EDITORIAL : REFORMS CAN START NOW L.A. DOESN'T HAVE TO WAIT FOR A NEW CITY CHARTER.

Today is inauguration day for the winners of the Los Angeles municipal elections, including members of the elected Charter Reform Commission, which will propose changes in the organization of municipal government itself.

It also could be the day that marks a new beginning for the city of Los Angeles - or the beginning of the end of L.A. as a city.

The public overwhelmingly supports reform of this city through drafting and adopting a new charter that would restructure municipal government. They approved it in the belief that Los Angeles must make its municipal government more responsive and accountable to all sectors of the public - and not just the narrow constituencies and special interests that have run the city for so long, run it into decay and crisis.

It may be that charter reform has been taken hostage by those very same interests and may never occur. But some changes don't have to wait until the charter commission finishes its work in two years.

Reforms can start now, if the City Council and mayor have the will.

The needs and problems aren't limited to the San Fernando Valley's desire for a fair share of resources and an equal voice in decision-making. The problems actually are about a city out of balance.

From San Pedro to Chatsworth and from Venice to Sylmar, residents want a meaningful voice in decisions that affect their homes, neighborhoods and communities. People throughout the city feel shortchanged in various ways. For years, taxpayer-paid services were being cut back in the community while spending increased for central government operations.

When decisions are made downtown at City Hall in this sprawling city, distance separates the decision-makers from many of the people who work and pay taxes. And the gap is more than just geography; the system is self-serving and tends to exclude many of the people of Los Angeles from participating regardless of where they live.

One strong example of the potential for improvement can be seen in Council District 8, represented by Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas. In his South Los Angeles district, he organized locally elected community councils and delegated real authority to them, affording them meaningful participation in decisions.

There is no longer any excuse for any council member refusing to share power with his or her constituents. The neighborhoods have a right to a voice, and the council members can give it to them today. More members of the City Council ought to follow the example of Ridley-Thomas by forming local councils in their own districts, or be seen for what they are - opponents of genuine reform.

The City Council also must get out of its downtown fortress and get acquainted with the rest of the town. The Valley is about one-third of the city, and there's no reason why one-third of the council meetings can't be held in the Valley, perhaps using high school, college and university facilities.

More council meetings in the Valley and other parts of the city would give residents a stronger sense of inclusion and would emphasize to municipal officials that there's a real need to reach out to every part of L.A.

Yet another problem is the concentration of government downtown. Decentralize city government - after all, it belongs to the people and should serve them and not the other way around. With the renovation of City Hall under way, this is a good time for officials and public employees to get to know the people they serve.

The bureaucrats might learn something if they decentralize and get a better taste of the problems endured by the public - an understanding that's lost when too many city functions are located downtown. Perhaps it will lead to innovations to provide better public access to services and offices.

The troubling issues of mass transit and public education also are areas that have suffered from inconsistent leadership at City Hall. While those issues are largely the responsibilities of other government entities, Mayor Richard Riordan has shown a willingness to grapple with them. So should the council.

The council's challenge to the MTA on rail funding produced a small movement toward fairness by that embattled transportation agency. The council has shown a willingness to assert its supreme power where it wants. It should want to do so in areas where it matters to taxpayers.

These are only a few of the ideas that could be embraced by council members and other city officials to become more attentive and more responsive to their constituents.

People want to feel as if their elected representatives respect their values, but that often doesn't seem to be the case now. People throughout Los Angeles get the impression that City Hall officials often are more interested in preserving their own positions and power, and responding to the special interests, the wealthy and the powerful who give them campaign contributions to help them keep getting re-elected.

Instead of waiting for voters to approve a new City Charter or waiting for the Valley to vote on whether to break away from Los Angeles, the people in power can do more now to change things for the better.

That's why they were elected. That's why they are called public servants.