Corliss turns down raise / LJWorld.com

Archive for Thursday, January 31, 2008

City manager cites fiscal situation in rejecting pay increase

In a sign of the city's fiscal woes, City Manager David Corliss turned down a raise in his salary as part of his annual evaluation in October 2006. Corliss is pictured in his office at that time. The current fiscal status isn't any better.

By Chad Lawhorn

January 31, 2008

Corliss rejects raise, citing city's financial situation

Lawrence City Manager David Corliss says "no thanks" to a salary increase during his annual review today by city commissioners. Corliss says he didn't feel comfortable accepting a raise this year, given the city's tight financial times. Enlarge video

Reader poll

In a sign of the city's fiscal woes, City Manager David Corliss turned down a raise in his salary as part of his annual evaluation.

Mayor Sue Hack said commissioners agreed to give Corliss a raise on Thursday, but the second-year city manager declined to accept it.

"I thought to assist in driving home the message to our employees about the city's fiscal situation, it would be best to respectfully decline a salary increase," Corliss said.

Both Hack and Corliss declined to reveal how large of an increase in salary was offered to Corliss, who makes $130,000 per year. But commissioners - who met for about three hours in executive session - did express unanimous support for the job Corliss had done in leading the city's staff.

"We feel fortunate to have Dave Corliss as our city manager," Hack said.

Hack said that Corliss had done a good job of hiring quality staff members, and had made sure city commissioners were well informed on issues.

Keeping commissioners informed about the city's precarious financial position will be a top priority for Corliss in 2008, commissioners said. Corliss said he would be keeping a close eye on the city's sales tax collections and other revenue sources. He said he was concerned that the slowing economy would cause the city's 2008 revenue to come in less than projected.

"Revenues are not going to be where we want them to be this year," Corliss said. "We're already beginning to make adjustments."

Corliss said he and his staff of managers were closely reviewing purchase orders from departments. He also is looking at open city positions and deciding whether they need to be filled immediately. For example, Corliss said he has decided to not advertise for a new Parks and Recreation director in 2008. Instead, acting director Ernie Shaw will continue in the interim role for the rest of the year.

Corliss said he had not yet ordered layoffs of existing staff members, but he would not rule that possibility out.

"We may end up at that point," Corliss said. "We'll just have to see."

Commissioners also directed Corliss to work on ways to bolster economic development and to improve trust levels between the city and its residents. Commissioners were heavily criticized in the latter part of 2007 for not being transparent enough when offering a package of economic development incentives to a startup pharmaceuticals company.

Corliss said city staff would "redouble" efforts in providing information to the public ahead of decisions by commissioners, and would stress the importance and value of public comment.

Corliss was hired in September 2006 to become the city's manager. He had served as the city's interim city manager for several months in 2006, while the city conducted a nationwide search to fill the position. He previously had served 16 years on the city's management staff, primarily as assistant city manager and director of legal services.

Discussion

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.

1 February 2008
at 7:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

I would rather see Dave Corliss get a raise and city staffers keep their jobs which likely could happen if the city commissioners would stop increasing the cost of community services by promoting projects that do NOT increase the over all tax revenue wealth of the community.

Expanding the tax base with tons of new housing is still having our revenue cookie jar coming up short. Empty space cost taxpayers nothing. Filling in empty space with the wrong idea has only increased the cost of living.

The following example will not increase the wealth of the community:
Following the construction of the $88 million sewage treatment plant,which in and of itself increases the cost of community services, will be more tax increasing projects:
* water and sewer lines
* streets and repairs
*houses
*public schools
*more public bus routes
* fire stations
* law enforcement manpower
*sidewalks
* snow removal
* bike trails and cross walks
* Traffic signals
* Traffic calming
* developers requesting more tax dollar assistance(new infrastructure) for their
warehouses and retail strip malls.
*In general increases the cost of community services to all taxpayers.

======================
What could $ 88 million or less accomplish? Invest in exisiting infrastructure instead of allowing it to go hell due to negligence. Revitalizing existing resources does not add more to the long term maintenance bill.

*Repair streets and sidewalks in:
Downtown
Old west Lawrence
Old East Lawrence
Barker
Brookcreek
North Lawrence
Oread

*Build a $17.5 million dollar library across the street from the New Hampshire parking garage(saves 10 million)

*Convert the existing library building into a convention center which could save millions upon millions and protect taxpayers from another TIF project. When library shelves and office space is removed there is a huge space. Lawrence does not need an extravagant building. Clean it up,do some remodel and landscape,landscape,landscape… we're set to go. Two large meeting spaces(one downstairs) and two existing smaller places in the current space. Using an existing resource to generate new economic growth makes dollars and sense.

*Provide development funding for a economic growth team in city hall. Apparently the Chamber of Commerce is not staffed accordingly. There is more transparency in City hall.

*Build the east Lawrence hike and bike trail

*Develop an exciting public transporation system accompanied with an appropriate maintenance facility.

Investing in existing infrastructure pays back and is good for business.
1 February 2008
at 7:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

cg22165 (Anonymous) says…

Somebody give him a headset; that thing on the phone is so 70s.
1 February 2008
at 7:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

The city manager and city planners respond to the will of the city commissioners and would continue to do so under any other circumstances. The big financial problems lay at the feet of city commissioners. They are the ones who chose to implement the strict policy of NOT using Economic Impact Studies to measure the potential outcome of their decisions some years ago.

