Giving financial assistance to the Lawrence school district will force Lawrence city commissioners to wrestle with difficult funding choices.

It was ironic that only a day after three Lawrence city commissioners voiced support for raising city tax money to help the local school district cope with budget cuts, the same commissioners were facing budget cuts of their own.

The possible cuts considered by commissioners last week also lent a sober note of reality to exactly how tough these decisions will be for city officials. It’s one thing to support school philosophically; it’s something else to translate that support into dollars and cents.

Last Tuesday, three city commissioners indicated they would support a plan to contribute as much as $1.4 million to support athletic programs in the Lawrence public schools. Their intention is that the money would enable the district to take money usually budgeted for athletics and spend it in other areas more directly related to learning — things like additional personnel and materials.

The city can do this because its taxing authority isn’t tied as tightly to the state as is funding for school districts. The Lawrence school district has maxed out its ability to raise money and has no choice but to cut. The city can — and probably will — increase its mill levy and perhaps some fees to raise additional revenue.

But these choices won’t be easy, and they will test city officials’ ability to set priorities for their spending. On Wednesday, commissioners looked at areas they might cut to balance their own budget without enacting large property tax increases. They agreed at a study session to increase employee health insurance by only 10 percent although they expected the city’s expenses to rise by 18 percent. They cut $150,000 in “contingency” money for the Public Works Department and cut $40,000 of the Lawrence Police Department’s budget for overtime pay.

Other cuts under consideration include programs for recreation, fire and police public education and neighborhood programs. A city hiring freeze or mandatory furloughs for some city employees also are on the table, as is reduced maintenance for city parks.

Another irony of this situation is that the city may furlough its own employees at the same time it is trying to help the school district hire people back. It also may cut its own recreation program at the same time it is contributing to athletic programs in the schools. And although the city’s contribution to local schools would be aimed at freeing up money for academics, it still will be targeted at athletics, arguably a non-essential function for education. Are school athletic programs more important than, for instance, a properly staffed and paid police force?

The city also is experiencing cuts in revenue from the state and will have to tighten its belt even with a property tax increase that may approach 6 mills next year. Any move to direct city tax money to public schools should be undertaken with caution and with a clear sunset provision to insure this is a stopgap measure.

Local residents support public education and are willing to back that support with a tax increase, but a decision by the city to provide those funds will require considerable soul-searching about funding priorities for city tax revenue.