More city budget cuts may be on the way after commissioners received news that 2007 sales tax numbers were essentially flat.
A new city report showed that sales tax collections in 2007 grew by 0.9 percent in Lawrence. That was about $1 million less than commissioners had budgeted for, but more importantly, the numbers created concern that 2008 collections also will be disappointing.
"I saw the numbers and found them disturbing," City Commissioner Mike Dever said.
For the city to meet its projections in 2008, sales tax collections will have to increase by 3.1 percent over their 2007 levels. That may be expecting too much because Lawrence sales tax growth since 2001 has averaged 2.3 percent a year. The last time sales tax collections grew more than 3 percent was in 2005.
"I think we're going to have to reduce our expenditures somewhere," Dever said. "I think we'll have to start discussing it in the next few weeks."
Commissioners last year also had to make midyear adjustments to spending after it became obvious that 2007 sales tax collections would not meet projections. During that round of budget cutting, commissioners imposed across-the-board decreases in funding for social service agencies and other outside groups that receive city funding. They also cut internally.
Both Dever and City Commissioner Mike Amyx stopped short of saying that they would target outside agencies this year, but also did not rule it out.
City Manager David Corliss agreed with commissioners that revenues likely won't meet projections in 2008. Corliss said his staff's projections are falling short mainly because the national economy has not improved as much as was expected when the projections were made last summer.
Commissioners, however, at the time were questioned about whether the projections were too optimistic. County commissioners, for example, built their 2008 budget on a more conservative projection of 1.5 percent growth in sales tax collections.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
Ragingbear (anonymous) says…
You could try doing things like NOT building roundabouts.
458casul (anonymous) says…
start with the planning dept there never there anyway.They have no accountability for what they do, all other deptments do have to report what they do.Why would it take 8 weeks to get a go ahead for a remodel permit...because there never there
458casul (anonymous) says…
if a company is slow they layoff why cant the city do the same
inatux (anonymous) says…
"The council has the support of the community."
Not to be petty, but it's a commission, not a council.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Vacant and unimproved land adds nothing to the cost of community services.
Forget the construction of the $88 million sewage treatment plant,which in and of itself increases the cost of community services. Lawrence cannot maintain its' existing
resources/infrastructure.
What will happen once a new sewage treatment plant is constructed....projects that will require millions upon millions of tax dollars for years and years which will require further tax increases.
What follows the sewage treatment plant:
* Additional city staffing and equipment
* water and sewer lines
* streets and repairs
*houses
*public schools
* fire stations
* law enforcement manpower
*sidewalks
* snow removal
* bike trails and cross walks
* Traffic signals
* Traffic calming
* Strip Malls
* Expensive Flood Control
* Vacant land adds nothing to the cost of community services.
*In general increases the cost of community services to all taxpayers.
Bottom line put this project in the back of the closet forever and spend the money more wisely. And do not spend $8 million on new waterlines in North and Southeast Lawrence. Again Lawrence cannot afford what we have.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Instead spend the $88 million on these projects listed instead of raising sales taxes. What $ 88 million or less might accomplish?
Investing in the following existing infrastructure is a dependable economic growth plan which pays back and is good for business.
Invest in the following existing infrastructure instead of allowing it to become a victim of further neglect for which I offer suggestions:
*Rehab streets and sidewalks in:
Downtown
Old west Lawrence
Old East Lawrence
Barker
Brookcreek
North Lawrence
Oread
*Develop an exciting public transportation plan complete with an appropriate maintenance facility.
*Build a $17.5 million dollar library across the street from the New Hampshire parking garage(saves $10 million) and makes a failed T.I.F. parking garage project somewhat successful.
*Convert the existing library building into a convention center which saves millions and millions over any new plan and prevents another T.I.F. project funding a private profit making venture. When library shelves and office space is removed there is a huge space. Lawrence does not need an extravagant new building. It could easily house two large meeting spaces and two small. Clean it up, remodel, landscape, landscape,landscape and Lawrence is set to go. T.I.F. projects eat up public school tax dollars.
*Provide initial funding for development of an economic growth team in city hall. Taxpayers need the transparency that city hall would provide. Cut or reduce funding to the Chamber of Commerce.
*Build the east Lawrence hike and bike trail
Investing in existing infrastructure is a dependable economic growth plan which pays back and is good for business.
Stain (anonymous) says…
I have an idea. Stop giving tax revenues away to subsidize the projects of the commissioners' developer friends.
monkeyhawk (anonymous) says…
CC:
First, ignore the obstructionists. They are not your constituents and will never support anything you do unless it is free.
Then, you could paste a picture of Rundle on your refrigerator as an example of how careless spending and debt can lead to your downfall, too.
BigPrune (anonymous) says…
Why would a retailer want to come to Lawrence? The amount of time it takes to put in one store in Lawrence is the same amount of time it takes to put in 10 stores in 10 other communities.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Revolts Against Sprawl:
http://www.google.com/search?q=Commun...
Communities Against Big Box Retail Centers
http://www.google.com/search?q=Commun...
BigPrune (anonymous) says…
Yes Mr. Merrill, your advocacy is why Lawrence is suffering.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Donovan Scruggs, Ocean Springs director of community development and planning, said the city's current budget. crunch can be tied directly to infrastructure expenses needed to serve new housing developments.
"If residential growth paid for itself and was financially positive, we would not be in a budget crunch," Scruggs said. "But with increased numbers of houses you have increased demand on services, and historically the funding of revenues generated by single-family housing does not pay for the services, they require from a municipality."
Scruggs said there have been two studies done on impact fees. One 100-page study was on services for police and fire protection, administration and parks. A second study was done on infrastructure related impacts on roads, water and water.