Just because some of our local movers and shakers made tons of money turning over real estate is no indication they know how to grow and financially support a community. At this junction it is fair to say that the Chamber of Commerce/real estate lobby made some serious miscalculations. Can't blame that on Dave Corliss.
1 February 2008
at 8:24 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

redmoonrising (Anonymous) says…

Hey, give the guy a little credit. Instead of bashing the commissioners, the photo of him on the phone, etc., consider that at least one person is trying. He's only one man and maybe he isn't perfect but how many people do you know who would turn down a raise right now, even if they were making $130,000. Don't even a few thousand dollars help? And who knows, maybe some others will follow his example, saving even more. I agree that there is a lot of waste but change has to start somewhere.

A couple of questions about Merrill's suggestion of turning the current library into a convention center. Why would you put a convention center in a building with so little parking? Wouldn't it generate more cars than the library? I don't use the library already because of its downtown location and lack or parking.
1 February 2008
at 8:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

bangaranggerg (Anonymous) says…

After reading this if I were Freenet I wouldn't want the city to cosign my loan sounds like their credit rating is terrible.
1 February 2008
at 8:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

newsreader (Anonymous) says…

Can't the poor man just get a decent speakerphone? Sad….
1 February 2008
at 9:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

unite2revolt (Anonymous) says…

Not sure, but it looks like he might be ordering lunch. He really needs to make better use of those assistants, lol.

1 February 2008
at 1:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

OrangeCat5 (Anonymous) says…

I think it's great that he refused the raise. He's already paid plenty. Wildgen never refused $$, no matter what shape the City was in. There are lots of City workers (especially those with physical jobs) that deserve a raise.
1 February 2008
at 7:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

George_Braziller (Anonymous) says…

cg22165 (Anonymous) says:
Somebody give him a headset; that thing on the phone is so 70s.
–––––––––––––––––––––-
Oh, the '70s. That's SO horrible. Headsets don't work for everyone in their job. I'd rather see that than a stupid bluetooth. They always look like there's a large roach sucking out the person's brain.
1 February 2008
at 10:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

damnocracy (Anonymous) says…

I'll try not to be redundent since the original story came out yesterday and I posted a response to it there: http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/jan…

but…

I heard Mayor Hack (alias Mrs. Giggles during commission meetings) on KLWN. She commend Dave Corliss for setting an “example” by turning down the raise the commission offered him—and then said there is “no way” the city can afford to offer other city employees a raise. Huh?

According to friends of mine who work for the city, that would be two years in a row with not even a raise to cover their increased property taxes, their increased health insurance, and increase prescription costs.

Why is that Mayor Hack? The money issues have little if anything to do with the work done by mid-level to low-level city employees, and everything to do with decisions made on the 4th Floor of city hall and in the commission meetings.

Also, why are there no quality journalists who know how to ask a follow-up question?

If I were a journalist (and perhpas I am, hehe), I certainly would have asked Mayor Hack why she sounded so dissapointed that Corliss shunned his raise, yet so quick to add that there is no way the commissioin can offer other city employees a raise.

Police officers, Fire & Med workers, street maintence folks, billing department folks, Parks & Rec folks, water treatment folks—these people work jobs that most of us would never take for caca hourly wages.

Would you want to work on the roads or picking up trash in swealtering heat or frigidly cold weather? How about working the night shift as a police officer, knowing the next call down to Last Call might be the last call they ever take? Would you work as an IT for a third of the going rate of private companies in Lawrence? Would you enjoy listening to folks scream about their water bill being a couple of dollars higher this month than it was last month (a result of the commissioners raising rates)? Anyone for mowing medians? Who in our community want these jobs for lousy pay?

The answer, of course, is few. I wouldn't, and I encourage those who work for the city and county to get out, enjoy life, and quick taking the fall for those truly responsible for the crisis the city is in. And who is responsible?

Simple: The city commission—past and present, and the community whiners. They've turned Lawrence into an entitlement community. Everyone at both ends of the social spectrum feel entitled in this town. The Kirk McClures, the socialists, the Mark Buhlers, the homeless, the Doug Comptons, Hilda Enoch, the Gene Fritzels, the golfers, the David Holroyds, the environmentalists, the Richard Hecklers, Agnes T. Frog, Dennis Steffes, lawsuits and attorney fees, Loring Henderson, Van-Go Arts, etc..

You see, you can't please 'em all, and for far too long the only ones the commission has been a-pleasin' (or annoyin')are those at the far ends. Who pays? The rest of us.
1 February 2008
at 10:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

texburgh (Anonymous) says…

Corliss is an attorney. He should have stopped the illegal meeting on Deciphera. Would you give a bonus or a raise to an attorney who didn't have the sense to keep you legal?

The tragedy here is that Hack and the Illegals made the offer!
2 February 2008
at 1:20 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Jeremy (Anonymous) says…

Anyone out there besides Corliss earn an average of $75.00 per hour wages and benefits?

Don't get me wrong, he is the CEO of a multi-million dollar corporation, but a 2-3% raise means nothing to his lifestyle.

He's posturing to cut wages and benefits of city workers. Cut city waste, not salaries!!!