 |
Film Shoot Security and the LAPD Uniform
by Bill Murray
OPINION
On June 16th, I was on hand at City Hall to hear a presentation and spirited testimony regarding an issue I've long thought needed to be resolved, the wearing of LAPD officer uniforms by retired cops who serve as security personnel on location sites for film and tv show production companies.
The current uniform is virtually identical to the on-duty, sworn officers' one, save that the badges feature the word "Retired" accross the top.
The presentation and discussion that ensued was held in the Public Works Room at City Hall, which can accommodate more participants than the relatively tiny and cramped chamber in Parker Center where the Police Commission normally meets.
The Police Commission in the Public Works Room at City Hall
The primarily public comment was from a lopsided and at least somewhat organized group of film company employees, many of them location managers, and retired police officers who work security for film and tv projects, and might have left less informed folk with the impression that there was no one in favor of the proposal to change the way film security personnel dress.
But I was the final person to speak, and in the single minute I was given I tried to say that, in my opinion, this was an issue that was long overdue for serious consideration, based on my interactions with the community in many areas of town frequently chosen as film locations.
But I also agreed with other public opinion that the suggested outfit shown during the presentation, which features a "Film Detail" patch on each shoulder of the jacket, and no badge of any kind, didn't go nearly far enough to be taken seriously as authoritative.
Personally I believe there has to be a middle ground ..
I disclosed to the Commission that I have had an over 30 year career in the film and tv industry, both in front of and behind the camera, so I'm not a novice to show biz industry needs. I understand how difficult it can be to do location shooting, filming by permit in otherwise public venues.
But at one time, between film gigs, I'd served for about a year as a private security officer myself .. for the six square blocks on the east side of mid-town Manhattan known as Kips Bay Towers. I'd been provided a uniform far more distinct than that being proposed by the LAPD, which included a light blue shirt with a silver security badge, a police style hat with a second badge, dark pants with a light stripe running sown the outside of each leg, a bomber jacket in the wintertime (with yet another silver badge) and a belt of equipment (sans sidearm) that included a night stick, a radio, an oversized notepad, a large set of keys, etc.
The point was that at first glance I could easily have been mistaken for a cop as I traveled on the subway to and from work, and as I walked my "beat" in and around the property. However it was also just as obvious upon any closer inspection that I was NOT a sworn officer of either the NYPD or the Transit Authority, as my insignia and distinct badges clearly stated the simple words "Security Officer."
Its my hope the Department will take a closer look at the outfit it has proposed and come up with something more obviously authoritative.
Yet I'm sympathetic with those who are concerned by the confusion that can be cause by security people who are using a retired officer's LAPD uniform, which is frequently coupled with a privately owned Kawasaki motorcycle painted to closely simulate those used in LAPD's motor units,
The public's ability to quickly determine just who is a real cop is at stake, as is the need to be obvious as to who it is that has " authority" and over what jurisdictions.
Chief McDonnell gave the Department report
Here's how the issue was reported later by the Police Commissions staff:
| The Department's verbal presentation relative to the change of uniform to be worn by retired police officers employed by private entities to provide traffic and crowd control at filming locations was given by First Assistant Chief Jim McDonnell. Chief McDonnell said the Department would no longer allow retired personnel to wear an active duty uniform. The issue at hand is the LAPD image, credibility and brand. A public safety type uniform will be available which is not similar in any way to uniforms worn by the LAPD, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department or the California Highway Patrol. Retirees will be allowed to wear a gun with ammunition, however they must have all the necessary permits. |
And here's how the LA Times wrote the story the next day:
LAPD to ban police uniforms for retired cops at film shoots
The department says it's concerned about liability and image issues. Location managers and the former officers denounce the move to black pants, white shirts and reflective vests.
by Joel Rubin
June 17, 2009
To the casual observer they look like the real thing: Uniformed Los Angeles police officers on motorcycles controlling traffic around action-packed chase scenes and sprawling film sets on the streets of L.A.
