On a relatively small island with a sizable population — in Oahu’s case, some 953,000 residents and millions of visitors each year — inefficiency in trash collection and disposal can get ugly quickly. In East Honolulu, for instance, ongoing delays in bulky-item pickup services are leaving agitated residents with unsightly curbside clutter for weeks at a time.

Earlier this month, City Councilman Trevor Ozawa stood beside disposed mattresses, a couch and vehicle seats covering a sidewalk along Hawaii Kai Drive, and rightly demanded that the city improve its pickup service. But he flatly opposed a proposal that’s likely the most realistic strategy for stepped-up efficiency in handling of bulky items.

Tucked into Mayor Kirk Caldwell’s budget plans for fiscal 2019 is a proposal for a $5 monthly fee for residential pickup, and a switch to a call-in-only bulky-item pickup service with a $10-per-cubic-yard fee.

Just last year, a Caldwell pitch to charge residential customers $10 a month was rejected by the Council even as it prepared to put pass various other fee hikes, for services such as city bus rides. This time around, if Honolulu Hale can demonstrate that the proposed lower fee clearly brings us the value of improved service, it might be more palatable.

As for switching the city’s bulky-item pickup to appointments, such a move could help fix what’s now a broken program.

A scathing city auditor’s report, released in August, revealed that the bulky-item program, operated by the Department of Environmental Services’ Refuse Collection division, is rife with problems. Among them: excessive sick leave, staffing shortages, and union-forged agreements that have resulted in untimely collections and excessive overtime. Of some $10.5 million Environmental Services spent on overtime in fiscal 2016, nearly three-quarters was for the Refuse Collection branch.

Weighing possible solutions, Caldwell has correctly pointed out that some residents share blame for the curbside uglification by parking bulky refuse there, in violation of city ordinance, several days and weeks ahead of scheduled pickups. “We increased the fines, we have crews that go out and enforce, and yet people abuse it every single day,” he said.

Further, Caldwell asked: “Do we just do away with the program altogether and let people just take their bulky-item stuff to the transfer stations? Do we let the private sector do it? Do we continue to do it the way we’ve been doing it, or do we do something else differently?”

The appointment-only idea is different, but not entirely new. Twelve years ago, the bulky item collection program made a full switch from appointment-based to islandwide regular, monthly pickup. The city envisioned that move as a means to reducing illegal dumping and providing the same service for all residents. That hasn’t happened. With problems persisting, the Council should give serious consideration to switching to a call-in, fee-based service.

Both bulky-item and regular curbside pickup are now free of charge. Ozawa, along with many residents, maintain that the sanitation services should hold a spot on the list of “core services,” ranging from police and fire department protections, to maintenance of streets and parks. Those essential services are largely paid for with property taxes.

Hawaii’s other counties, however, approach the matter of funding differently. Maui and Kauai counties charge fees for pickup, while Hawaii County does not provide any curbside hauling. Given the latter sort of option, many Oahu residents might see paying $10 for the city to cart away a cubic yard of junk, at least, as a decent deal.

For call-in, fee-based service to succeed on an islandwide scale, though, the city must commit to seeing through an overhaul of the deeply flawed bulky-item program. More needs to be done to improve timely pickup, reduce complaints from residents, and reduce overtime costs.