The city of York and a slew of other municipalities are headed down a slippery slope; this editorial appeared in yesterday’s York Dispatch deserves to be read.

Everyone who lives and works in York should read a new report on the city’s financial health, posted at http://www.yorkcity.org.

It will probably make a lot of people scream, but take a look anyway.

It paints a bleak picture, estimating the city will face a $50 million deficit in five years unless drastic measures are taken.

“Unfortunately, despite the City’s efforts and progress to date, this … report does not just describe long-term challenges that could, in the future, develop into threats to the City’s financial stability. The challenges described here have already arrived and have driven York’s budget into deficit in recent years, even if those deficits are not always apparent to York’s citizens.”

If not addressed, “They could threaten the City’s ability to continue providing critical services within the five year period covered in this report.”

Pretty bad.

But what’s likely to anger many people the most isn’t in the report — it was city officials’ reaction to it.

It wasn’t shock or even surprise. No one is saying, “Why, I had no idea …”

Business administrator Michael O’Rourke confirmed the situation is indeed “as dire as the report shows it to be.”

“I have been saying for several years now we face the real possibility of falling short on cash,” he said. “If that happens, then we have to decide what we’re paying and what we’re not paying.”

Really.

Then why in the world would he urge the city council and the administration, just this summer, to make “bold moves and (do) what it takes to give the city modern infrastructure”?

That was in response to concerns some council members had to the amount of money the city was spending on the newly purchased City Hall and the planned renovation of the old administration building. (Also on the city’s wish list is a brand new fire station.)

The report by Philadelphia-based consulting firm Public Financial Management noted the city planned to take on more debt this year to cover those projects, as well as to renovate community centers, refinance the ice arena debt and pay off short-term notes.

It said the short-term, $14 million note taken out last year for the City Hall projects comes due at the end of this year and will be paid off with a bond issue. If additional projects are added, the final bond issue could be around $23 million, according to the report.

“At time of publication the City was revising the final list of projects that will determine the actual amount of bonds issued in 2011. Whatever the amount, issuing this bond will increase York’s overall debt burden and alter significant ratios used to evaluate the City’s fiscal health by rating agencies.”

Read: When you’re in a hole, stop digging.

We assume O’Rourke is the person most familiar with the city’s dire financial situation.

Yet, not only was he not screaming from the highest mountain warnings against taking on more debt — he was urging “bold action” on new projects.

This administration and current city council didn’t create this mess, but they certainly had a responsibility to not make it worse.

It’s obvious now was not the time for the city to take on these new capital projects. That it did raises the question of who — if anyone — is minding the store.

Included in the report is this: “The City presently lacks formal policies guiding some of its financial practices. Creating and implementing policies and practices related to debt could improve the City’s fiscal management.”

There’s a thought …