Corliss sees pluses, minuses in city’s balance sheet / LJWorld.com

Archive for Monday, July 6, 2009

Next budget to reflect changes wrought by poor economy

By Chad Lawhorn

David Corliss has his hands in a host of city issues day in and day out.

By Chad Lawhorn

July 6, 2009

Corliss is named Lawrence’s new city manager

Photo by Kevin Anderson

City Manager David Corliss has been in his job for two and a half years. While Lawrence’s growth has slowed somewhat in recent years, Corliss is confident that our best days are not behind us.

From his fourth-floor office at City Hall, City Manager David Corliss has a good view of what hangs over the city.

During his first 32 months as the city’s top executive, what he’s noticed is an attitude that hasn’t always been healthy for the community.

“We have not hustled,” Corliss said. “When you look at what other communities have been doing, what they have been investing in, we have not been hungry.”

Corliss, in a lengthy interview with the Journal-World and 6News, said the community’s appetite is showing definite signs of increasing — he’s still praising voters for soundly approving a trio of new sales taxes that took effect in April. But he also said such efforts are more of a beginning than an end.

“There’s a lot of things that we’ve moved ourselves on, but I don’t think we’re at a point to spend a day congratulating ourselves,” Corliss said.

As the city prepares its budget for next year, and also looks for a path through a turbulent economy, here’s what Corliss had to say on several broad issues facing the city.

At last count, Douglas County has suffered through 10 straight months of year-over-year job losses. In addition, our rate of job loss has been greater than the statewide average. Why hasn’t Lawrence seen more job growth?

A lot of it has to do that we had it good for so long that we became complacent in our economic development activities. I don’t blame a particular institution or a particular entity. If I have to blame something I blame the attitude of ‘we’re a great community and we don’t have to hustle, we don’t have to work hard to create jobs.’ I don’t think that is accurate.

I don’t think that attitude is as prevalent in the community as it was in years past. I think there has been a change in attitude from all different kinds of views. Those views that challenge growth, those views that have always been part of Lawrence and that I think will always be part of Lawrence, that challenge whether growth will attract things that will hurt our community. Those advocates have recognized the importance of job growth.

In your opinion, what would be the most positive sign — economic or otherwise — you could see for this community within the next year?

I think there are many, but one would be where we would continue to get requests through the Chamber of Commerce for economic growth and we would be able to appropriately facilitate that growth, and where we would see the residential building community be a little bit stronger and pick up the pace of new homes being built in the community because that will show people still want to be here.

I’ll ask you to do something that I suspect you seldom get to do in this office: Put the money out of your mind. If money is not the issue, what could city government do to provide this community a real, positive push forward?

I think it would be just substantial investments in infrastructure. I think completing the South Lawrence Trafficway — which is not a city project but I’m putting those things out of my mind, as you indicated — would be a top priority. We continually hear from residents and nonresidents who visit or patronize our community that the lack of that east-west connection is a deterrent and detriment to the community.

Some folks have goals and then they’ll have a “stretch goal” for themselves, something that will take some amount of sacrifice, some amount of luck, to accomplish. Do you have a stretch goal for the city of Lawrence?

I think the stretch goal is to be among the top communities in the country for raising a family, for building and growing a business, for being one of the great college communities in the country. I don’t think it is a goal in the sense that it is an end zone because I think that creates the mindset that if you reach a certain milestone you stop. I don’t think that is how communities thrive. … I think in many areas we have a lot of those attributes, but I don’t think we have pushed ourselves hard enough to excel in many of those attributes.

Who knows what gasoline prices will do in the future, but some smart people have said that we’re above $2 per gallon to stay, and that the long-term trend is upward. Given that a lot of our housing growth historically has come from commuters, do you expect Lawrence’s growth to ever return to what it was in much of the 1990s?

Oh, absolutely. I think Lawrence’s growth has great, substantial potential. I don’t think it is going to happen immediately. I don’t think it is going to happen next year. But I think the long-range demographic trend of the urbanization of northeast Kansas will make Lawrence a lot larger city than it is right now.

When it comes to growth, do you have some sort of number in your head that represents some type of sweet spot or ideal?

I don’t know that government would be the best decider of what the sweet spot of our population is. You’ve been in enough of these meetings, where you’ve heard people talk about growth or no growth, I’ve always said let’s insist upon quality growth. I define quality growth as growth that adds more positives to the community than the negatives that might be created with traffic congestion and service demands and those sort of things.

I’ve heard you speak several times about how downtown may be at a particularly interesting point in its history. Do you expect downtown Lawrence to look or feel significantly different in five years?

