In an effort to cut a tight budget, city commissioners are going to take a hard look at whether it takes about 1,200 city employees to provide basic services to the community.
Mayor Mike Dever asked staff members at Tuesday evening's meeting to look at how Lawrence's employee totals stack up to other cities similar in size and services.
Dever specifically mentioned examining whether new technology could produce labor savings in the water and sewer department and trash collection division of the city.
Talk did not turn to layoffs, but Dever said he was interested in examining reductions of the city's work force through attrition and retirement.
"I'm asking these type of questions because I feel like that is what I was asked to do when I was elected," Dever said.
Tuesday's meeting represented the first time commissioners had an opportunity to discuss City Manager David Corliss' recommended budget.
Employee totals were a significant part of the discussion. Several commissioners expressed reservations with the one part of the budget that recommends adding positions to the city's payroll.
Commissioners said they wanted more time to consider a proposal that would add two new city inspectors to expand the city's rental registration program. The expansion would require all rental units at least 50 years old to undergo a basic life and safety inspection.
Commissioner Sue Hack said she can see potential benefits to the program, but indicated she may want to put the decision off until after the budget.
"I'm feeling like I may not have had as much time to think this through as I would like," Hack said.
The city budget, as proposed by Corliss, already cuts 15 city positions that currently are vacant. Those positions include a planner, zoning enforcement officers, a municipal court clerk, and five positions within parks and recreation.
Commissioners also addressed major capital improvements included in the budget. Two projects that Corliss recommended be funded faced questions Tuesday.
Approximately $1.3 million to make improvements to the Carnegie Library building at Ninth and Vermont streets, and about $1 million to help the school district rebuild the tennis center near Lawrence High School were mentioned by Commissioner Mike Amyx as projects that perhaps could be cut from the budget.
Overall, Corliss' recommended budget would reduce the property tax mill levy by one-tenth of a mill, but the budget relies heavily on voters approving in November two new sales taxes that total a half-percent. One sales tax would provide funding for the city's public transit system, while the other would provide increased funding for infrastructure projects such as street maintenance.
Commissioners will have a study session to dive deeper into the budget at 3 p.m. Monday at City Hall.
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.
merrill (anonymous) says…
If property taxes decrease what increases?
merrill (anonymous) says…
Recently I've read that city governments can provide repairs and services for less tax dollars than turning matters over to private contractors. Privatization thinking is over rated as I believe contractors see governments as an easy tap consequently they all bid high. Which means a low bid is still a high bid. Do we ever see a city price vs private contractors bids?
xbusguy (chris Ogle) says…
Thank you City Commissioners. Just about every home, and business in Lawrence has cut something to stay in the black. The City of Lawrence needs to do the same.Thanks again for showing fiscal responsiblity.
BigPrune (anonymous) says…
I'm going to request that Jimmy Carter and his entourage come to Lawrence to monitor the sales tax election, to be assured everything is above board.
formerlawres (anonymous) says…
I would hope someone would look at all of the "Supervisors" that are needed to run the City. When I worked there, I had 4 supervisors. Why are so many needed, if the City would cut a few $50-60,000 a year supervisors, there would not be such a money problem and there would not be a lower level employee that has to report to so many "bosses"!! Just my two cents worth.
xbusguy (chris Ogle) says…
Right-On formerlawres...... we hav too many wheels and not enough spokes.
formerlawres (anonymous) says…
exactly, i hope the City examines this situation instead of letting the lower level employees go.
autie (anonymous) says…
Hey barry, the guys on the shovels watching the backhoe usually find it better to not be in the hole while the backhoe is digging. Merrill has an excellent point about out sourcing. My city even went to the extent of buying a paver and we do are own major street resurfacing annually instead of paying private contractors..it saves the city thousands over the long term and we get better work.
BigPrune (anonymous) says…
Is it true the City has more supervisors than actual workers?
