Butler City Council’s 3-2 decision Thursday against seeking financially distressed status under state Act 47 put off substantive action to begin addressing the municipality’s worsening fiscal situation.

It wouldn’t have put off action if council members who oppose Act 47 had come to the meeting with ideas and a timetable for making important corrective financial decisions in lieu of the distressed designation. However, that wasn’t the case, with Mayor Maggie Stock and council members Kathy Kline and Richard Schontz Jr. — those who cast the “no” votes — merely referring to old options for review about which they have not been proactive up to now.

Those options include recommendations contained in the state’s previously compiled early intervention plan as well as cost-saving changes in the various city departments.

Again on Thursday, the anti-Act 47 majority talked the talk but did not commit themselves to getting the task completed within a reasonable time frame.

All they did was acknowledge a fact that has been at the forefront for a long time: that if the city doesn’t work to address its fiscal challenges, the city faces the possibility of bankruptcy in about three years.

That would worsen the troubling fiscal condition already in place, adversely affecting even the city’s ability to obtain tax-anticipation loans.

After the council similarly voted against pursuing Act 47 status in October, council members should have gotten busy to establish at least a foundation for better fiscal decision making and, ultimately, financial stability. But none of the three council members put forth any specifics Thursday about that having been done, to give city residents any cause for optimism.

Based on what occurred at Thursday’s session, it appears that city leaders are willing just to admit that there is a serious problem but don’t really have the strong will to collectively make the tough decisions that lie ahead. The absence of anything new from their vantage point is hardly a basis for confidence regarding their ability to get the necessary job done.

Granted, there are limits regarding what the council can do, but there isn’t any evidence yet that actions within their power have been mapped into a coordinated agenda for consideration, complete with target dates for decision making.

The current situation is consistent with previous councils’ penchant for merely hoping that the city’s financial problems would somehow dissipate on their own. Previous councils’ failure to pursue tough actions to shore up the city’s finances — including such things as structural changes in the fire department — is part of the reason the city currently is faced with such troubling financial realities.

Voting in favor of asking the state to determine whether the city is eligible for Act 47 were Councilmen Joseph Bratkovich and Fred Reese. Both realize the negative implications of Act 47, including the assault on the city’s ability to present itself in the most positive way — as a good place to live and work, or maybe even open a business. But bankruptcy will be a worse public relations nightmare.

That is not to say that Bratkovich and Reese are completely right and the other three council members are completely wrong.

However, in order to have any hopes of a successful resolution of this serious problem, there must be an established starting point. Unfortunately, there’s no evidence of even that being in place.

Shame on the city council for being no further ahead of where it was in October.