Advertisement

Archive for Sunday, May 17, 2009

‘Scorecard’ rates city’s economic performance

May 17, 2009

Advertisement

As teachers across the community grade final exams, Lawrence City Hall leaders are getting scores back of their own.

The results: The grades on economic development wouldn’t make many mothers happy, but then again, there are plenty of people bewildered by that subject these days.

“It does show that we’ve seen a downturn, but the sky is not falling,” said City Commissioner Aron Cromwell. “The Lawrence economy is still strong, but I think we would all like to see it stronger.”

City Hall staff members have released the city’s first performance management “scorecard,” as city commissioners prepare for an upcoming goal-setting session.

The city in 2007 adopted the new performance management system, which attempts to create specific, measurable goals for various city departments to meet. Commissioners said the approach is needed, especially in the economic development arena.

“I think we’ve been a little bit too subjective in our analysis in the past,” said City Commissioner Mike Dever. “We need to be a little more objective in evaluating whether we are doing everything we can to grow our economy and our job market.”

The scorecard, which is still in draft form, gives city commissioners their first peek at how they’re meeting their new numerical goals.

In the area of economic development, the city measured 11 separate categories for 2008.

The city met or exceeded the goal in six cases. It failed to meet the goal in five other areas, which included high-profile goals such as jobs, wages and retail strength.

Here’s a look:

• The city set a goal to have job growth keep pace with the rate of population growth. To accomplish that in 2008, the city needed to add 369 new jobs. Instead, the city lost 953 jobs, according to the latest data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

• When it comes to the amount of money people have in their wallets, the city sought to have median household income grow by a rate greater than inflation. Based on 2007 numbers — the most recent available when the city put together the scorecard — median household income fell by 2.3 percent.

• The city made a goal of having the average wage paid by a Lawrence firm grow at a rate greater than inflation. The average wage — according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics — did grow from $31,304 to $32,500. But that was an increase of 3.8 percent. Inflation for the Midwest checked in at 4.3 percent for the same period.

• The city sought to have its retail pull factor — a measure of the balance of retail spending flowing in and out of the city — increase. But in 2008, the pull factor declined by 3 percent. The city posted a pull factor of .97, indicating that it loses slightly more retail dollars to other communities than it attracts.

• In another retail category, though, the city met its goal. The city set a goal to have its sales tax receipts grow at a rate faster than the state’s sales tax growth. For 2008, city sales tax collections grew by 3.6 percent, while the state’s overall collections were down 2.6 percent.

• The city strived to have its vacancy rates for industrial, office and retail space be below the average for the Kansas City metro area. According to data from a regional commercial real estate company, the city met that goal on all three fronts. Vacancy rates in 2008 for industrial were 3.9 percent in Lawrence, compared with 5.9 percent in Kansas City; 11.5 percent for office vs. 17.1 percent; and 5.4 percent for retail vs. 9.8 percent in Kansas City.

• The city also set several property value-related goals. The city met its goal of having its nonresidential tax base grow. Nonresidential property made up 29.4 percent of the city’s overall tax base, up from 28.2 percent in 2007. The city did not meet its goal of having residential property values increase at a rate greater than inflation. Total residential values were up 2.4 percent. Commercial values were up 4.2 percent, which met the city’s goal of outpacing the growth of residential.

Reaction

City commissioners said some of the numbers are concerning, despite national economic struggles.

“We had negative job growth in the community, but we know that some other communities around us were able to grow jobs during the time period,” Lawrence Mayor Rob Chestnut said. “We need to pay attention to why that happened.”

Chestnut said the retail numbers also concerned him because he thinks Lawrence should consistently be attracting more shoppers than it loses.

“With KU football games and the other events we have, we have more opportunities to attract outside shoppers than many communities do,” Chestnut said.

Cromwell, who was elected to his first term in April, said he didn’t want the city to overlook the numbers.

“Just because the economy is bad, we take that into consideration, but that doesn’t mean we’re 100 percent off the hook,” he said.

Chestnut and Dever both made improving Lawrence’s job market and economic development efforts key campaign issues when they took the top two spots in April 2007 elections. Job and business growth also was a hot-button issue in last month’s election.

Despite the lagging numbers, Dever and Chestnut said the city has been working hard on the issue.

Both men pointed to funding the city has provided for a new bioscience incubator building that will be constructed on Kansas University’s West Campus in the next year.

The city also has been redrafting its economic development polices related to tax abatements and other incentives. Chestnut said he thought such work was important, even if it doesn’t produce immediate results.

“It is critical that we have a common vision on what we want to do because it has created controversy in the past,” Chestnut said.

He said he now hopes to meet with Lawrence Chamber of Commerce, Douglas County Commission and other stakeholders to discuss how the community decides what type of businesses it pursues.

Economic development issues also are expected to be a major topic at the city’s upcoming goal-setting session. That study session will be at 3 p.m. May 26 at City Hall.

Comments

jafs 5 years, 7 months ago

Met 6, failed to meet 5.

That's about 50% - a failing grade.

BigPrune 5 years, 7 months ago

I find it amazing that the City met its goal in the retail sector since the City hates retailers and is known as one of the most difficult cities in the entire nation to do business.

Practicality 5 years, 7 months ago

What is the Average wage of the Nation? Also, what is the average cost of rent in Lawrence these days? What about the average morgatge? I would like to see these figures compared to the average wage? I would also be curious as to what the average wage for the city would be if you didn't include all the KU professors in that number.

BigPrune 5 years, 7 months ago

bronze, you're living in a fantasy world, period.

Richard Heckler 5 years, 7 months ago

When markets are flooded numbers simply cannot improve and what Lawrence has going is Economic Displacement rather than Economic Growth.

If Lawrence mover and shakers seriously believe that the Lawrence retail market can compete with Ledgends,Oak Park Mall,Olathe,Topeka and the KCMO/JOCO metro in general these people should not be in government.

Sports fans do not come to Lawrence to shop our downsized big box stores. If Old Navy,Banana Republic, Lands End were located downtown with GAP and Weavers things be different. The concerted effort to kill downtown will not drive locals or anyone else to west Lawrence shopping.

The residential “boom town” economy has come back to bite us in the butt. The market was flooded before the national scene took place so welcome to a double whammy.

The city commission has no intentions of being a positive player. This commission will continue business as usual….approving more and more residential no matter what. Their answer is “get more people to move to Lawrence”.

Common sense says tighter markets hold property values up not down.

http://www2.ljworld.com/polls/2007/sep/why_do_you_think_lawrence_growth_lagging/

Over the years Lawrence has approved approximately 5000 more homes than the market dictated on a “build just in case someone shows up” notion. Face it flooded residential markets are unfriendly to property owners.

This commission will continue to refuse performing Market Capacity Studies that would determine what the Lawrence market can absorb in residential and retail. One could imply government does not want to know!

This commission will continue to refuse performing a Cost of Community Services study that would help determine what growth is or is not paying back. This could also provide direction for governing bodies. One could imply government does not want to know!

This commission will also refuse economic impact studies to be performed before approving any new projects that come before the city commission. One could imply government does not want to know!

Had these economic tools been mandated and respected Lawrence markets would be stronger.

Face it over saturated markets across the board are business unfriendly which apparently influenced the decision of Banana Republic to decline Lawrence not too long ago.

Economic tools are not new tools. Lawrence has simply refused to mandate use of these tools. Frankly there is no one in Lawrence or on the city and county commissions that can “just know these things” and there never has been.

There are not enough dollars in Lawrence to support helter skelter growth. Helter skelter growth has no continuity and is unfriendly to buisness.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.