A bankrupt L.A.? No way

The city of Los Angeles is not on the brink of bankruptcy, and prudent action now by city leaders can keep the city solvent. As surprising as it may sound, that’s disappointing to some people.

We can make allowances for the city’s occasional self-esteem crises. You know the saying: “To start a conversation in San Francisco, say something bad about Los Angeles. To start a conversation in Los Angeles, say something bad about Los Angeles.”

But civic mood swings aside, there is something unseemly about how readily some inside City Hall have begun to use the “b-word,” not because they view it as likely but perhaps because they view it as easy. Why work through what departments to cut, which employees to lay off, which city services to deem unaffordable luxuries? That’s hard work. It makes people mad. It’s so much simpler to just drift into insolvency and let the courts sort everything out.

Let’s give the b-broachers the benefit of the doubt and assume that their talk is meant to provoke a needed sense of urgency and to startle elected officials, managers and unions into action. Because although bankruptcy is not around the corner, it could soon be -- if city officials pretend that they can continue spending without regard to short-term revenue dips and long-term structural challenges.

We’re confident that Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa will not permit Los Angeles to skulk its way into Chapter 9 on his watch. But just in case anyone else in City Hall thinks they can do that and emerge with a political career intact, let’s just say it now, clearly, for the record, so there’s no mistake: Bankruptcy is not an option. Any city official who takes us there will be held accountable.

Mismanagement and economic downturn have combined to present Los Angeles with a serious challenge, and only laziness and cowardice on the part of elected officials can prevent the city from meeting that challenge. The task confronting the mayor and the City Council is straightforward: Protect the city’s fiscal health, its future and its reputation by cutting expenses and nonessential functions and redesigning city government to better serve its people.

It’s doable. The savings don’t lie in the small pieces that seem to most anger City Hall critics; they’re not, for example, to be found by firing a calligrapher or two or ending fee waivers for block parties. They lie in big places, such as the superfluous Information Technology Agency, or in controversial ideas, such as eliminating departmental boundaries and holding the mayor responsible for staffing programs as needed.

City leaders are up to the challenge, if they want to be. If they don’t want to be, they should leave now. Maybe there’s a more comfortable place for them in Orange County. Or Vallejo.