KTLA News: "Concerns about LAPD’s intelligence gathering practices" (1980)

[Zev Yaroslavsky:] When we were told at one time that there were no undercover agents in this chamber, the day that the Sundesert Nuclear Plant hearing was taking place. And in fact, there was an undercover agent of PD ID in the chamber at that time. [Tom Bradley:] They have now issued interim orders and a policy to guide the officers as to what they can gather, as well as what they can maintain. By letter, I have indicated to them that we must protect the right of the department to gather information, but at the same time we must protect the constitutional rights of individuals. [Man:] ...year... advising various facts about the Public Disorder Intelligence Division including that I requested the examination PD ID activities. Intelligence-gathering by a law enforcement agency is essential. I support that concept totally. But that department, whatever law enforcement agency it is, must be very sensitive to our democratic principles, to the preservation of civil and constitutional rights in any such information-gathering or maintenance. I'm pleased that in 1976, I asked the Police Commission to examine the card files maintained by Public Disorder and Intelligence Section and determined whether or not they were proper and whether or not any should be destroyed. They examined those files and discovered that of the two million that were maintained, that most were inappropriate. And they destroyed two million cards on individuals and organizations. They kept some 200 on organizations and, and individuals. They thought that with the guidelines they laid down then, as to what kind of information and on what kind of individuals and organizations should be kept, that that took care of the problem. But it appears that they simply were not able to anticipate all of the possible circumstances, and since then they have discovered that it is apparent that certain information was maintained that should not have been maintained though it was on an informal basis by individual officers and not in the card... [Chambers:] ... are upset by the fact that intelligence work in general is being, is being attacked, potentially both on the national, international level as well as in the local level that there is a need for intelligence to fight whatever enemies there are. [Bradley:] It is true that intelligence gathering has come under criticism and a considerable attack, because of the abuses that have taken place, both at the federal level, internationally and at the local level. We cannot in this society condone any kind of illegal or improper activity by a law enforcement agency, whether it's intelligence gathering or not. The Senate has now attempted to set guidelines to control the CIA. We have to set guidelines to control local law enforcement. I think that's appropriate and I hope that the Department they - through the Commission will establish permanent guidelines and policies that will at the same time provide flexibility for the officers to do their job, to protect the public interest and yet at the same time protect civil and constitutional rights. [Chambers:] Mr. Mayor, what would you say to those who say that guidelines have been set, the professionals are doing the best they can, they feel they've been doing a good job, and now they're being criticized? [Bradley:] Oh, I think that it is clear that their, their intentions were good, and they made a good-faith effort. I think even within the department they did not anticipate some of the things that were, were done. And as the Commission is refining these policies as they discover loopholes that they hadn't anticipated, it's appropriate that they make those changes. And that's not any criticism of the department, which the officers thought that they were acting properly. Now that they've discovered that this was apparently contrary to what was intended by the Commission, the Commission is now trying to correct that. [Chambers:] Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. [Bradley:] Thank you. [Lawyer:] ... an executive session would not be appropriate. It is my recommendation that if this committee desires to have any kind of an executive session, but that be put over for two weeks in order to allow the plaintiffs to test this question in court, rather than going ahead today. And not making any judgement now on whether there will be an executive session. But we do want to let the court know and they're waiting at this time for an answer, whether there would be one today. So it's my recommendation that you agree that if there's going to be an executive session between the Police Chief or police representatives in this committee, that be put over for two weeks. [Man:] I have no objection. [Woman:] That's fine. [Lawyer:] Okay, fine. With that in mind we'll immediately call over and let the [Woman:] Alright. [Lawyer:] the court know there's no need for any kind of a TRO that we are putting it over. That's now being taken care of. Thank you. [Chairwoman:] The committee then... [Yaroslavsky:] ... March... [Yaroslavsky:] I think it is clear now, certainly clearer today than it ever has been since I've been a member of this City Council, that there's growing public concern about the nature of intelligence-gathering in this community conducted by our Police Department, and I'm sure other law enforcement agencies. And I think that if there's