Monday, March 21, 2005

Living Wage 2

[ SBN-P, 3/18/2005 ]:

Living wage proposal hits nonprofit roadblock at City Hall

3/18/05
By JOSHUA MOLINA
NEWS-PRESS STAFF WRITER


Just days after a flashy rally on the steps of City Hall, the well-orchestrated movement for a $13.40-an-hour "living wage" is fighting an unexpected battle.

The Santa Barbara City Council is squeamish about putting the living wage idea on an agenda unless nonprofit organizations are removed from the proposal that would require businesses contracting with the city to pay their workers double the state's minimum wage.

But the coalition behind the living wage, led by two members of PUEBLO, won't budge -- a move that may hurt the activist group's cause.

"We're starting to get people from the small-business community and the nonprofits saying, 'I don't know if we can live with this,' " said Mayor Marty Blum. "I just want to make sure that other council members want to do it. I will give myself until Friday."

The political drama behind the scenes began to unfold more than a month ago.

A group calling itself Santa Barbara for a Living Wage sent a letter requesting that the city put the matter on an agenda on Feb. 9.

The request sat on the mayor's desk.

She scribbled some notes on the letter: "Helene? Das?"

But council members Helene Schneider and Das Williams were unwilling to back the request.

Mr. Williams, who crafted a reputation for being a living wage activist three years ago when a different proposal went before the council, seemed the most likely to back the idea.

After all, he was a co-founder of PUEBLO, under a different name several years ago. As a consultant and before he was elected to the Santa Barbara City Council, he worked to create successful living wage ordinances in Oxnard, Port Hueneme and Ventura County.

But Mr. Williams has a problem with the current ordinance.

As drafted, companies that have contracts of $10,000 or more with the city would have to pay their employees at least $13.40 an hour or $15.40 an hour without health benefits.

Nonprofits would be exempt the first three years, and after that could ask for a hardship waiver. Organizations where the executive director earns four times the lowest-paid employee would have to comply.

Mr. Williams supports the concept of a living wage but wants the nonprofits removed from the ordinance. Politically, he doesn't think it will fly. The ordinance, he said, needs more work.

PUEBLO, however, doesn't want to remove the nonprofits until the matter is aired in a public meeting.

"It is important for council members to know that PUEBLO will negotiate with them," Mr. Williams said. "It is important for PUEBLO to know that council members will negotiate with them. Neither one trusts that the other one is truly going to negotiate in good faith with the other, and that is really the big hurdle."

The councilman said Thursday that because he believes in the concept of a living wage, he would move to place the matter on a council agenda.

Some supporters are upset that the council won't automatically listen to their requests.

"By playing the rules, we expect to be heard," said Daraka Larimore-Hall, a member of PUEBLO. "If we are not, then there is going to be trouble. We're watching very carefully, and we expect that very soon they will take action."

David Fortson, executive director of the Santa Barbara County Action Network, is bothered by the way the matter has played out.

"Fundamentally, something's not right about the way this process has taken place," Mr. Fortson said. "There should be a very vibrant debate about the pros and cons of this issue; instead we're talking about whether to put it on an agenda. It makes public policy-making in the city look like farm ball instead of professional-league."

Ms. Schneider said there's no way she's going to do anything to harm the nonprofit organizations.

"I don't want to put nonprofits in jeopardy just by virtue of putting a request forward," she said. "I have always said that nonprofits should be exempted."

The nonprofit community is trying to make sense of the proposal. Santa Barbara county has about 900 nonprofit organizations.

"One of the things with nonprofits is that people do their work with passion," said Carol Nickell, executive director of the Nonprofit Support Center of Santa Barbara County.

"Because they are passionate about something doesn't mean they should pay less. But we can only pay what the sector bears."


e-mail: jmolina@newspress.com

[ SBN-P online edition ]:
Living wage proposal hits nonprofit roadblock at City Hall

2 Comments

Anonymous Ray said...

Wages cannot be set arbitrarily! What are we going to do when businesses are forced to either raise their prices or lay-off people? People already making around $14/hr are going to demand raises too.

It's better to be very poor (or very rich) in SB. Why? Because if you're very poor you get a lot of help. I would like to get Section 8 (subsidized rent), but I make too much money to be officially poor, but not enough to avoid being financially crippled by rent. (I also hate the socialism of it all)

I don't think I have to elaborate on why being very rich is good.

If there was NO section 8 housing, the rent would have to go down because you can't afford to rent in SB on $8/hr and landlords can't afford to have their apartments go un-rented. Of course property taxes would eat up a lot of the rent collected.

More apartments would help. Especially multi-story apartments, but lotsa luck getting that approved: it would ruin people's views.

Too much government, too many taxes. Only problematic "solutions" in sight.
I moving to Arizona first chance I get.

13/4/05  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

More government and unjustified wages will continue the people that these people claim to want to help....

4/5/05  

Post a Comment

Links

Create a Link

<< Home

!-- APTURE SCRIPT............................................................................... -->