Johnson County has legitimate public safety needs. But an antiquated state law has hamstrung county officials, resulting in a flawed plan to pay for a larger jail, new juvenile services complex and crime lab.

Voters should reject the permanent quarter-cent sales tax on the Aug. 5 ballot.

The trouble with the plan is the state law that requires one-third of the tax proceeds to be distributed to area cities. So for the county to raise $20 million a year, taxpayers must kick in another $10 million for the cities.

Some cities say they would also spend their share of the money on public safety, but they unfortunately would be under no legal obligation to do so. And some cities have failed to give voters detailed plans for spending the money.

This inefficient funding plan is too much to ask of taxpayers, particularly in tight financial times. Over a decade, the “excess” tax dollars for cities would reach an indefensible $100 million.

We regret that a rejection at the polls would create problems for the county as it proceeds to expand the jail and provide other important community services.

To their credit, county officials have long complained about the unfairness of cities piggybacking on the county’s sales-tax revenues. Unfortunately, the state Legislature has refused to change the law.

If the sales tax is defeated, the county should redouble its efforts to change the law. City officials ought to support rather than fight those efforts, keeping in mind that the county provides mental health services, a successful library system and housing for city prisoners.

Voters previously approved a sales tax for the schools in the county in 2002 and 2005. The cities also received millions of dollars during that time.

However, those tax proposals were limited to three years. The tax on the Aug. 5 ballot would be permanent, and this would reduce the county’s options in the future.

When the state under-funded schools, county leaders and residents helped protect education. Now it’s time for the cities to help the county meet its public safety needs.

If this tax is defeated, the county’s options would include:

 Cut less essential programs in its $700 million-plus annual budget to free up funds for high-priority public safety projects.

 Increase the property tax by a small amount, keeping in mind the county has a relatively low tax rate for this area.

 Give voters a shorter sales-tax plan that would construct the public-safety facilities, with the cities agreeing to dedicate their funds to the county’s projects as well.

In recent months, the weak economy has forced many Johnson County residents and businesses to re-evaluate how they spend their money. In tight times, voters should not be expected to support raising more tax money than necessary.