Gawkers and paparazzi who get up close, however, might realize something is a bit off. The stripes signifying the officers' rank are gone, the motorcycles are without emergency lights and their badges read "Retired" across the top.
They are part of the aging, but proud and stubborn cadre of former LAPD cops whom Hollywood has relied on for decades to keep real-world Los Angeles at bay while it creates its fantasies.
On Tuesday, however, after a year of failed negotiations and building tensions, top LAPD officials announced their decision to ban ex-cops from wearing police uniforms and badges. It is a move that people in the industry warned would hinder their ability to make movies and TV shows and undermine attempts to stem the exodus of film productions to other cities.
At a meeting of the Police Commission packed with angry, sometimes rowdy retired officers and film location managers, Assistant Chief Jim McDonnell unveiled the new uniform that retired officers will be required to wear.
Gone are the iconic dark blues of the LAPD, replaced by black pants, a white shirt and a fluorescent yellow reflective vest. In place of badges are patches that read, "Film Detail."
The city's municipal code gives Police Chief William J. Bratton the authority to decide who is permitted to conduct traffic control and security on film sets and what they are required to wear. McDonnell said he planned to formally notify the association that represents the retired officers of the changes in the next day or two and that the rules would go into effect in three months.
The commission -- the civilian panel that oversees the LAPD and typically votes on departmental policy issues -- has no say in the matter and was only listening to an update on the topic.
McDonnell said the department is concerned about liability and image issues that arise from having the contingent of about 100 retired cops who regularly man sets -- many of them in their 60s or older -- looking like active officers.
"We are trying to legitimize the system so when someone from the community approaches a person in an LAPD uniform it is actually an LAPD officer whose training is current and not someone who has been retired possibly for a few decades," he said.
The new duds were not warmly received, to say the least, by the retired officers and the location managers who depend on them to keep shoots running smoothly.
Richard McMillan, a spokesman for the Location Managers Guild of America, challenged McDonnell's concerns, saying in an interview that the actions of retired officers have never led to a lawsuit.
Several other opponents addressed the commission directly, saying the new uniforms would render retired officers impotent in the eyes of the public and make film shoots unsafe. "There has to be the threat of some sort of enforcement that comes with the LAPD uniform," said one retired lieutenant.
Kristan Wagner, a location manager who runs big-budget action movie sets, echoed the sentiment, saying, "My concerns are the car chases, the stunts -- the control we need will be very difficult."
Councilman Bill Rosendahl, who opposed earlier LAPD plans to ban retired officers from film sets altogether, said in an interview that he understood Bratton's stance on the uniforms, but called on department leaders to work with the retired officers to create a dress code acceptable to both sides.
Councilman Tom LaBonge, however, sided vigorously with the retired officers. He called on Bratton to back down, saying the decision "is a bad step for the LAPD."
McDonnell also outlined plans to change the way active- duty LAPD cops are hired to work on film sets. Currently, production crews pay a "wrangler" to hire such officers for jobs. The department is proposing to cut out the middleman and require crews to deal directly with the department.
At present, active and retired LAPD officers are paid about $50 an hour. Under the LAPD proposal -- which would require approval from the commission and city agencies -- active officers would be hired at overtime rates of about $80 an hour.
That idea, too, drew an angry response. Going through the LAPD to get uniformed officers who would probably have to be rotated out during film shoots that can run more than 16 hours a day would be cumbersome and disruptive, location managers said.
The city, they said, should be working to make it easier, not harder, for studios to make films in Los Angeles as the city's one-time virtual monopoly on the filmmaking market continues to erode. For years, industry hands have grimaced over "runaway production," as studios have increasingly shot films in New Orleans, Vancouver and other cities that offer tax incentives and lower costs.
"The level of filming in L.A. has decreased," one manager told the commission. "Don't take away the only incentive we have to stay in L.A."