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
merrill (Anonymous) says: "Recently I've read that city governments can provide repairs and services for less tax dollars than turning matters over to private contractors."Where did you read that? The only time I have seen that is when the government did not have to follow the same rules and regulations that they impose on private companies. Anyway, provide a link, in the past you have been really good about that Richard. No need to cut and paste the entire article, just a link will do.merrill (Anonymous) says: "Privatization thinking is over rated as I believe contractors see governments as an easy tap consequently they all bid high."Again beliefs but no data or link? Strange behavior for Richard II. In general putting work out on competitive bid results in lower overall costs for both governments and private businesses. Competitors that are more efficient or with more productive workers can bid less than the competition and still make money, and they do.
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
merrill (Anonymous) says: "If property taxes decrease what increases?"Disposable income of tens of thousands of Lawrence taxpayers. Are you that dense??
pace (anonymous) says…
Yoos should go into the round file.Scheduling should be adjusted to delete automatically generated overtime. Did we really get rid of the guy looking at reducing energy use?Departments do not communicate or cooperate with each other, a policy legacy from Wildgen. Coordinating and identifying duplicate or contradictory services would help $.There needs to be an audit of policy and procedures for costs. How many times does public works, especially santitation buy below a $1,000 materials that should go to bid? They routinely break up large purchases into more expensive small purchases so they can cater to friends or as personal power trips.
smitty (anonymous) says…
IF indeed the city manager and commission is negotiating a retirement settlement with OLIN due to an investigation/indictment by the feds, it would save many $$$$'s to not reward abuse of power and obstruction of justice with a large/expensive settlement for OLIN's retirement. Prosecute him as any other citizen. Why pay a large settlement if the man got caught doing his dirty blue wall of silence deeds? No settlement!! Maybe then we can afford to pay the honest blue collar workers if we rid ourselves of the under the city's dirty under the table negotiations for OLIN's illegal and incompetent career.
fu7il3 (anonymous) says…
Considering what I have read on LV, smitty, I figured you'd back off all this stuff a bit out of risk of landing YH back in jail.Way to stick to your guns, I guess.
simplyamazed (anonymous) says…
The department that needs close examination is the utilities department, especially in regards to the amount of managers and supervisors they have versus how many field workers they have doing the job. Something is seriously wrong there since DW took over. There have been too many longtime employees who have quit or was fired for various reasons in the last few years. I know cause I am one of those! There is definately too many big wheels and not enough workers in that group. The supervisors have managers and managers have more managers just to tell them what to do. There is also lots of nuputizim going on there as well. I was always confused as to who was my chain of command because there was too many in the chain. The good ole boy system and back stabbing is working overtime in that department.
smitty (anonymous) says…
Hawk, I was wondering the same thing. Where is the auditor on all this??? He's in a new costly position while the commission is looking to cut city blue collar workers. Let's see how our new auditor has saved the city money!!So are you(fu7il3) in favor of giving OLIN a large retirement settlement if he under investigation or indictment? Why not wait until the dust settles before our city authorities negotiate. Fire Olin first. Let him take us to court instead of the city's frequent settlements due to his management of the LPD and abuse of powers. What about Amyx's reply to my question of whether Olin and his staff are under investigation by an outside higher legal authority that is current and on going?Amyx replied that **IT** is being handled as a personnel issue by the city manager's office. I think that may be what the commission went into closed door negotiations over last night. I may not be correct since it is closed but I don't think so based on Amyx's reply..If this rumor (that I verified with a city commissioner) results in the city commission settling under the table with Olin for a large retirement package that costs all of us for years to come, how can you not contact your commissioners and ask questions and let your mind be known? Are you fearful that it will get the YH in legal problems? I didn't realize you were so supportive of YH?I am pretty sure Amyx wishes I had never gone to him with the question, though. Does his reply make him liable for YH's legal woes? Or maybe Amyx(it could have been any commissoner) exposed the fears of liablity of the city for failure to supervise and control Olin's illegal means of managing the LPD for many years.
