The news is rarely good for the public when contracts must be settled through binding arbitration, as the pact with Honolulu’s police union was last week. But this time the sticker shock is going to leave a deep mark. It’s hard to imagine how the city is going to cover this one without going to the taxpayer well again.

Revelations about the settlement, which includes a pricey adjustment to an add-on benefit called the "standard of conduct differential," also prompt another consideration.

That is, all the county police agencies covered by the contract, including the Honolulu Police Department, owe that public a lot more transparency about their work than they’ve been providing to date.

The settlement headlines at first pointed to a 16.8 percent pay increase over the course of four years. That’s a daunting fiscal hurdle by itself, but considering the negotiated pacts with other public employee unions, it could have been anticipated.

But the entire package given to the State of Hawaii Organization of Police Officers by arbitrator Thomas Angelo totals $200 million over four years. Considering that the city will have to continue paying the higher wages into the future, some kind of additional revenue generator is the likely outcome. The City Council must weigh its options carefully to find the one that leaves the least impact on the permanent residents who underwrite most municipal services.

That discussion is going to play out over the coming weeks. For now, this moment shouldn’t pass without a review of the particulars in this pact.

The most egregious element is the conduct differential. Few people outside the department realize that for the past decade, police officers have received $1 per hour they work as compensation for having to adhere to the standard of conduct, whether they’re on or off the clock.

In principle, that’s just wrong: Many professions with a high public profile require 24-hour behavior standards as a condition of employment. But increasing the hourly bump over the life of the contract to a high of $3.80 for most officers is flatly beyond the pale.

There’s also a new firearms maintenance allowance of $500 annually for all officers who must carry their firearm around the clock — covering what expenses, actually? — and the cost item for contributing to the Employer-Union Health Benefits Trust Fund.

That last part is a necessity, with unfunded liabilities across the public-employee spectrum left languishing for far too long.

Police advocates have argued that Hawaii salaries in the context of the state’s high cost of living have not helped in recruitment.

Fair enough: Police should be paid rates equivalent to those in comparable cities.

But the add-ons are leaving some in the public rightly feeling they’ve been fleeced, especially as they were seemingly slipped in under the wire.

There seems little the city can do about this other than to pay for the contract, with as little impact on the public purse as possible.

Meanwhile, HPD needs to realize the public expects something in exchange: excellent service in an atmosphere of openness.

Arguably, police officers do perform up to snuff, with few exceptions.

But law enforcement in Hawaii has a less than stellar record of providing public information. In particular, disclosures about disciplinary actions against errant police officers have been rare.

If the public is paying for officers to be on their best behavior around the clock, then people certainly deserve to find out more about the times when they aren’t.