Honolulu Mayor Mufi Hannemann, along with his fellow mayors and governors, faces a difficult problem:

The economy is in the tank, yet citizens demand the same level — if not an increased level — of services. What to do?

Hannemann, in his budget message to the City Council this week, had few choices. The counties do not have a broad menu of taxing options like the state. Nor can they simply print money and go deeper into debt as does the federal government.

Effectively, all the counties can do is nickel-and-dime their constituents and hope things will turn around. That is precisely what the proposed Hannemann budget is about. Spending restrictions, a hiring freeze and salary restrictions are already in place, but will not be enough.

So the focus of the budget — on the revenue side — is on the fees or assessments people pay for the pleasure of living in Honolulu. While property tax increases will likely generate the greatest public uproar and concern at the City Council (after all, property owners are voters), the biggest flashpoint is likely to be the proposed increase in bus fares.

A single bus ride will jump by about 12 percent, from today's 2 bucks to $2.25. More painful will be the increase in the monthly bus pass, which will jump a whopping 25 percent, to $50. Arguably TheBus is still a bargain, but the plain fact is it will cost folks a lot more to move around town on city transportation under this budget proposal.

By comparison, property tax rates are pegged to go up a little under 10 percent.

The focus on fees and assessments makes sense as far as it goes. To some degree, they are discretionary (you don't have to golf or visit the zoo as often as you do today). And they are related to the cost of doing business — or at least they should be.

And this is the central rub that the City Council will have to confront as it works over the administration's budget. It makes sense to increase fees and assessments for city services and amenities, so long as the fee still maintains some relationship to the service offered.

In other words, it is disingenuous and more than a little unfair to use specific fees to generate general revenues. Fees should have a direct relationship to the cost and value of the service provided. If the city is short of cash to provide basic general services, the correct response is to increase its most general tax — in this case, property tax.

Will the council have the courage to adopt this kind of budget clarity as it works through the Hannemann budget?

Jerry Burris' column appears Wednesdays in this space. See his blog at blogs.honoluluadvertiser.com/akamaipolitics. Reach him at jrryburris@yahoo.com.