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
Cut all department budgets (except fire and police) by 7%. Let department heads decide if they need to layoff personnel or find the reduction in a non-personnel expenditures. Quit trying to micromanage everything, you have department heads let them decide and take responsibility. Fire any of them that want to hire a consultant to help them decide. Let all City employees know that Lawrence spends $2,500,000.00/year (two-million-five-hundred-thousand dollars every year) year after year, with MV Transportation to run empTy buses all over Lawrence and that is why they are short of funds and are being laid off.
hairshoptalk (anonymous) says…
i personally think that everyone needs to know the FACTS before making these bashing comments. we all have a right to our opinion, but these comments are opinions without education!!! there are so many opinions on were to cut and who to cut but a lot of you have no idea how things are done around the city do you? all you can do is gripe about how things are done! these city workers are working there butts off for you and for what? just to say there not working hard enough!!! maybe we should cut your job!!!!!!!!!!!
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
hairshoptalk (Anonymous) says: "i personally think that everyone needs to know the FACTS before making these bashing comments. we all have a right to our opinion, but these comments are opinions without education!!!"Which opinion is without education? hairshoptalk (Anonymous) says: "there are so many opinions on were to cut and who to cut but a lot of you have no idea how things are done around the city do you? all you can do is gripe about how things are done!"I have a right to to have the City run in a manner that we are not threatened year after year with "if you want the roads paved we need an increase in taxes." All we are asking is pave the damn streets, keep up the infrastructure with the budget you have first!hairshoptalk (Anonymous) says: "these city workers are working there butts off for you and for what? just to say there not working hard enough!!! maybe we should cut your job!!!!!!!!!!!"I am saying everyone works their butts off, BUT it is only the city and state governments that never lay off workers. Why exactly are they exempt from the layoffs the rest of us face when the economy turns slows or the city resources are mismanaged?
lawrencian (anonymous) says…
With gas going up and up, I am personally glad to have the "T" -- it is the only public service, other than paved roads, that has any meaning for me currently! I just hope that the rest of you get the raises you probably deserve to afford the gas in your car... My boss sure isn't going to give me a raise just to cover that cost.
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
lawrencian (Anonymous) says: "With gas going up and up, I am personally glad to have the "T" - it is the only public service, other than paved roads, that has any meaning for me currently!"Would you be happy to pay the full cost of the bus service, currently $8.00/ride? How about half the costs, $4.00/ride? How about a quarter of the costs, $2.00/ride? If not then there will have to be cuts in the other single largest expenditure in Lawrence's budget, City Personnel. You see the taxpayers have to pay the cost for the gas for the empTy buses that in your words "go up and up" there is no free lunch. Why should you get a free ride? We elect City Commissioners to make tough decision with a duty to ALL the citizens of Lawrence, not just city employees or bus riders.So tell us all why your 50 cent bus ride is more important than other city employees jobs?
dagger (anonymous) says…
You guys are right that there are to many managers and or supervisors, unfortunatly they wont be the ones to go, it will be the people who actually work hard for their dollar. The ones that have risen to the top know who's back to scratch. If they didnt they wouldnt be there and their not about to stop now that talk of cutbacks is going around.
Yabut (anonymous) says…
Cutting employee positions by reducing services = efficiencyCutting employee positions while maintaining current service levels = inefficiencyI hope the city commission knows the difference.
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
Yabut (Anonymous) says: "Cutting employee positions by reducing services = efficiency. Cutting employee positions while maintaining current service levels = inefficiency. I hope the city commission knows the difference."Well I for one, for all my book learnin and years of experience have no idea what you are on about. Is this your own special mantra or is there some organized theory of management that is in vogue today.In either case please enlighten us all or did you read that on a bumper sticker somewhere?
twaldaisy (anonymous) says…
What about the folks that drive city owned vehicles home and to work (and supposedly not on personal business off hours)? Can these vehicles not be parked in a city lot and these employees drive to the lot and use the car during business hours only? I can understand utility trucks as there are emergencies after hours, but what about other city owned cars that you see parked in people driveways at night.
twaldaisy (anonymous) says…
ooooo or better yet...let these people drive to work and use the T during business hours or even better use the T to get to work, use the T for business during the day, and then ride the T home. That is quite efficient.
twaldaisy (anonymous) says…
Plus think of the examples these city employees that drive city vehicles will set!
