City and county officials want to help their local schools, but taking over this state responsibility is a slippery slope.

It’s good of city and county governments in Lawrence and elsewhere across the state to be willing to look at ways to lend financial assistance to their local school districts.

But, as Douglas County Commissioner Bob Johnson said, “it’s a choice you don’t want to have to make.”

It’s a decision city and county governments have had to make before. An example is the magistrate judge position for Douglas County District Court that now is being funded through the county budget. District courts are part of the state’s judicial system, and their funding is the responsibility of the state.

But the state’s refusal to add another judge to the Douglas County court had made the workload untenable and was threatening to affect the court’s ability to provide a constitutionally required speedy trial. Out of desperation, county commissioners decided a couple of years ago to fund the position. They now fear the expense of the added judge may permanently be borne by the county.

Now comes the school district. All indications are that this session of the Kansas Legislature will leave local school districts in dire straits. The Lawrence district already has notified 65 teachers that their contracts won’t be renewed for next year. That may not be enough to balance the budget, and other cuts are being examined.

The funding course being pursued in Topeka hurts not only local government but, in the long run, the state. In Kansas, state government took over responsibility for funding public K-12 schools a number of years ago in response to a court order requiring the state to equalize the educational opportunity available to students across Kansas. The courts were concerned that districts with smaller tax bases wouldn’t be able to provide the same quality of education as districts in more wealthy areas.

That concern hasn’t changed. In some rural parts of the state, it surely has grown more intense. How can a small western Kansas town with primarily an agricultural tax base match the local school funding of a wealthy district in Johnson County? And yet, if the state continues to draw back from adequate state funding for schools, local communities will be forced to find ways to compensate. It seems likely, that if the state continues to pursue this tactic, it could find itself the target of another court case about school finance.

In the meantime, Lawrence and Douglas County officials are planning a meeting with school officials to see how they can help. If the state does reduce school funding and lower the tax levy, it may offer some leeway for the city and county to add taxes without raising the overall tax burden. The city and county are looking at subsidizing some services that aren’t directly related to the classroom although many would argue services such as recreation, school nurses and the WRAP program are vital to producing successful students.

As they consider those moves, they have to be concerned about picking up a responsibility that should belong to the state. Such action would open the door to a tax burden that could become crushing in the years to come.

It’s good that city and county officials value education and understand how important it is to their communities. It’s good that they know that taking care of our children is a fundamental mission of communities and their governments. It’s unfortunate that the same message doesn’t seem to be getting through to state legislators.