The current proposal calls for the fees to be collected separately.
"We want. to make sure we tie the fees as closely as possible to when the demand is being generated," Scruggs said. "Water and sewer fees would be collected when the subdivision is constructed. Services more related to occupancy and homes being constructed would be collected later. For example, no one will have a need for a park until there are kids in that neighborhood."
While developers pay for onsite water, sewer and road infrastructure, Scruggs said it is costly to pay for offsite upgrades needed, such as enlarging lift stations and raising water towers.
"Now if we have to upgrade a lift station, it is paid for by the general fund revenue paid by each taxpayer in the city," Scruggs said. "Someone on the west side of town would have to pay for subsidizing the growth in demand caused by the development in the east part of town."
The eastern part of town is where the greatest residential growth is being seen. Scruggs said there has been so much growth in recent years that the city has to elevate its water towers to keep pressure at adequate levels. "That was a direct result caused by the growth," he said.
Scruggs said that impact fees are legal if they are done properly.
"Madison's impact fee program had problems," Scruggs said. "Ours will not have those problems. It can be done right."
Ocean Springs had 120 homes constructed in 2000, 90 in 2001 and is on track to have 120 homes constructed in 2002. If impact fees had been collected on the 310 homes built in three years, the city would have extra revenues of about $2.1 million.
In order for the city to have orderly growth, developers need to be responsible for a certain amount of the infrastructure. Most builders understand impact fees are for a purpose that improves their development."
458casul (anonymous) says…
merrill you are so bullsh.it and you cant back it up
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…
snap writes:
marioni
,
did
you
have
Great
Danish
for
breakfast
this
morning
?
BTW, still having a wonderful internet life.
Godot (anonymous) says…
Mortgage lenders are now redlining areas where home prices are in decline, or are at risk of declining, and requiring larger downpayments for new loans made there.
The commissioners need to cut to the bare bone and make this city a shining beacon of fiscal responsibility and low taxes. If not, we will see conditions that make it extremely difficult for first time homeowners to buy in Lawrence.
gccs14r (anonymous) says…
If the City cut the sales tax rate by 1%, that would pull customers from Topeka and JoCo. That would only be worthwhile if sales revenue went up enough to make up the shortfall.
justfornow (anonymous) says…
Hey plumber, have you ever been on the back of a trash truck when the temp is -14 degrees, would you want to? Those guys work harder then anyone else in the city. Leave them alone.
tbeartron (anonymous) says…
Want income? Have the police monitor the school zones for people who park in the "No Parking" sides of the street and give out tickets. Where I live that would be 20-30 a DAY!!
damnocracy (anonymous) says…
hawkwhowon'tnamenames wrote:
"The city employees need to have a wage freeze. And then thru attrition role back the staff and payroll."
So let me get this straight. Every Tom, Dick, & Harry in this city, and every builder in this city has their hands out wanting more and more after they were already given everything and then some under the past two commissions.
Library projects, sidewalks, roundabout, schools, sewer plants, Van-Go Arts, Eagle Bend, the empTy bus, Lawrence Community Shelter, Salvation Army, Chamber of Commerce...on and on and on...
...and as always your solution is "screw the employees." Now, we know how you feel about Corliss, but tell us, who else needs to go. Be a big boy for once and give us specific names and departments. Tell us, since you know so much like where people live and how much they make.
Don't say, "fire the janitors at South because that place will be a gararge someday" or whatever. Say, "The city should fire John Doe in the planning department because..."and give us a reason. Let us know who should be fired, why they should be fired, and how that benefits the services we need provided to us.
Let us know why the city, county, and school district employees--all who probably get paid less for lower level jobs than their counterparts in surrounding counties, should get stiffed again. From what I've read in the paper, they've already bitten the bullet--increased health insurance, prescription costs, no dental other than a cleaning, no raises last year except the so-called "2% cost of living" raise eaten by the increases in their costs.
damnocracy (anonymous) says…
So the hard working folks picking up the trash, paving the roads, Police Officers, Fire Medial personel, service crews who provide us water, clerks who spend all day listening to citizens whine. From what I've heard, city jobs have high turn over because of better pay in surrounding communities for the same job or in the private sector.
So let's see, you want to get rid of Corliss--but he would be replaced. Hmm, so what gives? Give us names, departments, and reason.
You seem to know a lot of city employees--where they live, their marital status, income level. etc...back up your position and tell us who needs to go. We all want to know.
How about it folks---anyone and everyone can provide their input. Who should get the ax and why? How will it benefit us and provide us with better service if this person is kicked to the curb? Give us names & department they work in, you know "Sally Doe, the old lady at the front desk of the Fire Med building downtown."
Everyone wants to knock the city, county, and school district employees. Hey, most of these people are our neighbors and work for crap salaries in jobs that are taken for granted. I'm not talking about the high level folks, but the ones who actually work and come into contact with the public!!!
I can't name a single of job these folks do that I would ever want to do...and never would for the crap they have to deal with from the public and the salaries they make compared what they would make working for Hallmark, a private builder/plumber/cement contractor/landscaping company, etc...
So, open floor folks...give us names, department, and reasons of city, county, school district employees who should go before our city goes to that warm place down below. Don't be boring and list Corliss, the two assistant city managers. Old news.
What department heads, principals, supervisors, work crew, clerks, teachers, etc...must go? Let us know!
samsnewplace (anonymous) says…
Godot 9:48pmThe commissioners need to cut to the bare bone and make this city a shining beacon of fiscal responsibility and low taxes. If not, we will see conditions that make it extremely difficult for first time homeowners to buy in Lawrence
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Do you honestly think a young couple just starting out has a snowballs chance of buying a house in Lawrence? .That is a joke.