It clearly is feeling the impacts of the recession. I think the community is going to continue to have a dialogue about what public role, if any, should be involved in the mix of uses downtown. I think in a lot of ways downtown is very strong in terms of its activity. I know we’re going to need to respond to the issue of homeless individuals. We’re paying attention to that. … I think it is changing, but to some extent downtown’s greatest strength is its greatest weakness. It is not a homogenous mall where the mall manager can get on the intercom and say: ‘You shall stay open until 9 o’clock or say you shall sell things that are green for half price or whatever.’

In downtown, each property owner, each store owner has the great business sense to hopefully be successful, survive and prosper. So it is hard to lead downtown in any dictatorial sense. You have to find ways to try to assist downtown with the public services that can be available — parking, beautification, those sort of things — and then rely on the (private sector) to take it from there.

In your opinion, what, if anything, is downtown missing? I’m trying to get at whether you think there is a type of business, a type of new use that could be particularly beneficial to downtown.

Clearly one of the best things that we can do is find things that bring people downtown. I’ve heard mention of a general population run movie theater. I don’t want to compete with the great things that happen at Liberty Hall, but there might be another way to get people downtown along those lines that would be complimentary to the entertainment uses downtown. I’ve heard talk of some sort of arts incubator or retail incubator that might occur downtown and might need some level of public assistance. That is something we would like to explore at some point.

There’s been a lot of financial anxiety throughout the country this past year. How would you assess the financial condition of the city of Lawrence?

I think we’re in relatively good financial shape. We’re not able to make some of the investments, particularly in infrastructure, perhaps in public safety staffing, that I think we need to. I think we can defer some of those until better days. I think the financial reports show that our fiscal situation is tightening but still relatively conservative. We’re on track to have a balanced budget this year. It will be tighter than it was last year, and we’re proposing an even tighter budget for next year. But we’re able to hold onto our reserves and still meet the community’s obligations.

The concern with that is the city needs to do more than just pay its bills. It needs to invest in its future.

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.

6 July 2009
at 6:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

cowboy (Anonymous) says…

kinda fluffy up on that 4th floor
6 July 2009
at 7:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

KU_cynic (Anonymous) says…

“Lengthy interview with the Journal-World and 6News,” indeed.

Corliss is obviously not a taciturn or carefully spoken person, which is fine.

But do Journal-World readers really need a full text transcription of this interview, with all its rambling?
6 July 2009
at 8:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

preebo (Anonymous) says…

KU_Cynic,

All his ramblings were very telling on what he and the city council have planned for Lawrence. Overall, pretty scary. It appears that he (and some members of the Council) want Lawrence to look like an extension of Johnson County - a nebulous mass of growth and congestion. No identity, no complexity - just growth for growth sake. The idea is you throw up a thoroughfare, and call it progress.

IMHO - Lawrence is what it is because of its complexity. If you make it Topeka or Olathe it will cease to be what it is now - an interesting place wading in a sea of monotony.
6 July 2009
at 8:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

SettingTheRecordStraight (Anonymous) says…

“…he’s still praising voters for soundly approving a trio of new sales taxes that took effect in April.”

Corliss' support for three - count 'em - three sales tax increases last year alone brings David's judgement into serious question. Can we trust a tax-and-spender to be fiscally responsible?
6 July 2009
at 8:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marshalus (Michael Stanclift) says…

“where we would see the residential building community be a little bit stronger and pick up the pace of new homes being built in the community because that will show people still want to be here.”

How does having empty homes show that people want to live here?

I'm not anti-growth, but I am anti-growth-for-the-sake-of-growth. I moved from Lawrence to Johnson County two years ago, because it was too expensive to continue commuting, and everytime I come back I'm struck by the amount of empty storefronts and homes that litter the city. Why not think about ways to fill those before we build more places?
6 July 2009
at 8:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

NoOneSpecial (Anonymous) says…

Corliss needs to step out of his office and see what it's like for other city employees who are “doing more with less”.

Instead of getting us the staff and materials we need to do our job, he sponsors a “Stress Relief BBQ” for city employees. (Most couldn't even go because we were actually working.)

Positions have not been filled, benefits are going to be cut, and don't even think about a raise that would come close to covering our increase in health insurance premiums.

Maybe he could start to “do more with less” by only having one assistant city manager OR rein in his department directors who think it's okay to pay $200 per staff car to have them professionally detailed OR paying the city's legal staff to go after hard working city employees for no good reason except to retaliate against them and harass them.

Maybe Corliss and his department managers could lead by example and do more with less TOO!
6 July 2009
at 8:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

srj (Anonymous) says…

NoOnesSpecial. don't bite the had that feeds you, especially if your posting from a city computer.

