The Lawrence city budget process already is spurring some heated exchanges among city commissioners and local residents.

Balancing the budget, while addressing some new city priorities and avoiding a tax-levy increase, isn’t an easy task, but this is just the beginning of the process. Before the budget is completed, there will be some changes and some compromises. It’s a process that works best if everyone works together rather than becoming polarized.

City Manager Tom Markus’ budget proposal included some staff and funding cuts that have drawn sharp criticism. But his overall goal of providing a realistic budget that preserves the city’s reserve funds is hard to argue with. Maybe the reserves don’t need to be as large as what is called for in his budget proposal, but it isn’t sound financing for the city to consistently dip into those reserves to cover expenses.

The proposed budget calls for no increase in the mill levy. That’s something many taxpayers would applaud, but maybe taxpayers would rather see a moderate tax increase than to eliminate all of the spending Markus has suggested. It’s arguable that a moderate increase this year would be a good idea in light of the fact that state law will make property tax increases more difficult in future years.

Employee wages and benefits are a big portion of the city budget, so Markus’ strategy to trim the budget included personnel cuts that have drawn considerable attention. His plan calls for the elimination of one part-time and eight full-time staff positions, including the relatively new positions of city auditor and arts and culture director. His recommendations are a subtle reminder that creating new staff positions is a lot easier than eliminating them.

Markus defended his recommendations by noting that most of the eliminated positions weren’t standard for other cities. The response from some residents was basically that Lawrence isn’t a standard city. There even was the smug assertion from Commissioner Matthew Herbert that if the city reduced funding to the arts, “congratulations, we just became Topeka, Kansas.”

That kind of rhetoric not only is needlessly condescending to Topeka but also does little to contribute to constructive discussion of the city budget.

City commissioners have said they are concerned about affordable housing, bicycle and pedestrian transportation and the need for more mental health services in the community, so the proposed budget dedicated funding to those areas. If city commissioners would rather spend that money on maintenance at the Lawrence Arts Center, higher salaries for Lawrence Public Library employees or maintaining city staff positions, they have the power to do that. If they have to raise taxes to accomplish everything they want to do, they have the power to do that, too.

The goal of all city officials should be to come up with an honest budget that includes realistic spending and revenue figures and doesn’t depend on dipping into reserve funds. Difficult choices will be involved, but the choices will be easier if local officials and residents maintain a thoughtful and constructive conversation and don’t lapse into a polarized, nasty debate.