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-hollywood-cops17-2009jun17,0,5276469,print.story |
That same day the LA Daily News did an OPINION piece on the issue:
No one but an LAPD cop on duty should dress like one
Updated: 06/17/2009
NO one who isn't a sworn, currently employed and on-duty member of the Los Angeles Police Department ought to wear an LAPD uniform or badge. Impersonating an officer is against the law. Violators - including former police officers - are routinely arrested on those charges. However, it's something that happens almost daily in Los Angeles and - amazingly - is perpetrated and supported by none other than former enforcers of the law.
Retired LAPD officers have been wearing their LAPD uniforms with impunity for decades as they supplement their city pensions with $50-an-hour film details. City officials looked the other way, and there was little regulation. Many active-duty LAPD officers also moonlight on sets while wearing their uniform, which is less egregious but still questionable.
The film crews have benefitted as well, getting a security force with all the cachet of on-the-clock cops - without the cost.
Now LAPD Chief William Bratton wants to change the policy so that nonemployees - or off-duty officers moonlighting on film shoots - aren't impersonating actual officers, and that active duty LAPD officers are hired for film through the department, not independent wranglers. It's a basic liability and legal issue.
On Tuesday, the Los Angeles Police Commission heard a report from LAPD Assistant Chief Jim McDonnell outlining this change and previewing a new film shoot outfit that retired and off-duty officers can wear instead and still look imposing and cop-like. It didn't fly with the retired officers or location managers who came to protest the policy change with dramatic stories and overblown warnings.
It's understandable that the retired LAPD officers who now staff film shoots would be upset by this proposed policy. The LAPD uniform isn't just a pile of clothes to them, but the representation of their life's work and a symbol of who they are.
As former enforcers of the law, they, better than anyone, should understand the sanctity of the uniform and the responsibility that comes with wearing it - including the responsibility to be honest with the public.
Officers said that without the sartorial support from their old uniform, they wouldn't get the respect they need from the public during shoots. They would be considered no better than security guards. (After the heroic actions of Stephen Tyrone Johns, who lost his life earlier this month protecting museum-goers from a shooter at the Holocaust Museum, there are some who might be glad of the comparison.)
As well, with all the outcry from officers and location managers at Tuesday's meeting, it would seem there is an economic imperative to maintain the current system. There is not.
The LAPD isn't saying that retired officers can't work film shoot duty, only that they shouldn't impersonate an officer when they do. And while the location managers must hire through the LAPD at a higher hourly rate if they want off-duty/active-duty officers in their LAPD uniform on their sets, they can still hire the retired cops and off-duty officers so long as they don't wear LAPD duds.
Seems reasonable but, location managers were so incensed that they warned they would take their film and television business elsewhere unless the city continues to allow the use of the LAPD uniform at discount prices. It was a cheap shot, bordering on extortion. Besides, it doesn't address the fact that film production has been deserting this city for a long time based on many factors having nothing to do what the people wearing traffic control wear.
This new policy will take effect in 90 days, unless the City Council overrules it. No matter what the issue, it's inappropriate for anyone at anytime to pass themselves off an an officer when they are not. The public has a right to assume that anyone in uniform is an actual LAPD officer.
http://www.dailynews.com/opinions/ci_12614228 |
There was a lot of public comment and testimony
I certainly understand LA's desire to do whatever it can to keep film and tv production in town, and I frankly wish we had a far more pro-active film commission promoting what our city has to offer the industry. There are many state and out-of-country commissions elsewhere that far outshine our efforts, and this has resulted in Los Angeles losing business to them.
But I'm also familiar with the issue from the community's perspective.
Many neighborhoods, primarily because of their "look" as a backdrop in a film, are used over and over again, and residents have multiple and ongoing concerns about the side-effects on their lifestyles, their homes and their businesses.
Here's a little sample of a recent email announcement and ensuing discussion on a local e-group, this one coming out of Echo Park, where the distinct local architecture in an "out-of-the-way" community, and sometimes the view of downtown, make it a popular film location.
Note that the notification was for one day's shooting of a popular show, Monk, where some of the action is "stunt driving" with "near hits and misses" and some is relatively simple, consisting of perhaps a couple short scenes described as "Talent on sidewalk and street. Talent walking dog."
