Gov. David Paterson has earned plenty of praise for his pro-active stances ahead of a looming state budget deficit.

Soon after hammering out a 2008-2009 state budget with the Legislature, Paterson set the tone for the following year's budget by calling for a spending reduction in 2009-2010. He also began talking about finding costs to cut in the current budget, saying the plan legislators passed can always be revised. To that effect, he's put state agencies on notice to avoid unneeded hiring.

All of these measures are motivated primarily by the forecasted reductions in state revenues, particularly the income tax revenue that pours into Albany from Wall Street each year.

Paterson's approach is wise, but we worry that many of the government decision-makers at the local level aren't catching on. Elected leaders need to realize that the budgets they approve are merely a starting point - the goal should be to run their operations below projected spending levels.

While there are no examples of runaway spending increases in any of the local school budgets being put up before voters next month, all of them do bring some level of increase to the table. They can do this in large part because the state budget once again delivers healthy sums of state aid to districts throughout New York.

But there's a very real chance that money could dry up, either later this year or next year. It's happened before, and the districts that had not prepared found themselves in desperate situations.

The same potential problems could confront county and local municipal governments, which count on Albany for funding, albeit to a lesser extent than school districts.

That's why it's so important to address local government spending now, not during the next budget cycle.