FREE e-Newsletter
Important News - Hot Topics
Get them Now!

Tactical Pants - Galls
A popular choice for public safety professionals, the Galls Tactical Pants are...

Top News

Los Angeles Police Commission Votes to Scrutinize Some Officers' Finances

December 20, 2007  | 

The civilian Los Angeles Police Commission voted unanimously today to require gang and narcotics officers to disclose personal financial information.

Police union officials have filed suit seeking an injunction on the disclosure policy.

Union officials told the Torrance, Calif.-based Daily Breeze Wednesday that some 500 officers would quit or transfer to other units if the city requires them to disclose their finances as mandated by the federal consent decree.

The proposal would require all gang and narcotics officers under the rank of lieutenant to provide detailed information on their finances, including property, past-due credit cards, outside income, stocks, bonds, bank accounts, and bank accounts shared with other family members.

"No other law enforcement agency in the country forces its officers to share this kind of information," police union President Tim Sands said Wednesday in a prepared statement. "This financial disclosure plan is an unnecessary and ill-conceived intrusion into the private lives of LAPD officers, their spouses, and their children."

Under the proposal, the disclosure would apply immediately to all newly assigned gang and narcotics officers. Disclosure requirements would be phased in over two years for officers currently working gang and narcotics assignments.

The consent decree was born of the Rampart corruption scandal, which involved gang officers. The consent decree has increased scrutiny of LAPD gang and narcotic officers to the point that many are frustrated with the increased paperwork.

Under the consent decree, gang officers are prohibited from using secret informants and the officers are required to work in uniform.

The police union told the Daily Breeze that corrupt officers would find ways to circumvent the disclosure such as hiding funds in other family members' accounts.

"I am puzzled by this," Robert Stern of the nonprofit Center for Governmental Studies told the paper. "Usually (financial disclosure) is meant to prevent conflicts, not corruption. I always say that the ones who want to be corrupt will be corrupt and won't disclose."

Request more info about this product / service / company

Comments (3)

Displaying 1 - 3 of 3

coxgregg @ 12/20/2007 8:01 PM

Just another way for the cops to be scrutinized while the bad guys go on their merry way.......

cforbis @ 12/21/2007 7:11 AM

I have always had problems with the "civilian" oversite boards. These boards usually are only staffed with those people with an axe to grind or a political agenda and don't ,for the most part ,even know about the inner workings of police work. We are given the powers to deprive people of their most sacred God given right. Freedom. How long now before every arrest must be scrutinized by those who don't have a clue about police work on the streets and would not volunteer to sacrafice, and do what we do every day to keep them safe. I wonder how many of these people would volunteer their financial history for us to scrutinize.

posapres @ 12/21/2007 10:01 AM

Why single out just those units and the rank and file? If this commission truly believes that financial disclosure is a great way to fight corruption then their recommendation should apply to ALL city employees and ALL board and commission members (including themselves.)

Join the Discussion

POLICE Magazine does not tolerate comments that include profanity, personal attacks or antisocial behavior (such as "spamming" or "trolling"). This and other inappropriate content or material will be removed. We reserve the right to block any user who violates this, including removing all content posted by that user.
Police Magazine