Lawrence residents have found themselves in the bottom half when it comes to wages and other income, according to a federal study released Wednesday.

The growth of personal incomes in Lawrence was well below the national average in 2003 — the most recent year data is available — and was near the bottom of other Big 12 university cities, the report by the Bureau of Economic Analysis found. The city’s average personal income ranked 202nd out of 360 metro areas.

Lawrence resident Shirley Domer is not an economist, but she said she thought the reason behind the slow growth rate was simple to comprehend: The state’s budget is a mess, and Lawrence is still largely a government town.

“My friends at the university tell me that things aren’t going well up there salarywise,” said Domer, who is retired from Kansas University. “Given how large the university is in our economy, it is easy to understand why we didn’t see more growth.”

Lawrence incomes grew by a stagnant 0.9 percent in 2003, failing to keep up with the rate of inflation and trailing the national growth rate of 2.1 percent.

Joshua Rosenbloom, director of the Center for Economic and Business Analysis at Kansas University, is an economist. He said Domer’s explanation probably was a good one.

But he said the numbers from the most recent report shouldn’t necessarily cause alarm.

“You have to look at these things in the longer run,” Rosenbloom said.

But economists said the latest report would be troubling if it signaled the beginning of a trend. The report also could spell trouble for the overall Kansas economy because it found that income growth in Wichita and Topeka was well below average. Wichita incomes grew by 0.6 percent, while Topeka was one of only five metro areas in the country that experienced a decline, dropping by 0.1 percent.

Jamie Ledet, a Kansas university graduate teaching assistant, standing, and her students in a public speaking class work on an assignment outside Stauffer-Flint Hall on the KU campus. A federal study has found relatively stagnant personal incomes in Lawrence. Some people partially attribute the problem to the lack of growth in salaries at KU.

Lawrence, Topeka and Wichita also were among only 39 metro areas that failed to have total personal income grow at a rate greater than or equal to inflation, which was 1.9 percent in 2003.

“If your income is not going up by the rate of inflation, you are losing ground in terms of real dollars,” said Sean Tomb, senior research analyst at Kansas Inc., a Topeka-based economic think tank. “I think (state leaders) should definitely be concerned, and it is something they should look at. But I would be hesitant to say it is the only catch-all variable to look at.”

Lynn Parman, vice president of economic development for the Lawrence Chamber of Commerce, said she did not believe the number was evidence that the area economy was in trouble. She said the slow growth likely was a result of state budget cuts and the economic aftermath of 9-11.

“In terms of prospect for business expansion, we’re seeing more activity than we ever did before Sept. 11,” Parman said. “I think we’ll see those (income) numbers continue to improve the further away we get from 9-11.”

Kathy Moellenberndt, vice president and director of economic development for the Topeka Chamber of Commerce, said the number for her city also did not correspond with what she had seen of Topeka’s economy.

6News video: Lawrence wages below average Bureau of Economic Analysis: Metropolitan area personal and per capita income in 2003 (.pdf) Job market welcoming for soon-to-be KU grads (04-26-05) Taxpayers in Kansas bear bigger burden, census shows (04-23-05)

“What I would say is that it is one year, several years ago, and we’re being very aggressive in making some positive headway over here,” Moellenberndt said.

Domer, the Lawrence retiree, said she also wasn’t convinced the numbers spelled doom and gloom for the city. She spends part of the year living in Lexington, Ky. She said Lawrence’s economy appeared to be better than many of those she had seen in that area.

“It definitely feels different in Lexington,” Domer said. “If you want to see poverty, go to Kentucky.”

Rosenbloom said there was evidence that Lawrence incomes were nearly as healthy as they’d ever been. He said Lawrence’s per capita personal income was about 85 percent of the national average, a healthy number considering that cost of living is less in the Midwest than many places on both coasts. That 85 percent level is near the high of 87 percent, reached in both 2002 and 1977. It also is well above the historic low of about 75 percent in 1990.