Our Vision
We envision collaborative governance that empowers all stakeholders—residents, community organizations, businesses, and local government—to shape local policies, budgets, and outcomes.
Current City Issues
City Hall Annexation Proposal
On Tuesday, June 2, the City Commission will consider purchasing the former LJWorld building (609 New Hampshire St and 603 Mass St) for the City Hall Annexation. City Hall needs more and better space for offices, large meetings, and other public spaces. A 2024 report about the City Hall renovation needs states that the "City Hall building supports 120 employees from multiple departments,” and that it needs, "extensive alterations to bring the current City Hall to code and modern standards. Additionally, the current building comprises 35,500 square feet while our space needs exceed 50,000 square feet to accommodate current needs and future growth." (For more details about City Hall’s needs, see slides 16-23.)
TheJune 2026 report states that “Multistudio and City staff evaluated all submissions using a comprehensive set of criteria” that included downtown location, total building size, “flexibility to accommodate large departments and future growth”, structural conditions, parking, and total cost. Of three buildings shortlisted, “The World Building at 609 New Hampshire Street and 603 Massachusetts scored highest across all categories, providing the best combination of size, condition, and location while supporting the City Commission’s direction to remain downtown.” “Should the City Commission vote to approve the purchase, staff will move to close the transaction by July 20, 2026.”
This purchase may be the appropriate choice for the City, but I believe the City should first ask these questions about this project:
Does the City actually need as much space as the old LJWorld buildings provide? If not, could they use a creative renovation that would allow them to generate revenue from the unneeded portion of the building?
Could the City use some existing municipal spaces to reduce the amount of space needed in an annexation?
Can the City afford a $23M annexation, especially given the City’s current debt load?
Considerations
Our coalition advocates for staff to provide transparent and comprehensive information about issues before the Commission to guarantee they will have all data needed to make the best decisions for our community. I believe that our community and the Commission would benefit from more information about this proposal to determine if it is the appropriate solution to the City’s needs, and these are some details of this proposal and related issues that I believe deserve continued examination.
Finances - Purchasing this annex would initially cost $2.1M, but the report indicates that this decision would commit the City to a project totaling $23M.The CIty’s Capital Improvement Plan does not currently include this proposed expense, and our coalition’s research about the City debt raises concerns about adding more, substantial debt-financed projects to the City’s budget.
I believe this allocation would be in addition to the $12.5M that the Commission has approved for City Hall renovations. The report says that the initial $2.1M to buy these new buildings would be taken from this $12.5 allocated for City Hall, but I assume the City also needs the full $12.5M for City Hall.
If the City were to spend $23M for the annex and $12.5M for City Hall, they would invest $35.5M in a space that currently houses 120 people, and also serves a public meeting space for the community. This would equal about $300,000 for each employee in these spaces. If staffing increases as projected in the 2024 report (slide 14), the cost per employee would approach $180,000.
Plans - We cannot find any reports outlining the City Hall renovation plans, so it is unclear what needs will be met by the $12.5M City Hall renovation versus this $23M annex. We believe this information should be provided in evaluating whether this purchase necessary and appropriate.
Needs - Future staff growth is a primary justification for the annexation. The 10-year growth analysis chart from the consultants’ initial report says that the City anticipates adding 46 more employees into City Hall, including 19 more in Planning and Development (slide 14). According to the chart, this is an expected 30% increase in employees in 10 years. However, the City's population is not increasing, and the City is currently reducing staff to align with budget constraints. This implies that the space planned for a new annex should be adjusted to align with current staffing estimates.
Total Space - The June 2, 2026 report says the City would use 40,200 of the old LJWorld building for the City Hall annex. If all of the existing City Hall space is also used, the City would have 75,700 square feet of space – 22,700 more than the 53,000 square feet this report says they need.
Other Options for Space - Coalition members are curious if there are any other existing buildings that could serve some of the City’s needs, which could reduce the scale of the anticipated annexation renovations and their costs.
MSO Campus - The City has just invested $130M in their new MSO campus. Our coalition has found limited information about this facility’s space and accommodations, and we would like to know if any spaces in this campus could support any of City Hall’s expansion needs. It would be valuable for the City to share more details about this campus as part of this discussion.
Riverfront Property - The City is set to acquire the riverfront property next April, which is currently operating as a hotel. While we are aware that parts of the building have serious structural issues that require demolition, we are curious if any parts of this existing building could be retained and renovated.
County Commission Chambers - The County recently renovated their Commission chambers, making them larger than the current City Commission chambers, with improved acoustics and technology. Our coalition advocates for collaboration between our local governments, and some members have wondered if the City Commission could share the County Commission’s chambers, rather than completely remodeling theirs. (The current City Commission chambers could continue to be used for many meetings, especially if the City improved the acoustics and audio-visual equipment.)
The Carnegie Building - One of the City’s needs is for larger meeting spaces. The City owns the Carnegie Building, but, as those of us who attended last week’s City Manager candidate Meet and Greet experienced, this building has terrible acoustics for large groups. Could the City make use of this existing, beautiful, and historic space by improving the acoustics and audio-visual equipment, rather than building a new large meeting space?
KU graduate students in the Urban Planning Department’s Politics and Planning class researched recent Lawrence projects and issues. They interviewed community members and City staff, researched public records, and wrote papers analyzing these issues and providing policy recommendations.
Local Issue Research
by KU Graduate Students
Our coalition was fortunate to participate in this project by identifying research topics and meeting with the students to share our experiences related to these issues. Topics include affordable housing incentives, City budget, data centers, KU’s tax incentives, the Farmer’s Market permanent home, solar energy projects, and much more! And here’s a cool poster on the City budget.
