Council members at the Oct. 6, 2025 meeting of the Lawrence Common Council said the administration’s budget materials, delivered Sept. 30, left the council with little time to analyze options for closing an estimated deficit for next year.

Councilman Terrell Giles, District 1, told the chamber the city is facing an estimated shortfall he described as “1.3 to $3,000,000,” and urged residents and colleagues to prepare for tough choices that could affect hiring plans. Giles said the city historically has funded a high share of costs for police and fire and warned the hiring freeze announced during the mayor’s budget presentation may mean fewer new hires than previously planned.

Giles said the mayor’s Sept. budget presentation was held at an event called by the administration rather than a regular council meeting and that the mayor left without taking questions; councilors said the chamber microphones and the live stream were shut off, limiting public access to the presentation. “The council president is the one who determines when our meetings are over, not the administration,” one councilor said during the session.

Councilor Wells and others said the September 30 delivery of the budget book left insufficient time to analyze the material and explore alternatives; Wells asked the administration to provide materials sooner in future cycles. Council members discussed a salary ordinance the administration intends to present and asked for it to appear at the next meeting or the meeting following that. The council also sought clarity on the effective date of the mayor’s hiring freeze; the administration confirmed the hiring freeze was announced as “immediate” during the mayor’s presentation.

Council members raised specific questions about the budget book and related documents: who is reviewing monthly financial reports; the appearance of new “budget amendment” and “amended budget” columns in April–June financial statements; internal service charges listed in departmental budgets; and the status and public availability of independent audit work done under contract. A resident commenter, Daniel Rapp, asked for transparent explanations of amended budget figures and the source of a June $74,000 budget amendment shown in the posted financials.

City staff responded that they would prepare additional documentation: a grant report requested by councilors and follow-up on internal service charges in the police budget. Grant writer Mister Perrin agreed to “put together a report” for the council and submit it. On the independent audit, city staff said the contracted scope did not require a public report in the consultant’s deliverables and that a copy had been discussed with the administration.

Councilors discussed police staffing levels and budget pressures. One councilor summarized recent staffing history: city policy guidance recommending a higher complement (cited as 68 by a councilor), prior operating levels around 59, and current staffing “63 or 64” officers as reported in the meeting. Council members said they did not want layoffs but acknowledged planned hiring could be curtailed.

No binding budget decisions were made at the Oct. 6 meeting; the council directed staff to provide clarifying documents and asked that the administration present the salary ordinance at the earliest feasible meeting. Councilors said they expect to hold additional meetings in October to meet statutory deadlines for adopting next year’s budget.