Once again the city enters the biennial budget dance, this time with requirements to increase spending (for example, added police officers getting deserved higher pay) and gloomy forecasts of decreased revenue (for example, mild recession and housing slump).

This year the City Council Budget Committee, chaired by Council member Jean Godden, took to the road with "public metings" in West Seattle as well as around the city.

Much of the meetings were dedicated to endless lines of people representing human service agencies pleading for more money to handle ever increasing needs. Just one example was Ronni Gilboa who said her downtown hygiene center demand has nearly doubled but "our finances haven't doubled."

On and one the well-reasoned pleading went to stony faced Council members who were nagged at the problem of declining revenues.

Dwight Dively, director of the city's finance department, said a budget cut was likely because of slumping income from the real estate excise tax, one of the city's biggest revenue sources for major capital projects. Last year the city got $70 million but the city will be "lucky" to get $40 million this year.

On her city Web site, Council member Godden said the slower growth and the increases in necessary spending mean cuts somewhere are going to be necessary, because Seattle must, by law, balance their budgets. We might note here that no one is talking about any tax increases.

Well, Mayor Greg Nickels is, sort of. He wants a 20-cent per paper or plastic bag tax he calls a way to cut greenhouse gases. The millions collected will finance education on global warming. This is a misguided "father knows best" idea we hope the Council will leave out of their budget.

That aside, the council is facing some critical decisions. All of those agencies that need more for human services are sounding a call that must be heeded. There is undoubtedly a bit of wasteful spending, perhaps better called misdirected spending, but we believe that amount is small.

Most people do not understand that the biggest single cost of Seattle city government is police and general public safety, where in 2008, 34 percent of the city's income will be spent. Yet who has not heard a complaint for more police services to track serious crime, but also to chase away noisy people after the bars close, or to find and eradicate pesky varmits such as coyotes or racoons?

The second biggest cost of government is our Fire Department, and its medical branch, where 18 percent of the budget goes. Libraries and parks get 18 percent also.

All those people at the public meeting on the budget who were seeking more money for "human services" were vying for a mere 5 percent of the budget.

To pay for all of this, the city collects the most money from the property tax, 25 percent. Another 23 percent of income comes from all those fees and fines (remember that parking ticket or that fee for a permit?). The hated Business and Occupations tax provides 19 percent of the budget and the tax on utilities (the city taxes them, they bill us) hauls in another 17 percent of income. Sales taxes net the finla 19 percent.

Now the city can raise any or all of these taxes, but you will be only one of the chorus of outraged citizenry.

So where does the city turn. To the red cutting pen and to the sad news that often people and their very human needs are not as important as may would wish.

Despite the brave talk about elminating homelessness, it cannot be done with good intentions or with an eye to keeping a balanced city budget. It will take some new strategies and, like it or not, some new source of income.

That won't happen until new leaders step in to make painful decisions, probably not for this biennial city budger.

- Jack Mayne