KsTwister (anonymous) says…
If our city government was worth their salt they would have been doing this on a yearly basis long before now. And I believe that when they have said they were looking at making the departments more efficient in past years their eyes were closed.
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
KsTwister (Anonymous) says: "If our city government was worth their salt they would have been doing this on a yearly basis long before now."They haven't had too, they just threaten not to maintain streets or buildings (the stuff the should be a high priority and that most people want) unless they agree to more taxes. By putting everything else (green cemeteries, buses, wellness centers, Farmland toxic dump cleanup, domestic registries, fire sprinklers for downtown merchants, new cars, new trucks, pay increase, and on and on) ahead of maintaining the most basic infrastructure and services (roads, sidewalks, sewers, police, fire) they hope to blackmail the citizens into higher taxes. They are playing us for fools and if we agree they are right. Vote no on any tax increases and then vote against the incumbents. Repeat until we get responsible City management that can live within our budget.As to where the new auditor and public accounting and reports, that was just a sick joke as far as anyone can tell.
xbusguy (chris Ogle) says…
Just take a look at the age of our City Vehicles. Now look at the Private Business fleet.See anything different?
fluxx (anonymous) says…
Its true, way too many city employees. They always over staff the smallest tasks. In my buisness and most, we have learned to do more with less people.
hairshoptalk (anonymous) says…
sigmund you type a lot for not saying much!!!! and no not everyone works their butts off. as for the roads of Lawrence they would be done in a more timely fashion if they had more employees to help them! you want to knock the road crews and to think they are some of the few employees that are actually getting something done for the city, fixing damaged roads, clearing snow, flood safety, and more! maybe you can look into who really needs to gotten rid of instead of being small minded enough to blame the people who aren't serving to you personally!
ASBESTOS (anonymous) says…
City Employees (and most other governmental employees) are not too concerned about getting fired or terminated, and their work ethic, and productivity shows this lack of concern about keeping their jobs.In all forms of government we need to "weed the garden" and get rid fo the dead weight. We have way too many governmental employees "coasting" to "get in their 20" and then retire on our dime. These empolyees complain that they are not paid very well, but have benefits that make anyone in the private sector jealous.As for the "efficiency" we have workers that won't or can't work, managers that "don't" manage anything and "supervisors that "can't or won't" actually superivse. When "filling a pothole" it does not 5 people! Thjis is not rocket science, that is neither "filling the pothole" nor the oversight of the task.We also have way too many governmental employees "moonlighting" during their "work time" they are supposed to be working for us. They also use city and governmental property to do this "moonlighting during the workshift", again costing us double; paying these incompetents to not do the job they are supposed to be doing, and paying them to do a job that they are getting paid for at the time.No the time has come for the goobenment workers to wake up and realize they are not spending "someone elses money" but they are spending "our money", and thise governmental agencies are bred to be incompetent, inefficienct, and ineffective.This applies to the majority of our civil servants, if you are upset about it, try working in the private sector.
ASBESTOS (anonymous) says…
"these city workers are working there butts off for you and for what?"No they do not, they really do not. They would not last 5 minutes in a private sector company!
