EDITORIAL SPRUCING UP L.A. SECESSION THREAT ALONE DRIVES CITY HALL SUDDEN BURST OF ENERGY.

THE evidence of city government vigorously getting down to work cleaning up Los Angeles after a generation of neglect seems to be just about everywhere these days.

Road repair crews, tree trimmers, cops swooping down en masse on gangs and other crime problems in one neighborhood after another suddenly have become a part of daily life in the San Fernando Valley. Signs have sprouted announcing new projects to serve the community, compliments of Mayor James Hahn and local council members.

Could all this activity have something to do with the vote on Valley secession on Nov. 5? Hard as we might try, we haven't come up with any other explanation.

In the face of secession, city officials have gone to heroic lengths in the last few months to show Valley residents how much they care. Their overdue commitment to better city services is welcome, but it raises far more questions than it answers.

First on the list: Where was City Hall for the last 30 years, when streets and sidewalks were allowed to crumble, promised improvements were never delivered and whole neighborhoods were taken over by street gangs?

For the answer, look no further than the massive city bureaucracy, the powerful unions that cash in on every public-sector job, the army of consultants collecting six-figure salaries from City Hall, the developers and contractors feasting on the taxpayers' largess.

That's where City Hall has focused its attention all these years - on the well-connected that make up the downtown power structure, and at the expense of all city neighborhoods, especially those in the Valley.

There's no denying that city services and City Hall's responsiveness have improved over the last few months, but it will take more than a short-term investment to bring the Valley's infrastructure up to date. At best, city leaders are barely keeping up with the widespread disrepair - paving new roads, for example, at about the same rate (but no faster) than old ones crumble.

Which brings us to the biggest question of all: What reason is there to believe that, absent a secession threat, City Hall wouldn't resume mistreating the Valley and other neighborhoods?

As much as city leaders like to boast that a new era of leadership is upon us, they have done little to back up the claim. Whether it's pretending powerless neighborhood councils are the vanguard of an urban revolution or blocking boroughs that would actually empower neighborhoods, City Hall has stood firmly in the way of any reform that assures the public of greater authority and accountability.

The single motivation behind the current onslaught of services is the secession threat, and should secession fail, what will become of City Hall's newfound interest in Valley concerns?

The answer can be found in the historical record - and it isn't pretty.

City Hall will stay focused only as long as its privileges are under threat, unless there are major structural changes that break up the downtown power structure and allow for a balancing of competing interests.

Without that, the neighborhoods and the interests of the city's residents will be ignored again, and the insiders' feast on the public treasury will resume.