This is real money we’re talking about here.

In a recent editorial, we suggested a “go slow” approach on the notion to create a Bainbridge-based electric utility to replace the island’s current provider, Puget Sound Energy.

At the city council’s meeting this week, the council teetered on the edge of hiring an outside consultant to study the idea, to the tune of nearly $100,000.

Concern over such a study arose immediately. The city received a number of bids for the analysis, with bids ranging from the low one of $99,300 to a top bid of $490,000.

The top end study was widely viewed as the one that would give greater clarity to the pros and cons of a city-run electric utility, while the $99k study was largely preferred because it could be completed in time — by the first week in August — for the city to notify Kitsap County of its intention to put the creation of a power utility on the November ballot.

One councilman downplayed the cost of the $99k study — the council had approved other costly, large ticket items that night, he said, in a “What’s the big deal?” response.

But Councilwoman Sarah Blossom sagely noted that it would be $100,000 spent on a study for an idea that many islanders don’t support. That’s $100,000 that wouldn’t be spent to fix more immediate problems here, such as filling potholes on Bainbridge’s bumpy roads. That money would come from the city’s general fund, the pot of money that pays for such things as police, parks and planning.

And let’s not forget if the study is done and the utility proposal passes or fails at the ballot box, it’s still islanders who will foot the bill for the study, either way.

Let’s also be clear about what such an analysis won’t do.

Supporters of an island utility have recently been raising “local control” as one of the major benefits of the idea. But a consultant analysis won’t be able to inform residents if Bainbridge city hall is truly up to the task of running its own power company; starting a municipal power company will require a leap of faith when it comes to proper governance of the utility.

And this is where our skepticism remains. The city has a well-earned spotty history on its utility management, from sky high water rates, to sewer pipe breaks and spills, to, more recently, the South End sewer fiasco that has local business folks stymied in their attempts to complete projects.

The best idea we’ve heard so far is a compromise measure: Put the notion of the study itself on the November ballot for an advisory vote.