The Lawrence Wastewater Treatment Facility at 1400 E. Eighth St. processes all of the city’s sewage. The city purchased land for a second facility along the Wakarusa River, but plans for it have been put on hold as the city’s population growth has slowed.

Wastewater treatment operator Jay Lovett works in the control room of the Lawrence Wastewater Treatment Facility. Water treatment, wastewater treatment and street repairs are key infrastructure concerns for the next City Commission.

Wastewater treatment operator Jay Lovett crosses the catwalk over one of the aeration ponds at the Lawrence Wastewater Treatment Facility. The next City Commission will have some big decisions to make on maintaining infrastructure.

The next City Commission likely will be charged with making the most expensive decision in the community’s history.

The next group of Lawrence city commissioners almost certainly will have to figure out whether to restart work on building a second sewage treatment plant for the city, a project that will cost at least $80 million and cause sewage rates to rise for every resident.

At the heart of the sewer plant question is an even larger issue — growth, and whether the city is experiencing enough of it.

Just a couple of years ago, commissioners believed they were in a race against time to get the new sewer plant constructed; it is slated to be built on property just south of the Wakarusa River. But last year, commissioners decided to delay construction of the plant after population and building permit numbers showed the city’s growth had slowed considerably.

Here’s a look at how the eight candidates seeking three seats on the Lawrence City Commission view the issues surrounding the plant.

Issue: To build or not build

Price Banks, the former director of planning for Lawrence and Douglas County, said he thinks the city has done a poor job of planning for the massive project.

He said the city should reopen the subject and study whether the existing sewage plant could feasibly be expanded for a much smaller price tag.

“We’ve already spent a lot of time and money on this, but I don’t think we ever took a good look at the alternative,” Banks said. “When you expand something or repair something, you seldom get a brass plaque with your name on it, but you do when you build something new.”

Other candidates generally gave the city high marks for buying the property — about 500 acres — and doing the preliminary planning for the project. But most said they also thought the city shouldn’t spend more money on the project in the near future.

Lance Johnson said the community needs to be prepared to restart the project once growth numbers show a sign of a rebound. But he said city leaders had “made a tough, forward-thinking” decision to lay the groundwork for the project.

Tom Johnson said the community had to be careful not to get caught on its heels and be unprepared for growth when the economy rebounds. But he said a more pressing utility issue for the city was repair or replacement of the Bowersock Dam. Inspectors have cited concern over the integrity of the 19th century dam on the Kansas River. The dam helps the city’s Kaw Water Treatment Plant function properly.

Gwen Klingenberg, Aron Cromwell and Mike Amyx all said they thought a second wastewater plant for the city would be needed, but said they thought the city needed evidence of a more solid growth trend before work should resume on the project.

“Sewer rates will have to go up once this is restarted, and I’m very hesitant to do that right now,” Amyx said.

Dennis Constance was the candidate who said he thought it was most likely that it would be some time before the city had to restart the project.

“I think it needs to stay on hold for a while,” Constance said. “I think we got a little ahead of ourselves. I really want to try to manage growth, and do a better job of managing what we build with what we really need.”

James Bush was the candidate who predicted the plant probably would need to be built sooner rather than later.

“I think we should be moving in the direction of starting construction,” Bush said. “We can’t let crisis lead the day. Planning still has to rule the day.”

Issue: Growth numbers

The candidates were more divided on the growth numbers that led to the ultimate slowdown in the sewer plant project.

For the better part of two decades, the city consistently has had a population growth rate of about 1.5 percent to 2 percent per year. But since the middle part of this decade, Census Bureau estimates consistently have shown the city growing at a rate of less than 1 percent.

Reasons on why the decline has happened, and whether it should represent a red flag, sparked disagreement.

“I think those numbers show why City Commission elections matter,” Bush said. “If you have people who aren’t pro-job creation and don’t want to see good things happen in terms of growth and development, you get a slowdown. We’re seeing the effects of slow-to-no-growth mindset on the commission from a few years ago.”

Lance Johnson also said a lack of commitment to creating jobs is behind the numbers.

“To me, it couldn’t be more obvious,” Lance Johnson said. “This is naturally what happens when you don’t have jobs to offer people.”

On the other side, Constance said he thought the slowdown was in part because the city had lost some of its charm through previous growth spurts.

“You can love a thing to death,” Constance said. “Lawrence is kind of that way. Everybody wants to live here, but if we aren’t careful, we lose some of the quality of life factors that caused everybody to want to live here.”

Klingenberg said she thought a combination of higher-than-average housing prices and higher gasoline prices had hurt Lawrence’s population numbers. She said the slower growth rates were somewhat concerning because she does believe a community must either grow or die. But she said she also was concerned that the city hadn’t done more to slow the pace of new developments to match the slowdown in populating growth.

“We can’t keep approving more and more retail and commercial if we don’t have the people,” Klingenberg said.

Cromwell said he was still trying to determine exactly what to make of the slower growth numbers. He said it would be “awful” to have a loss in population, but said he wasn’t sure what the right growth number should be for Lawrence.

“I do think slow, steady growth is a better way to grow than in rapid bursts,” Cromwell said.

Tom Johnson said he thought the slowdown in growth was mainly related to Lawrence’s cost of housing, and the type of jobs that the city has to offer.

“It is a cost-of-living thing,” Tom Johnson said. “A lot of the people who work in the service sector can’t afford to live here anymore. A lot of service workers can’t afford $150,000 or more for a house.”

Amyx and Banks both said they thought the slowdown was a combination of several factors. But both said they thought Lawrence was affected by the slowdown of the national economy earlier than many other communities.