The Lawrence City Commission voted 5-0 on Sept. 16 to adopt Resolution No. 7632, approving the City of Lawrence's 2026 operating budget and the 2026–2030 capital improvement plan using the package described in staff materials as "option B."

Option B, as presented by staff during the Sept. 16 meeting, keeps a near-term budget that restored certain county-shared public-safety funding items and adds a set of community requests heard during public hearings. Staff described three scenarios for the general fund mill levy: option A (a flat mill levy), option B (an increment that combined several community requests and additional funding) and option C (a higher, 0.8-mill maximum increase). Option B included budget additions the commission discussed, such as funding to support the Lawrence Farmers Market design work, a $20,000 neighborhood-association support item, and funding requested for small-business support.

Commissioner Finkelstein moved adoption of Resolution 7632 under option B and Commissioner Sellers seconded; the motion passed 5-0.

During the budget discussion and public hearing, multiple city residents and organizational representatives praised aspects of the proposal while urging additional caution or changes. The Coalition for Collaborative Governance urged more transparency about the city's long-term debt plan and said the CIP and proposed debt could substantially increase annual debt service in later years; an analyst presenting for the coalition said the chart they produced showed debt-service payments rising by roughly $10 million by 2030 if all projects proceed as currently shown. "You appear to balance the budgets without cuts or new revenue, but you do it by quietly accumulating obligations," warned public commenter John M., who urged a published debt-reduction plan.

Public-safety unions and firefighters urged the commission to prioritize staffing levels. Lawrence Professional Firefighters president Seamus Albritton and others presented call-volume data showing steady increases in non-structure emergency runs and said that all three budget scenarios included the loss of a fire apparatus in 2026; they urged restoring apparatus and staffing. Local union representatives said fire-truck response calls have climbed approximately 60% across recent years and that maintaining redundancy requires the additional apparatus and personnel. Noli John Inman, chair of the Lawrence Police Officers Association, raised recruitment and retention concerns related to prior and proposed staffing cuts and urged a multi-year plan to restore positions.

Several residents commented on the parks and recreation fee proposal included within the budget discussion. Speakers said fees would be a barrier for some residents, including students during the summer months; KU student body representative Andrew Rivera urged a reconsideration of how fees would affect students who are not enrolled in summer classes. Other residents urged alternative revenue sources rather than membership fees.

Supporters of local initiatives urged adoption of option B because it included targeted funding the groups had requested. Laurie Trojan, speaking for the Lawrence Farmers Market, asked commissioners to support $175,000 to complete a design phase for a permanent farmers market pavilion.

City staff, including the finance and budget team, described the three scenarios and the mechanics for adoption. They told commissioners the resolution incorporates an insert to update the general-fund numbers and that the commission may select any iteration of the scenarios so long as the adopted levy does not exceed the maximum legal limit. Staff also noted that the city had developed three mill-levy scenarios reflecting different mixes of restorations and new items and emphasized the long-range capital plan underlying the debt discussion.

Clarifying details noted during the meeting: scenario A was presented as a flat-mill proposal (proposed estimated tax rate cited by staff: 21.142); scenario B was described in staff materials as a package that would raise the estimated tax rate to 21.63 and included the additional items discussed above; scenario C represented up to a 0.8-mill increase with a higher estimated rate shown in staff materials. The final motion adopted option B; the commission also discussed future budget items including Station 6 and a possible property-tax increase tied to that project.

Speakers quoted or cited in this article are listed below.