6 July 2009
at 9:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

BigPrune (Anonymous) says…

The reason there are empty store fronts is because the city put too many restrictions on businesses wanting to occupy the empty store fronts. It is exactly what the progressive controlled commission wanted so the vacancies can be used as an example to prevent any future development. A very crafty move that has been in effect for a few years and the dumb populace cannot figure it out.
6 July 2009
at 10:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

frankenstien (Anonymous) says…

Thank you NoOnesSpecial for simply telling it like it is. Corliss has absolutely no clue about the city workers or how his hiring decisions have been geared more towards taking care of himself then the city.
6 July 2009
at 5:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

frwent (Anonymous) says…

I was struck by one omission. I have repeatedly contacted the city commission members about misconduct and criminal behavior by employees in a city department and a cover up by the director of that department. I have repeatedly noted the fact that I have printed official documentation of this misconduct and criminal behavior. Commissioners have ignored my complaint, Core-less was also notified and also ignored my complaint.

How about a new city manager that has the guts to see that he and the city have a very large problem, possibly reaching back for several years, and having the guts and initiative to investigagte thoroughly my evidence and do something about this stinking morass that exists in a city department?? Is there any question about where the problem lies? The city manager controls the city commission like a puppet master, and the commissioners are clueless, gutless, and spineless to do their job and evaluate the job the city manager is doing, not knuckling under to his orders. Who is running the city anyway, the elected representatives? No Way! This guy has got to go and the city elected officials need to assert their duty expected by the voters. But don't hold your breath.
6 July 2009
at 6:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

One problem that stands out is too much speculation. No way to substantiate. A Cost of Community Services Study would help determine what is and what is not working. This is not a new idea but one that has been rejected for the last 15-20 years.

Taxpayers should know what has been the over all economic impact of the bedroom community and all the new retail. Constant increase in taxes and user fees after 25 years of expanding the tax base says something is not working. What exactly is it? No one knows.

Bush probably compounded an existing economic problem.

Face it bedroom communities are high tax communities due in large part to the fact there is nothing here to support them. It is no secret that residential dwellings demand more in dollars and cents from a municipality that they generate.

If those dwellings had locally employed people living in them supported with $70-$100k salaries the picture might be different. More and more retail is not going to to generate what Lawrence needs for revenue but will further economic displacement. The retail market was flooded and pushing economic displacement before the Bush recession.

Believe me if Lawrence was such a hot retail market there would be no empty buildings. The west side development is killing downtown and not likely supporting
itself as well.

Face it Legends,,kcmo/joco metro and to some degree 119th Olathe and Topeka are the established retail Goliaths. All of which are not far from Lawrence and is very very seasoned and stiff competition with an abundance of choice and lower prices.

Doing what the much larger metro areas are doing is not the key. Lawrence is a small town with limited retail dollar availability. Economic displacement and NOT smart growth only increases taxes and user fees.

Smart or Sensible Growthers are not anti economic growthers. Those who push for perpetual flooding of the market space are the anti economic growthers that which brings economic displacement NOT economic growth.

Placemakers told city hall a few years back our markets were over extended but Placemakers was ignored.
6 July 2009
at 6:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

Allow me to present 3 descriptions as to how we local taxpayers are far too generous for OUR own good:

“Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense (And Stick You with the Bill)
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/18…

Not Smart Development Increases Taxes:
http://www.sierraclub.org/sprawl/repo…

Local Expert Thinking With Excellent links
http://lawrencesmartgrowth.blogspot.c…
6 July 2009
at 11:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Methinks Corliss sees “visions”.
7 July 2009
at 10:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

With the economy in the throes of a catastrophic downturn, unemployment, no matter how it’s measured, will rise dramatically and impose yet more devastating costs on society and on those without a job or unable to find full-time work.

Economy in Numbers

The Real Unemployment Rate Hits a 68-Year High
Comparing the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ “U-3” and “U-6” rates.

By John Miller

Although you have to dig into the statistics to know it, unemployment in the United States is now worse than at any time since the end of the Great Depression.

From December 2007, when the recession began, to May of this year, 6.0 million U.S. workers lost their jobs. The big three U.S. automakers are closing plants and letting white-collar workers go too. Chrysler, the worst off of the three, will lay off one-quarter of its workforce even if it survives.

Heavy equipment manufacturer Caterpillar and giant banking conglomerate Citigroup have both laid off thousands of workers.

Alcoa, the aluminum maker, has let workers go.

Computer maker Dell and express shipper DHL have both canned many of their workers.

Circuit City, the leading electronics retailer, went out of business, costing its 40,000 workers their jobs.

Lawyers in large national firms are getting the ax.

Even on Sesame Street, workers are losing their jobs.

http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archiv…