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
hairshoptalk (Anonymous) says: "sigmundyou type a lot for not saying much!!!! and no not everyone works their butts off. as for the roads of Lawrence they would be done in a more timely fashion if they had more employees to help them!"Everyone I know works hard, that isn't the issue. It isn't about getting roads done timely it is about the priorities in the budget. We can do everything else BUT the roads and basic infrastructure unless you increase taxes. Get it? I thought not.hairshoptalk (Anonymous) says: "you want to knock the road crews and to think they are some of the few employees that are actually getting something done for the city, fixing damaged roads, clearing snow, flood safety, and more!"I never knocked the road crews, I am sure they work hard but that isn't the point. Hard working people get laid off when the economy slows or mismanagement has wasted resources. Why should city and state employees be exempt from basic economics? I don't blame the road crews, i blame the City Commission and the City Manager. Get it? I thought not. hairshoptalk (Anonymous) says: "maybe you can look into who really needs to gotten rid of instead of being small minded enough to blame the people who aren't serving to you personally!"I don't want to be served personally, I want the City to balance our budget (all of Lawrence's budget) by either laying off employees or cutting unnecessary services. I want the basic services (sewers, roads, water, fire, police) fully funded FIRST and then if there is money left over for green cemeteries, buses, wellness centers, Farmland toxic dump cleanup, domestic registries, fire sprinklers for downtown merchants, new cars, new trucks, pay increase, rental inspection, sculptures, and on and on, then cut those. Get it? I thought not.This ploy by the City Commission and City Managers where the budget priorities are reversed and can't be funded without a tax increase is little more than blackmail. Vote no on any tax increases and then vote against the incumbents. Repeat until we get responsible City management that can live within our budget. Get it? I thought not.If you still don't understand let me know and I'll be happy to type more trying to explain it to you once again.
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
If you think Lawrence is the only town concerned about ever increasing taxes, you are wrong. The Houston Chronical recently published their database of all employees salaries. Obviously the NEWS paper has reporters who actually do research and report the FACTS."As I've mentioned here before, payroll databases are key government records for watchdogs and beat reporters. Much like budgets, these salary lists can help spot trends, identify excesses and highlight an organization's priorities. We've used this public information internally in recent years to spotlight high overtime at the Houston Police Department and document teachers' bonuses the Houston Independent School District. Now, we're turning over all the data to you."http://blogs.chron.com/houstonpolitics/2008/07/local_government_payroll_searc_1.htmlThis can and should be done for EVERY public employee, after all its the publics money. I know such lists exists for KU and is probably available to the LJW for City of Lawrence and State of Kansas Employees.http://www.chron.com/databases/publicemployeepay.htmlI wonder how long it will take the LJW's Chad Lawhorn, Cub Reporter to do the same? If they don't do it you want to know how long it would take me to put it online? If I had the data I could have it online and searchable in a weekend at most. Cost? Nothing not a red cent.Remember when the City Commission got all teary eyed and apologetic after the Diphtheria Debacle and "technical violations" of the law without "technical punishment" and the promises of "greater transparency." Absolutely nothing has changed. There is no more disclosure, the new auditor can't be found, and they are playing us for chumps. Vote no on any tax increases and then vote against the incumbents. Repeat until we get responsible City management that can live within our budget.
Godot (anonymous) says…
Sigmund, spot on! "I don't want to be served personally, I want the City to balance our budget (all of Lawrence's budget) by either laying off employees or cutting unnecessary services. I want the basic services (sewers, roads, water, fire, police) fully funded FIRST and then if there is money left over for green cemeteries, buses, wellness centers, Farmland toxic dump cleanup, domestic registries, fire sprinklers for downtown merchants, new cars, new trucks, pay increase, rental inspection, sculptures, and on and on, then cut those."Why this is not being done is a complete mystery to me. But because this commission continues to reverse the priorities, I will vote no on every new tax inititative, and will oppose the reelection any incumbent.
