When local taxing units are facing tough financial choices and tax decisions, it becomes even more important for them to work together to try to lessen the impact of those decisions on local taxpayers.

The Lawrence City Commission is looking at a budget that calls for a 1.85-mill increase in the city’s property tax levy. That increase is needed for a variety of reasons, including the need to boost pension fund contributions. It also includes increased funds to operate the new Lawrence Public Library and other new initiatives of city government such as a new director of arts and culture and personnel for the city’s new rental registration program. The 2015 city budget funds nine new positions. That seems like a lot for a city with a relatively stable population and tax base.

On top of the mill-levy increase for the budget, city residents also will face higher rates for water, sewer and trash service and may be asked to approve an additional property tax increase to fund a new police station.

On the county side, commissioners are looking at the largest property tax increase in more than two decades: 3.86 mills. Compared with the city, more of the county’s increase is driven by revenue reductions spurred by actions at the state level. Key among those is the loss of the mortgage registration tax, which will be phased out over five years. The fact that the county collected significantly less mortgage tax revenue than expected this year, created an additional budget hole. The state also is requiring the county to increase its pension contributions; expenses at the Douglas County Jail are rising; and more responsibility for funding local mental health services is being pushed from the state to the county level.

So local taxpayers already are looking at a property increase of 5.71 mills, and the Lawrence school district has not yet announced its mill-levy projections. District officials promised they could maintain a flat mill levy despite approval of a $92.5 million bond issue in April 2013, but it remains to be seen whether the loss of some state funding for next year will make that impossible.

Each of these governmental units no doubt sees its own tax proposal as necessary, but local taxpayers have to wonder whether the three units could work together to help mitigate the size of the tax increase that is heading down the pike. Leaders of the city, county and school board have been meeting only on a sporadic basis, and there is little, if any, coordination on services, taxes or spending. Each group has its problems and/or priorities, but maybe, if they put their heads together, they could come up with some creative strategies to cut or at least spread out the expenses being dumped on local taxpayers.

It would be nice if the city, county and school district could at least get together to discuss their combined wants/needs before the bill for all that spending gets totaled up on local property tax bills.