A key rule of government transparency is that substantial public funds shouldn’t be committed without the clear and public approval of elected officials.

This basic accountability is often missing at Honolulu Hale, where the mayor and City Council can have taxpayer money delivered to them on a party platter — into their own pockets at times — without the political pain of a public vote.

Two current examples are massive pay raises for the Council and mayor and increased Oahu property valuations of up to 20% that could greatly grow the tax burden on homeowners — and the revenue city politicians have to play with.

The Honolulu Salary Commission in March approved 64.4% pay raises for Council members, to $113,292 from $68,904 (Chairman Tommy Waters gets $10,000 more), while Mayor Rick Blangiardi was bumped to $209,856 from $186,432.

Under the City Charter the raises automatically take effect 60 days after the panel’s adoption unless three-quarters of the Council votes to reject all or part of the package; in other words, the Council has the option to collect these unprecedented raises without holding public hearings or taking a vote.

The seven commission members are appointed by the mayor and Council, who publicly pressed them for the raises.

Some members are lobbyists or employees of entities that do business with the city, people who make a living seeking favors from elected officials. Being able to return the favors with juicy pay raises is a golden ticket.

One recent Council nominee to the Salary Commission was approved only after Waters and Council Vice Chairman Esther Kia‘aina got her to agree they deserved full-time pay for their traditionally part-time jobs.

Even with the raises and full-time designation, they’d still be free to hold outside jobs in a system rigged beyond shame.

On property taxes, Oahu homeowners are facing increased property assessments that averaged 12.4% islandwide and surpassed 20% in some areas.

Blangiardi called the increases “a real aberration,” but he and the Council haven’t nailed down the relief they’ve promised struggling taxpayers; there appears to be sentiment for keeping a share of the undue revenue windfall.

In more fairly managed property tax systems, assessments aren’t so subjective and don’t invite suspicions of political manipulation at homeowners’ expense.

Annual valuation increases can be controlled by means such as hard caps, inflation-based limits or setting property values at the price of their last sale. Then if public officials want more revenue, they increase the tax rate by public vote.

Here, deceitful leaders let capricious assessments give them more revenue without any action on their part, while piously pronouncing on the campaign trail that they never voted to increase the tax rate.

Elected officials are deserving of reasonable periodic pay raises like everybody else, and taxes sometimes must be raised to provide revenue needed for critical public services.

But leaders should have the guts to tap taxpayers in an upfront manner, holding hearings and putting themselves on record with a public vote.

Rigging the system to duck transparency only feeds suspicions that they care more about feathering their own nests than serving their constituents.

Reach David Shapiro at volcanicash@gmail.com.