Yabut (anonymous) says…
Sorry, thought it was obvious that if you don't reduce services and expect the current employees to pick up the slack, it creates a backlog of work and takes much longer to get things done. The city spends a lot of time and money on services and amenities that aren't absolutely nececssary. Do they make the city a nicer place to live? Absolutely. But times are tough and we need to focus on essential services right now rather than continuing to fund these services and amenities (flowers downtown, 2% for arts, parks and recs programs/the pool, etc).
conocybe_lactea (anonymous) says…
I hope the City looks hard indeed at the Utilities Department and considers social justice issues along with the efficiency concerns.
hairshoptalk (anonymous) says…
there are many many roads getting done around town my point being just because they aren't working were you think they should doesnt mean their not getting things done get it! tax increase is going to happen every years no matter what it comes with growth, so being against it is pointless. don't think a lay off is the answer. i money management is they key. i can see your the kind of person that has to have someone to blame instead of a solution without blame.get it, i thought not!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
conocybe_lactea (Anonymous) says: "I hope the City looks hard indeed at the Utilities Department and considers social justice issues along with the efficiency concerns."WTF? I hope the Commission ignores you and goes about balancing the budget with the resources available and with the priorities that reflect the majority of Lawrence citizens.
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
hairshoptalk (Anonymous) says: "there are many many roads getting done around town my point being just because they aren't working were you think they should doesnt mean their not getting things done get it!"Yep got it. Why the vote for a tax increase specifically for roads if they are a priority. Lets just do without the tax increase an djust fix the roads. Get it?hairshoptalk (Anonymous) says: "tax increase is going to happen every years no matter what it comes with growth, so being against it is pointless."There is a difference between tax revenues and tax rates. If this is too subtle a distinction you must be a City Commissioner or our missing in action auditor. Tax revenues typically increase with growth and do not necessitate and increase in the tax rate. This is a request for a increase in the tax rate and do NOT happen every year. Get it?hairshoptalk (Anonymous) says:don't think a lay off is the answer. i money management is they key. i can see your the kind of person that has to have someone to blame instead of a solution without blame."OK if no layopff what city service would you give up to balance the budget, the empTy? If not what? I am the kind of person the patiently explains that the only ones I blame are the City Commission. And I do have a solution, well two actually.Keep the empTy and cut all Departments Budgets equally (except Fire and Police) to pay for the empTy. Make sure all those laid off are told the mopney is to run empTy buses up and down the street. If you don't like that one then dump the empTy. Tell all the bus riders they will no longer get nearly free transportation because we can't possibly fire one City of Lawrence employee. Which would you choose?In either case no tax RATE increase is necessary and you get to keep more of your money. Get it?hairshoptalk (Anonymous) says: "get it, i thought not!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"Oh please. LOL Tell me your not a certain Commissioner who has been prompting Chad Lawhorn to write all the "Commission Touts New Tax," are you?
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
Now that I think about there is a third option to the above. Raise the rates for bus riders to $2.00/ride and use that to save a few jobs at City Hall.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Sigmund (Anonymous) says:merrill (Anonymous) says: "If property taxes decrease what increases?"Disposable income of tens of thousands of Lawrence taxpayers. Are you that dense??"Wrong this time. Think increase in swimming pool rates,water and sewer rates,sales tax increases,trash services etc etc. The loss to the cookie jar must be made up somehow. The cost of maintaining Lawrence has not decreased in 25 years instead inflatingly increases.Civil servants can do the work for less which is practical thinking comes from a book "Free Lunch" by David Cay Johnston. His thoughts on TIF projects is something taxpayers should keep in mind as TIF shifts development costs to local residents. This will be surfacing soon regarding the convention center,library with a $10 million parking package and relocating the post office project. This is why I have been offering locating the library at 9th and New Hampshire to use the existing TIF parking garage and have the city remodel the current library into a convention center and leave the post office alone. Otherwise a $50-$60 million dollar project will be the order of the day.I do not believe Lawrence can support an extravagant convention center and documentation from true outside sources have yet to say otherwise. Of course the proponents will provide a rosy picture.Not only that a previous proposal had the city giving away the current library location as part of the deal. The previous PLC majority were not supporting that give away.