EDITORIAL : IT'S NOT THE MONEY, STUPID; ALATORRE FAILS TO GAUGE PUBLIC OUTRAGE ON PROPOSITION 227 CHALLENGE.

HERE'S something completely expected: a Los Angeles City Council member fails to understand the public's outrage.

This time it's Richard Alatorre. And the issue at hand is the council's decision to join a court challenge to overturn Proposition 227, the city, county and state voter-approved ballot measure that overhauled bilingual education in California public schools.

Alatorre claims the public's anger is over money. And because of that misguided perception, he's offered to dip into his officeholder account, a sort of slush fund of contributions that council members can use for official business, to reimburse the $1,000 the City Attorney's Office will spend to draft and file a ``friend of the court'' brief.

``I'm doing it so people won't be able to say it's costing the city taxpayers money,'' Alatorre said. ``That's all they've been raising - the money it's going to take to fight this.''

How disrespectful and dishonest can you get?

Just ask Mike Feuer, Laura Chick, Joel Wachs, John Ferraro and Ruth Galanter - the council members who defied the will of constituents in their districts and backed Alatorre's legal action. Nearly four of every five callers to Feuer's office thought the council should not have ``second-guessed'' the voters, a Feuer aide said.

Some residents were so infuriated by the decision they took the time to go downtown Tuesday to tell the council that it was out of line getting involved as an institution in educational issues for which it has no responsibility. Last we checked, the City Charter created the school district and the board to run it.

It's not just the money, councilman. It's having the arrogance to attach the city's name to a position that is the opposite of what the voters believe without a clear and compelling case that a serious constitutional breach is involved. That's what's wrong. So paying for it out of another account doesn't change much, does it?

Even if the City Attorney's Office files the brief pro bono - or if you should personally repay the City Attorney's Office - it still flies in the face of what the voters wanted.