EDITORIAL MAYORAL TAKEOVER IF IT'S GOOD FOR SCHOOLS, WHY NOT THE CITY?

MAYOR Antonio Villaraigosa is taking his pitch for school reform to the people all across Los Angeles, painting a disturbing picture of a bloated bureaucracy in dire straits and failing an entire generation of Angelenos.

He talks about the second-largest government agency of its kind that should be among the most respected in the world but somehow can't seem to even accomplish its most basic responsibilities with its multibillion- dollar budget.

He decries the disconnect between the agency's officials and constituents, describing a bureaucracy that has become so remote from the people it serves that it can't hope to turn around without outside intervention. Which is, of course, where he comes in -- a take-charge mayor who will get things fixed, hold people accountable and empower ordinary folks to play important roles.

But wait a minute: Is Villaraigosa talking about the Los Angeles Unified School District -- or the city he heads?

Villaraigosa's assessment of the LAUSD and its current state of abject failure is right on target. But what he doesn't see -- or perhaps doesn't want to acknowledge -- is that the same things are true of City Hall.

If the LAUSD's problems can be defined by its 50 percent or so dropout rate and low achievement, the city's can be calculated in the flight out of town of the middle class and the good-paying jobs that supported them.

So if a take-charge mayor holding people accountable is good enough for the schools, it should be good enough for the city.

The school district is run by a group of extremely well-paid people who seem to be primarily interested in preserving the bureaucracy and squashing diversity and creativity.

The city, by comparison, is run by a group of extremely well-paid people who also seem to be engaged in keeping their place in the power structure and not rocking the boat.

The LAUSD board of education members are virtually anointed by public-employee unions or the mayor or one of the various political power brokers in the city. Their meetings are designed to squelch public comment, not encourage it.

The Los Angeles City Council is put into place by more or less the same interests, paid handsomely and granted much bigger staffs. And hard as it may be to believe, the council has decided to refuse to listen to the public at all.

Mayor Villaraigosa is right. The bureaucracy is broken -- both in the schools and at City Hall.

And while he needs new state legislation to fix the schools, the new city charter gives him all the tools he needs to put the bureaucracy and the City Council in their places. So he can start fixing the city.