The government reorganization plans outlined by Mayor Carolyn Kirk this week certainly paint a picture of a city looking to break dramatically from its recent past.

And the revamped government structure is no doubt causing some uneasiness among city officials who are facing new assignments, or could be out altogether.

Yet, the city is in dire need of the kind of shakeup Kirk has targeted. Lest there be any doubt about the need for dramatic change, two audits released by the mayor drive that point home loud and clear.

While interim City Auditor Barry Boyce described the city's fiances as "bad, but not a catastrophe yet," the reports from both the state Department of Revenue and Gloucester's own outside auditing firm suggest even more dire straits - and, by their nature, suggest the city's old way of doing business simply no longer works. That's what Kirk's new structure is designed to tackle.

Just how bad are Gloucester's finances? The report from outside auditor Giusti Hingston & Co. found a "material weakness" in an internal auditing and accountability process so far gone that a "misstatement caused by error or fraud" might not even be detectable.

That's right: the audit found that, while there's no real sign of fraud, the city's auditing practices are so skewed we might not know if there was. That's not exactly the kind of assurance taxpayers deserve.

With that in mind, Kirk's restructuring includes appointing former grants administrator Sarah Buck as community development director, filling a post that's been vacant for more than two years. It also includes a reconfigured administrative assistant's position that would go to current grants administrator Jim Duggan and cover economic planning and development, along with health, veterans and elderly affairs, the library, recreation, inspection and boards and commissions.

Then, there would be a separate, yet-to-be-named budget director to oversee collective bargaining, capital improvements, local infrastructure, finance, public works and safety, and waterways.

At a closer look, the budget chief should basically keep tabs on much of the city's spending. The administrative assistant would focus on economic development and services - some of which can draw grants or other outside funding.

And Buck would focus on community development, adding to an equation that Kirk says should help the city "jump-start its revenue-generating process."

These moves do not seem to represent change merely for the sake of change. They should indeed create more focused fiscal oversight through the budget director's post, while giving an expanded focus to development and potential revenue.

At the very least, they seem like steps in the right direction.