Lawrence Budget Shortfall -What You Will Not Hear Elsewhere

Posted by Independentone October 12, 2009 at 5:41 p.m.

Lawrence Budget Shortfall -What You Will Not Hear Elsewhere

Unlike historic budgeting methodology the City of Lawrence has not been charging enough for basic water services to cover our annual financial needs. In the latest of social experimentation they have planned for way too much income from residential homes who irrigate. That did not happen and now we have a significant shortfall.

Why have we heard nothing? Because the city doesn’t want to admit the level of social experimentation and income transfer buried in the residential water budget. In essence they argue that those who irrigate cost more and should pay more. Not unreasonable. Unfortunately they argue that those who irrigate should essentially pay for all future growth. That is not. I should mention that the city does not charge commercial users anywhere near what it charges residential users for an equivalent use of water. The magnitude of these irresponsible assumptions has now cost us and everyone will end up paying when we have to raise the water rates even higher.

Maybe we should leave social experimentation and income transfer practices to areas of our budget not dependent on long hot summers. Maybe our impact from climate change will be the other way. Maybe we should not soak (intended) those in West Lawrence where the lack of trees makes irrigation essential. Maybe we should charge commercial users more.

Copy and paste the link:

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.

gccs14r (anonymous) says…

The City bases residential annual sewer service on winter water usage (and hard surface runoff, in square feet), assuming that any monthly water usage over the winter average is used outdoors. Businesses are charged for sewer service on every gallon they use, so the effective per-gallon rate is higher for businesses than it is for residences.
October 13, 2009 at 5:26 p.m.
IndependentOne (anonymous) says…

Really,

On the water side we are all charged for what we use-some more than others.

On the sewer side you are at least in part correct. To the extent that business does irrigate they may pay more.

Does it off set the cost of irrigation paid by the residential user? I suspect not!
October 14, 2009 at 1:24 p.m.
rando1965 (anonymous) says…

how to save the city money !!!!!! use 99cent ink pens not $3.00 ones.why buy new police cars ? chances are the car is good except for a engine that has a lot of miles, replace just the engine not the whole car that would save thousands several thousands of dollars each year. oh wait thats to simple the city has mechanics on payroll that know how to do that job already and the city already owns the tools to do the job. you can go to the city ad get free paint to paint your house but i guess that paint isn't good enough for the city,,,,,,,,,,,
October 17, 2009 at 3:15 p.m.