Construction costs generally go up, not down, over time. Therefore, the county commissioners’ discussion about alleviating the serious space crunch at the courthouse and government center is not premature.

However, what option eventually is pursued must be in the best interests of taxpayers, even if that means renting space instead of new construction.

The county is not mandated to centralize all county operations, though efficiency usually supports consolidating offices.

With many county property owners facing increasing tax pressures on the school district and municipal fronts, the county must not unnecessarily add to that burden.

But if new construction is the most feasible and cost-effective way to address the current space issues, county taxpayers should not frown on a decision by county leaders in the months ahead to move the issue beyond the talking stage, rather than waiting for “better times.”

From the new-construction vantage point at least, there probably won’t be better times.

County employees should not have to work in cramped quarters or in spaces that never were intended to serve as an office — and that do not provide the privacy some government functions require.

But county leaders must be practical about what taxpayers can afford amid the options of renting space, or building a new office structure on land that formerly housed the county prison.

Fortunately, there are two circumstances — and probably a third — in the county’s favor regarding new construction.

First, the county is scheduled to pay off the remaining debt on the government center next year, freeing up money for debt service on a new structure.

Second, barring changes from Harrisburg, part of the cost of a new building would be paid by the state if human services were moved there — and that apparently is the intent.

It’s state policy to fund a percentage of utility costs as well as a portion of mortgage payments for buildings housing county human services that are mandated by the state.

The third factor giving an edge to the new-construction option would be no further need to rent office space in the tier parking garage for adult probation services. That would save the county approximately $97,000 annually — money that, like the current government center mortgage payment, could be allocated to paying a new-building mortgage.

However, Commissioner Dale Pinkerton was correct when he stressed that a new building would depend on county finances. “We do it on the budget we can afford,” he said.

First and foremost, county taxpayers must be considered.

Some county property owners might wonder whether the county simply has hired too many additional workers over the years and whether the county could cut staffing, and thus the need for more space.

That’s an issue for discussion, with the commissioners’ seats up for grabs in this year’s elections.

At the same time, it must be acknowledged that governmental functions have increased in size and scope over the years, and it can even be asked whether the county government employment numbers are too conservative in some areas.

The county’s space problem represents a challenge for county leaders but, because of increasing construction costs, delaying a decision on how to proceed would only work against the best interests of the taxpayers in the long run.