City of Lawrence 2027 Budget
City Expenses and Revenues
Here is some historical and current City budget information.
The City' expenditures have increased considerably since 2020, starting with inflation, which has increased 28% in six years.
Payroll - Employee compensation is one of the City's largest expenses, accounting for about a quarter of their budget, and there have been many additions to this expense.
The City has added 77 full-time-equivalent employees since 2020. At an average cost of $120K, those 77 additional employees could account for more than $9M in expenditures.
The City increased many employee's salaries in 2021-2023 to bring them to market rate.
In the last two years, the City Commission approved annual wage adjustments of 2.5% and 1%, but the vast majority of the City’s 250 top-paid, union and non-union, employees received raises of 6% or more each of the last two years. Many received similar increases the previous two years too.
The City spends more per capita on personnel expenses than any other large city in Kansas.
Health insurance costs have increased substantially for the City.
Additional Programs - The City added the Homeless Solutions program, which now has a $4.8 million annual budget. The City also stopped charging fees for buses, which previously only brought in about $200K. To generate more revenue, the City also started charging fees for recreation facilities and sports tournament at the beginning of this year.
Revenues - The City will be collecting 52% more revenues in 2026 than it collected in 2020. In spite of these increased revenues, their annual budgets have not been balanced, and they have stabilized their budgets by using federal Covid funds; making significant budget cuts; and using millions of dollars from their reserve funds.
Learn More about the City Budget!
2027 Budget Issues
Two of the most significant issues for the City’s 2027 budget is funding a new fire station and our community recreation facilities. The City is collecting resident feedback on these specific issues, so here is some additional information about them.
Fire Station
Our community has long needed a new fire station in northwest Lawrence, and its operational costs are estimated to be $4.5 million per year. City staff proposed raising the property tax rate to pay for this fire station. Because residents' property taxes have already increased substantially over the last six years due to increased property valuations, the City Commission also requested that City staff develop budget options that do not include raising the property tax rate.
City staff’s proposal is based on the assumption that the City needs the total $4.5 million next year, but this fire station will not be operational until 2029. The fire department will need some funding in 2027 and 2028 to start training new staff, but will not need the full $4.5 million in the next two years.
City staff is optimistic that new economic development from CostCo and the KU Gateway project will increase sales tax revenues in the upcoming years. The City could fund the fire department’s 2027 budgetary needs and gather data in 2027 and 2028 about how much the fire station’s costs could be covered by our community’s new business developments.
Recreation Facility Fees
Commissioner Mike Courtney presented a proposal for increasing Parks & Rec funding based on the City's own Parks & Rec Master Plan's many suggestions for cost savings and revenue generation. These options were not included in the City’s survey materials, so we’re glad to have community members know about these budget options too. For more details on this issue, see below.
Parks & Rec Fee News
Lawrence Recreation Center Fees
The City implemented fees at Lawrence recreation centers starting in January, in spite of strong community opposition. Over 3,800 residents signed the No Fees for Lawrence Rec Center petition, the most signatures we’ve ever seen on a local petition, and over 2,000 survey respondents (82% of all respondents) opposed these fees.
Expected Memberships The City is expecting to issue 3,000 memberships this year —2,250 paid memberships and 750 free ones for youth and low-income individuals. Last year, about 13,000 unique visitors used our City’s recreation centers (pg 5), so the City is expecting 10,000 fewer people (1/10th of Lawrence) to use our recreation centers this year.
Expected Revenue The City budgeted to bring in $450,000 from these fees, but we don’t believe this math adds up. Most passes are between $80-$120 a year, which means the City would need over 4,000 people to sign up to reach their financial goals.
January Data The Lawrence Parks & Rec department recently released data from their first month of membership sales. While they claim to have passed their goal of 2,250 paid memberships, they are counting each monthly membership as one membership, and they have only brought in $182,000 of the expected $450,000.
We believe that lumping annual and monthly passes together in the City's data is misleading. If one person bought a monthly pass for 12 months, that would be counted as 12 memberships. If all 2,250 memberships the City is anticipating selling were monthly passes, that would only equal about 200 residents buying passes. At an average of $12/month, this would only bring in $27,000 of the $450,000 the City is hoping to generate with these fees
Learn more at the LJWorld article, which includes lots of graphs, and The Lawrence Times article on the presentation before the City Commission.
Other Parks & Rec News
The Lawrence Farmer's Market has conducted a robust community engagement process to identify the best location for a permanent market location, and on Feb 10, they presented a proposal to the City Commission to start investigating South Park for this purpose.
You can see their presentation and community members’ feedback here, and you can read The Lawrence Times article about the Commission meeting here.
More Info on Parks & Rec Fees!
Lawrence residents to start paying for rec center access as city faces budget deficit, KSHB 41
What to know about Lawrence rec center access fees by Mackenzie Clark, The Lawrence Times
Lawrence city commissioners voted to implement rec center fees. Some believe they broke a promise. by Cuyler Dunn, The Lawrence Times
82% of Survey Respondents Oppose Rec Center Fees by Carol Kummer in The Lawrence Times
No Fees for Lawrence Rec Centers petition - 3,817 signatures and counting!
Our Coalition’s Goals
Develop Relationships
Develop more collaborative relationships between our local governments and their residents.
Identify Issues and Successes
Identify recurrent challenges and successful practices in local governmental processes.
Promote Solutions
Promote solutions to make our local government’s cultures, policies, and practices more transparent, collaborative, and accountable.