Over the past few weeks, Gov. Jay Nixon and top leaders from the Missouri Legislature have been going through the annual process of coming up with what's called the "consensus revenue estimate" — how much money state government will have to spend next year.

This is the first step in a very open, but often divisive, process that culminates in what generally is a bipartisan state budget.

The governor, a Democrat, will present his proposal to the Legislature, controlled by Republicans, who will pass their version. Mr. Nixon then will have the opportunity to make final cuts, if necessary, to make sure the budget balances.

It's a good process. And it's a model that St. Louis County Executive Charlie Dooley should consider if he expects county residents to take him seriously.

Instead of leading a fair-minded discussion about revenue estimates and budget priorities, Mr. Dooley, a Democrat, spent the past couple of months crying wolf.

In August, as a prelude to presenting the budget, he told the County Council that revenue was $10 million behind last year's pace. To give police officers and other employees a much-needed raise, he said, there would need to be a tax increase. Otherwise, Mr. Dooley said, he would have no choice but to fire cops.

County Council Chairman Steve Stenger, a Democrat, objected. Mr. Stenger pointed to county documents that showed Mr. Dooley's numbers were wrong. Other council members followed Mr. Stenger's lead.

Mr. Dooley then changed his numbers. Twice.

Later, he apologized for the whole thing.

Then, in November, he submitted a new budget that also predicted calamity. He suggested that, once again, the county staff's proposed budget would have to be cut by $10 million.

This time Mr. Dooley cried WOLF! in capital letters, suggesting closing dozens of parks, laying off employees (though none from his own staff) and closing the West County satellite office.

County residents went nuts. The council stood firm and did the unthinkable. Horror of horrors, it formed a budget committee seeking actual facts.

Mr. Dooley again retreated, and now we're back where we started.

There's not really much of a budget problem. To the extent that it exists, it can be solved by thoughtful cuts, not dramatic ones intended to stir fear in the public. There will be no police officer layoffs or closed or sold-off parks.

The moral of this fable is an easy one: Numbers don't lie.

Here's what should happen going forward, regardless of who sits in the county executive's chair: The county council should be involved in the budget process from the beginning.

There is no reason the county executive and the council chairman couldn't follow the state process and agree on a revenue estimate from the beginning.

There is no reason — none at all — why the council shouldn't have a standing budget committee that does what it did over the past couple of months: Ask tough questions and force the county executive to back up his assertions and projections.

Mr. Dooley may pine for the days when the county was booming and the county executive, be it a Democrat like Buzz Westfall or a Republican like Gene McNary, would offer his ring to be kissed and council members would genuflect.

But those days, like the wolf in Aesop's tale, are gone.