I'll remove any specific or personal information, since that's not the point:
Recent Film Company Production Announcement - Echo Park
Filming eNotification
From: Film Company
Subject: Filming eNotification
To: community members
Date: Wednesday, June 24, 2009
PLEASE BE ADVISED that a film production company is planning to film in your area. The production company is applying for all necessary permits and is required to abide by all city and county filming regulations. BEFORE OR DURING FILMING: The company may begin preparations prior to issuance of a film permit. If you have any questions or concerns regarding filming activity, please call FilmL.A., Inc. or the production company representative named below. You may also submit questions and comments to FilmL.A. by replying to this email. AFTER FILMING HAS CONCLUDED: Once filming has wrapped and the film crew has left your neighborhood, we welcome you to contact us and tell us how things went.
THE PRODUCTION COMPANY:
WILL BE FILMING:
MONK
UNDER PERMIT:
(permit number was provided)
LOCATION:
1. Echo Park Ave & Fairbanks Pl, 2. Montana St & Logan St
PREP DATE(S):
n/a
FILMING DATE(S):
07/01/09
FILMING HOURS:
1. 12:00 P.M. - 3:00 A.M., 2. 5:00 P.M. - 5:00 A.M.
STRIKE DATE(S):
n/a
DESCRIPTION OF SCENE: Pending Community Survey. Driving scenes. Equipment on sidewalk, curb lane and across the street. Exterior dialogue. Near hits & misses. Stunt driving. Adding sod and prop foliage to easement area between sidewalk and street. Beebe light, crane. 80ft condor. Cover street sign. Occasional traffic and pedestrian control. Talent on sidewalk and street. Talent walking dog.
PARKING: *07/01, No Parking Anytime. Both sides of Fairbanks Pl from Echo Park Ave - East 300ft (including around bend). East side of Echo Park Ave from Sunset Blvd. - 300ft North of Fairbanks Pl. West side of Echo Park Ave from Montana St - North 150ft. Both sides of Lemoyne St from 1445 Lemoyne St - North & South 50ft. *07/01, 6:00 P.M. - 6:00 A.M. Both sides of Montana St from Echo Park Ave - Lake Shore Ave. Both sides of Logan St from Montana St - North & South 50ft. Both sides of Lemoyne St from Montana St - North & South 50ft. Both sides of Lake Shore Ave from Montana St - North & south 50ft. *Basecamp & crew parking at Logan St Elementary School.
STREET CLOSURES: *07/01, 7:00 P.M. - 3:00 A.M. Full closure of Fairbanks Pl from Echo Park Ave - Eats 200ft. East side curb lane of Echo Park Ave from Sunset Blvd. - 300ft North of Fairbanks Pl. *07/01, 8:00 P.M. - 5:00 A.M. Full closure of Montana St from Echo Park Ave- Lake Shore Ave.
PRODUCTION COMPANY REPRESENTATIVE: ............ ...
FROM: Location Manager
(contact info was provided) |
And here's a little of the egroup dialogue that came later:
Q. Would you let us know if your street is "surveyed" and what the overall response is?
A. We absolutely were NOT surveyed. Neither we, nor anyone else we've spoken to, both on the east side of Echo Park Av., nor anywhere on Fairbanks Place. We spoke to a number of neighbors and no one knows what we are talking about. It's a damn lie. And by the way, there would be no where else to park, and because I need to have a car handy, due to illness, would never have consented. A neighbor agrees because he has a chronically ill child.
And another post read:
A. We have an invalid a couple of doors up the road, completely bed-ridden. We have a heart patient next door. There is me. And just two weeks ago, I had to have an ambulance for my husband. Should any of us need help, a filming co. would be far too invasive to get help to us immediately. The street is narrow as an alley. All of us are seniors. |
There are obvious and legitimate concerns on all sides of this issue, and it needs to be brought out into the light. LAPD can't afford to wait any longer.
What do YOU think? |
|
