Any columnist who has produced a body of work over the span of a few years has heard how easy his or her job must be.

We don’t actually have to do anything. We can just sit down at a computer and pound out our opinions or begin picking at problems that affect our community. Easy as pie, right?

Of course, we always hear that we’re long on finger-pointing, short on problem-solving.

Trust me, I feel that pain.

That’s why, right here and now, I am going to solve one problem. I admit; it’s a toughie for me. I’d rather just sit back and write about the shortcomings of others, but I feel obligated to do my part to contribute to the overall well-being of our community.

OK ... let’s see ... what do you say we solve St. Joseph’s sewer problem?

Just for starters.

News-Press city government reporter Joe Blumberg has written several stories about our city’s sewer woes. We’ve all heard the horrifying estimates – $450 million dollars over 120 years to completely fix them. Fortunately, I’ve stumbled across a great solution.

Last week, Kansas City’s City Council decided, 11-0, to install 12 cameras to catch drivers who run red lights at the city’s most dangerous intersections. More cameras could be added later.

What a fabulous idea.

St. Joseph has discussed the subject in a couple of meetings but never seriously considered installing traffic enforcement cameras anywhere in town. They’re missing out on a gold mine.

According to The Kansas City Star, K.C. will contract with a company called American Traffic Solutions, which will front the money to install cameras and be paid back with revenues from fines. The story said that St. Louis recently installed the cameras and already has raised $1.4 million in less than a year.

So, let’s do some math. Let’s figure the city can levy a $100 fine each time the camera captures a red-light violation. That means in the next 120 years, we only need to catch a total of 4.5 million red-light ruffians – that’s 37,500 per year, 100 per day – to completely pay for new sewers.

Of course, not all violators will pay and some will fight it in court and win, so you’d need 100 “good” busts per day. If the number of tickets lags, you can increase the fine, or maybe just “manipulate” the timing of the lights to gin up more business.

Of course, this is fuzzy math. But if you sat in front of me in Mrs. Freese’s fourth-grade classroom and watched me struggle with long division, you’d know arithmetic is all fuzzy with me.

Fuzzy or not, convince me that there’s a downside to this.

Recently, the City Council said it would like to put a public safety tax on an upcoming ballot to hire more police officers. Why not just install the cameras? They’re cheaper than live officers and don’t organize in unions. It’s like cell phone franchise taxes or gaming revenue – essentially “found” money.

We could eventually install cameras with radar detectors to catch speeders. Mr. Speed Racer thinks he’s getting off scot-free, but he won’t be so cocky when that fat, juicy traffic ticket arrives in the mailbox.

Hey, we could take this a step further.

Several alleged high-speed chases made news last year. Why not let technology do our dirty work for us? Let’s arm our officers with electronic pulse guns that disable a vehicle’s electronics. That way, if a suspect flees, an officer can simply zap their car with a remote and it automatically shuts down.

Eventually, we wouldn’t need patrol cars, just a fleet of Lazy-Boys parked along the Belt Highway and Frederick Avenue.

I could see where law enforcement morale might suffer here. So, as a consolation, maybe we could let an officer Taser the driver once or twice.

Of course, this solution is completely ridiculous. I just thought I’d try to entertain you for a few minutes on a Monday morning.

But next time you do think columnists only highlight problems and never offer solutions, ask yourself if you really want people like me solving your problems.

My hope is, you’ll say no.

Steve Booher’s column runs on Mondays.