With Aggressive Recruitment Efforts Without Compromising Standards".

The League, also on July 18, 2001, issued a news release regarding their concerns over the supposed "Large volume of dropped 9-1-1 calls." This news release was wrought with erroneous, and in many cases nebulous, information. Again, the Department responded in detail in a release dated July 18, 2001, titled "Department Responds to League’s Supposed Concern Over 9-1-1 Calls."

The Department, on numerous occasions, has addressed the issue of jail closures (two in particular) and the fact that the decisions were based on directions by the City Council to identify areas for closures. This decision was made due to cost constraints and the shortage of civilian jailers. There was concern by the Department for jailer safety (not enough jailers on duty). Subsequently, the Department was forced to taking police officers off the street in an effort to augment the jail staff.

In March of 2001, the Department effected the third phase of its commitment in the area of discipline when it formalized and implemented the Los Angeles Police Department Penalty Guide. This occurred after joint meetings and discussions with the Protective League. Additionally, pursuant to concerns expressed by officers, and after engaging in extensive meetings and discussions with the League, the Department, on November 7, 2001, implemented yet another phase of modifications to the disciplinary system, in the form of Special Order No. 36, dated October 29, 2001. This change will significantly streamline the recordation, investigation and adjudication of complaints, enabling them to be resolved more quickly without jeopardizing the quality of investigations.

How is it now that the Los Angeles Police Protective League can, in good conscience, represent to Los Angeles Police Officers and the community at large, that the Department has not and is not willing to discuss with them, pertinent issues of interest? The Department is not always going to agree with everything the League proposes nor will the League always agree with the Department on all positions. This however, is not justifiable reason for one to misrepresent, to the community and to officers, that the other is not willing to engage in meaningful discussions.

Los Angeles Police Chief Bernard Parks, within a month of League President Mitzi Grasso taking office in November 2000, met with her and enlisted the League’s support on how the Department and the League could best work as a team to address pertinent issues. That offer is still on the table for the League’s Board of Directors.

This press release was prepared by Lieutenant Horace Frank, Officer in Charge, Media Relations Section, 213-485-3586.