New residential sidewalks are sort of a mixed blessing for local property owners.

As part of Tuesday’s Lawrence City Commission agenda, the Lawrence Public Works Department is proposing about $150,000 in new sidewalk construction for this year. The three projects on the list are located on the south side of Sixth Street from Rockledge Drive to Schwarz Road, the north side of Ninth Street from Sunset Drive to Iowa Street and the south side of Trail Road from Lawrence Avenue to Rockfence Place.

These projects were chosen for a variety of reasons, including that the sidewalks would enhance pedestrian safety on collector or arterial streets in the city. All of the sidewalks will be built on public right of way at city expense, but maintaining those sidewalks will be the responsibility of the adjacent property owners, many of them, in this case, residential property owners.

Interestingly, a report that accompanies the sidewalk construction proposal discusses the city’s sidewalk maintenance program. Because of the poor condition of many residential sidewalks, the city is focusing on working with property owners to make the necessary repairs.

The beginning of the maintenance report cites the “public policy” involved. It says: “Sidewalks are community assets. They provide safe routes for pedestrian traffic, foster citywide walkability and enhance neighborhoods. Community accessibility and safety mandate repair of damaged or defective sidewalks.”

Clearly, the city sees properly maintained sidewalks as a public service, albeit a service the city is unwilling or – more likely, in this case – unable to pay for. Yet the city now is making a new group of property owners the victims of an unfunded mandate. They will be responsible for the expense of maintaining sidewalks that the city has decided to build adjacent to their property. Yippee!

These sidewalks are more of a benefit to other pedestrians than they are to the property owners that must keep them maintained and clear of snow and ice. Presumably, a sidewalk wouldn’t increase their property values, but if it did, they would be responsible for paying the increased taxes. In most cases, property owners probably would think the best place for a sidewalk is directly across the street from their home where they can walk on it but not have to take care of it.

The new sidewalk proposal once again points out the faulty reasoning of making private property owners maintain and/or replace crumbling public sidewalks. The city is seeking outside funding from several sources for sidewalk projects. When possible, wouldn’t it be better to use those funds to offset the cost of expensive repairs rather than building new sidewalks for someone else to maintain?

Unfunded federal mandates are a common topic of derision by local officials. They should realize that they are doing essentially the same thing by passing the public responsibility of pedestrian sidewalks on to private property owners.