Few Angelenos can claim a more remarkable career than Warren Christopher. He has served as Secretary of State, Deputy Secretary of State and Deputy Attorney General under Presidents Clinton, Carter and Johnson.
But Christopher never lost his interest in L.A., where he first practiced law at O’Melveny & Myers. Christopher was also vice chairman of the Governor’s Commission on the 1965-66 Watts riots and chairman of the Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department known as the Christopher Commission investigating the 1991 beating of Rodney King.
The 75-year-old Christopher recently sat down with the Business Journal to talk politics and police.
Question:
You were a mentor of sorts for Rocky Delgadillo at O’Melveny & Myers and you advised and endorsed him for city attorney. What does his move to that office mean?
Answer: His victory is of single importance to the development of Hispanic voters in Los Angeles.
Q: Will you continue to advise him and Mayor Hahn, who you also endorsed?
A: I’m getting to the point in life where I need to step back and have others fulfill that role. But I’ll be there on the other end of the telephone if they want help or advice. If you looked at their campaigns, they are deeply committed to education. I know they will continue to be. I’d like to see them make big plans for the city. We need to accomplish great things in the way of more housing, improvement of the environment, improvement of the beauty of the city.
Q: A decade ago, a lot of business headquarters had left the city. Then Mayor Riordan instituted what some would call a business-friendly agenda. Do you think that will continue?
A: Yes, I think that agenda will continue. Although we’ve lost some headquarter companies, nevertheless the L.A. economy is very vibrant, very strong. As has been the history of L.A., the strength has been in the medium-sized and smaller businesses.
Q: You have spent much time examining the LAPD. District Attorney Steve Cooley believes the consent decree does not do enough to reform the department. Do you think the changes outlined will work?
A: The consent decree is a major step forward. It’s certainly not a one-time solution. The main thing that the consent decree does is incorporate a number of recommendations that were in the (1991) Independent Commission. It gives the force of law behind those. Among the most important of those is the data bank, which will enable the senior officers to know what the real record of the police officers has been… It’s just amazing that quite often promotions are made without adequate data being available.
Q: The data bank is still not in place a decade afterit was recommended.
A: Most commission reports go on the shelf. At least with this one, people continue to talk about it as something that needs to be achieved. Major changes don’t come about overnight.
Q: What positive changes have resulted from the commission’s work?
A: We have fixed terms for the chief of police (two terms). In the past, the chief of police had a virtual lifetime appointment. We have a strengthened police commission and it needs to be strengthened further. We have an inspector general in place.
Q: Why are term limits so important?
A: One of the things our commission found is that a chief of police, when he has a lifetime appointment, is not accountable. The term limits provide for accountability. The chief of police is in for five years, and then the mayor and the police commission assess whether he or she should be given a second term. The limitation to two terms is simply a reflection of the fact that probably 10 years is long enough. (Former Police Chief Daryl) Gates who testified before us and who was basically hostile toward the commission’s activities, nevertheless said anybody who stays longer than five or six years is foolish. And he’d stayed 13 years by that time.
Q: What are the differences between the commission’s recommendations and the consent decree?
A: One thing that still worries me is that the commission recommended periodic psychological testing of police officers. Police officers are tested every two months for their firing skills. It’s not unreasonable to ask that they be tested psychologically at least every year. Psychological testing would turn up officers who have basically changed in character. Police work is extremely difficult work. It’s mind-altering work and it changes some people. Psychological testing is not incorporated in the consent decree. At the present time, the only way and officer can get psychological testing is to ask for it themselve.
Q: Had the commission reforms been implemented in a proper and timely fashion, do you think the Rampart scandal would have been avoided?
A: I wouldn’t claim that. I don’t think anybody can be sure that if there had been computerized records available even if there had been psychological testing that we would have turned up somebody like (former LAPD Officer Rafael) Perez. All I can say is if the reforms had been implemented, we would have had a much better chance of avoiding it.
