It’s hard to imagine that any Kansan doesn’t share Gov. Mark Parkinson’s “hope … to present a budget that doesn’t include any tax increases” for the coming fiscal year.

The only problem, as Parkinson noted, is “we need some help on the revenue side,” and that help doesn’t seem to be coming.

Earlier this week, the governor raised the possibility that he and the Kansas Legislature would need to consider some tax increases to meet the state’s financial obligations next year. Wednesday, he backed off that position somewhat, adding that his deliberations for proposing a tax increase would include consideration of what he sees as the likelihood state legislators would pass such increases.

Although Parkinson said Wednesday he didn’t have “a strong sense either way,” on where legislators stand on the issue of tax increases, those who have been speaking up in recent weeks have largely rejected that possibility. That could, of course, change if the state’s finances slip further between now and January.

When Parkinson make his initial statements, he correctly noted that there’s a limit to how much budget cutting the state can take. Four rounds of budget cuts already this year have been painful, and the revenue picture isn’t getting any better. October revenues announced Friday were $15 million below projections; the tax revenue shortfall for the fiscal year that started July 1 now stands at $80 million.

That virtually ensures Parkinson will have to make more budget cuts before the Legislature returns to Topeka in January. How deep those cuts will be depends largely on the figures arrived at by the state’s consensus estimating group, which meets in Topeka today. Given recent tax receipts, it’s hard to be optimistic.

No one wants to see taxes raised or restored, but neither can the state afford to cripple important budget areas that may help lead it out of the current recession. Economic development efforts are still vital, as is maintaining the quality of the state’s public schools and higher education system. Providing some level of service to people who are struggling in the current economy is both humane and an investment in the state’s safety and security.

The challenge, of course, is to balance the state’s financial needs against the taxpayers’ needs. We can’t afford to cripple state government, but we also can’t afford to pass taxes that will cripple businesses that provide tax revenue and jobs in the state.

Tax-funded state entities certainly should share the pain of the current recession, but the budget ax already has fallen heavily on many state services and almost certainly will strike again before the end of the year. Additional taxes are not a popular alternative, but after all other measures to reduce expenditures have been exercised, they may be necessary to keep state government running at an acceptable level.