been ever, ever been any doubt about the validity of our concern and of my concern over this issue, that it is more valid today than it ever has been since I've been a member of this City Council. And that it's a more credible concern than it ever has been since I've been a member of this City Council. And I think that the, this committee is to be thanked for that as well, for bringing this issue on a number of occasions to the public attention. Madam Chairman, I feel very strongly that there has to be some control brought in a very fundamental way over intelligence-gathering in this city. I think there is a way, in which that control can be brought through a Freedom of Information ordinance. I believe very strongly that it can be done, that a Freedom of Information ordinance can be adopted, enacted by the city, without jeopardizing legitimate intelligence-gathering activities, which I do support. The concern that has been raised in recent weeks and in the past years has not been over the legitimate intelligence-gathering operations of the LAPD, of which we know very little, if any. It has been brought over the abuses, the so-called abuses, the alleged abuses, the infiltrators and organizations who have reported on things other than what appeared to be the original purpose of their investigation. Reported on what elected officials have said in public meetings and in private meetings. Have reported what members of this City Council said in session. Have in fact reported the roll call of a vote of the City Council in one case over the Sun... [Yaroslavsky:] ... reasonable thinking person and certainly members of the City Council have a re... [Darryl Gates:] Well, I think the Commission has been inquiring into all of this and I really came here today to talk about this, but I wanted to talk about in an executive session. And that's been apparently prevented by some legal action and advice of the City Attorney. But, as you know, Police Department has always been willing to come to this Council and to talk with the Council concerning any matter that is at issue, that the Council feels that they want some information on. As a matter of fact, I must remind everyone that the very idea of coming to this Council Committee in executive session was the Chief of Police's idea, not anyone else's. And that's been in the spirit of cooperativeness that we have always had with the Council. And so the answer to your question is, "of course not." [Man:] Are you saying, Chief, that if we call it the Chairman's - they're calling an executive session, which is our prerogative to do so, that you'd be willing to testify now to any question we might ask you in executive session? [Gates:] Well I, I would certainly do my best to answer all questions. There may be some that I would perhaps be prohibited in asking- an- answering, but certainly I would do my best to, to give as much information that would be necessary to satisfy the interest of, of the Council. [Man:] I see. Madam Chairman, you do... [Lawyer:] ... in any of the these things, but in general, the powers of the Police Commission are defined in Section 78 of the City Charter, [Gates:] ... that what Commissioner Tooley has described has been a very orderly process of control, establishing control over the Public Disorder Intelligence function, which is a critical function for peace and safety in this, in this community. I'm disturbed by this constant effort to try this in the media, when there is so much effort being conducted by the Board of Police Commissioners and the Police Department to bring all of this into some kind of, of order. With that, I'll go to these questions that are... questions and accusations. [Chairwoman:] Okay, alright, thank you, Chief. [Gates:] Probably a better term. [Chairwoman:] Chief, [Yaroslavsky:] ... in the media if it is at all, "tried in the media," unquote is because we couldn't never get to first base. [Gates:] That's not true [Yaroslavsky:] I beg to differ with you Chief Gates. I've been on the City Council since June, [Gates:] That is not true. You've just heard a very orderly process. [Yaroslavsky:] Since June the, since June 10th, 1975 I've been on this City Council and it's only since this thing has surfaced in a very public way that Commissioner Tooley and your department [...]. [Gates:] I think you were still going to UCLA when this was being started. Now, it just seems to me, that what Commissioner Tooley has described to you... [Yaroslavsky:] Well then it hasn't been a very good job because since, since I was going to UCLA, and since I've been on this City Council, you've had officers infiltrating peaceful organizations, law-abiding organizations, in- infiltrating this Council chamber, reporting on what Councilmen have said, reporting on roll calls of Councilmen and you're telling me that you're proud of the efforts that have been made? [Gates:] You seem to know a great deal, for a statement that says you don't know anything. Now, what is it? Do you know everything or do you don't know everything? [Chairwoman:] I do too. Yes, yes, Mr. Bernardi, I believe so. [Man:] Order, Mrs. Chairman. [Chairwoman:] Mr. Li- Mr.... [Man:] I think I was a member the Los Angeles council, City Council [Gates:] When? [Man:] He happens to interject himself or herself. [Chairwoman:] The Chief has asked that we, he be allowed to answer these questions... ... other business, this committee is adjourned.