MEDILL NEWS SERVICE: BY STEVEN STANEK
Santa Fe Mayor David Coss and San Francisco Supervisor Tom Ammiano were greeted with a "warm" Chicago welcome Thursday as they met with a barrage of questions in an ad-hoc City Council meeting on living wage laws.
As is customary for discussions on the controversial "big box" ordinance, which calls on Chicago retailers of more than 90,000 square feet to eventually pay workers $10 an hour plus $3 in benefits, the session quickly devolved into a bare-knuckles debate with several aldermen demanding the stage and interrogating the guests like they were witnesses in a courtroom.
Advocate and opposition groups in the audience frequently erupted with cheers and jeers during the more than two hours of questioning.
Coss and Ammiano were summoned by Ald. Joe Moore (49th), the bill's primary sponsor, and Ald. Freddrenna Lyle (6th) to testify about the success of wage laws in Santa Fe and San Francisco and also to calm nerves of jittery aldermen shaken by threats of major retailers to cancel construction plans.
Both men said they were under similar pressure when the laws passed in their cities two years ago. As they hurled tough questions, aldermen also voiced concern the Chicago so differed from the other two cities that it was not fair to compare the cities' varying wage laws.
"My ward is about the size of Santa Fe," Ald. Bernie Stone (50th) told Coss.
Santa Fe, with 65,000 residents within city limits, has a population equal to that of most wards in Chicago. Outlying areas like Evanston and Skokie, which border Stone's ward, are actually bigger than Santa Fe, a city largely isolated from suburban populations. The closest suburban community to Santa Fe is nearly three miles from of the city center.
Stone, who supports building big box outlets here, seized on that point Thursday, saying that large retailers could easily build stores just outside Chicago's city limits, while they could not in Santa Fe. "I can step across a line and be in 3 cities," he said. "A competing commercial development can be built right across the line. It's not like going two or three miles."
Aldermen who oppose increasing the living wage for big box employees pointed to a variety of other differences between Chicago, Santa Fe and San Francisco--from the average household income and property tax rates to school funding, the cost of living, and even the crime rates--as reasons why wage laws in other cities cannot be used as a litmus test for Chicago.
Alds. Dorothy Tillman (3rd) and Howard Brookins, Jr. (21st) said Santa Fe'sethnic make-up, which includes only a small African-American community, made it incomparable to Chicago.
"Good morning and welcome to Chicago," Tillman said to Coss. "What is the racial breakdown of your city?" According to Coss, Santa Fe is about 45 percent Hispanic, 8 percent Native American, 40 percent Caucasian. Less than five percent of the population is African American, he said.
"Has your city ever experience 'white flight?'" asked Brookins. "Do you understand that is difficult to attract certain retailers to -- I'm not going to say urban areas -- I'm going to say black areas? Are you familiar with that phenomenon?" Coss said that the "phenomenon" is not one he deals with in Santa Fe.
Ald. Billy Ocasio (26th), a strong supporter of the ordinance, took a shot back at Tillman and Brookins when he got his turn to take the floor. "Let me just inform my colleague, Ald. Tillman, that African Americans are not the only ones who live in poverty," Ocasio said, noting the financial struggles of many Hispanics in the city.
The heated exchange between aldermen brought to the surface the deep fissures the ordinance has created in the council. "And I apologize that some of the people here have been trying to bully you," Ocasio added, speaking to Coss.
Aldermen also learned of big differences between the wage laws in San Francisco and Santa Fe the ordinance that passed through Chicago City Council last month.
In Santa Fe, for example, the law applies to stores of 25 or more employees, regardless of business sector, and does not include benefits. Workers were paid $8.50 an hour when the bill first passed in 2004 and the rate increased to $9.50 an hour this year.
In San Francisco, which has an urban landscape, population and ethnic diversity closer Chicago's, the living wage applies across the board to nearly all businesses--no matter their size or industry--and includes part-time workers.
The San Francisco law was originally aimed at employers of 10 or more workers, but it was modified to apply to all businesses with at least two workers. Any company that would be subject to the federal minimum wage must now pay the city's living wage of $8.85 an hour, an amount that increases by the year.
After the meeting Coss said he was unfazed by his hour-long shelling. "I thought they were very cordial," he said with smile. "They're elected officials at a public hearing, they can ask whatever they want. I won't judge whether they were the right questions or the wrong questions - on point or off point."
Although the living wage bill already passed in 35-14 vote, some aldermen say that Moore called the meeting to combat threats of a mayoral veto and to stem the tide of politicians who might changing sides.
Blognotes - Part #1: "We've got more work going [on] downtown in one block than . . . those cities combined. One block -- not two blocks or three blocks," Mayor Daley said. "They should go back and help their own cities.
Blognotes - Part #2: Alderman Moore should go back to his own ward and help his own people.
9 comments:
And their travel expenses, lodging, meals and souvenirs were paid for by ________________?
The General Assembly passed the landmark bill in April, but it was vetoed by Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. (R), who called the measure an unwarranted intrusion by government. Lawmakers will seek to override his veto in January.
Wal-Mart is the only known business that would be affected by the bill, which would require companies with more than 10,000 workers to spend at least 8 percent of their payrolls on health benefits or contribute to the state's health insurance program for the poor.
The clash has coincided with a national public relations push by Wal-Mart, which has tapped former presidential advisers to counter its reputation as a low-wage employer with benefits so stingy that some workers rely on public assistance. The company recently announced an expansion of health insurance options for employees, more than 15,000 of whom work in Maryland.
Thursday, November 17, 2005; Page A01
Preparing for a showdown with organized labor in the Maryland legislature, Wal-Mart has deployed at least a dozen Annapolis lobbyists and is making strong overtures to black lawmakers, including a $10,000 donation to help them pay for a recent conference.
The retail giant hopes to derail legislation that would effectively force the company to boost spending on employee health benefits.
http://wakeupwalmart.com/tour/splash.html
call 772 778 6677 in Vero Beach Fla.
Ask what percentage of employees are on some form of public aid.
If they answer less than %80 they are lying.
We MUST vote JoMo out of office. The guy is a joke. He is anything but a public servant.
Jeff Orr, what are you talking about?
Wal-Mart Corp. has more employees and family members enrolled in Medicaid than any company.
Wal-Mart Corp. which has 91,000 full-time and part-time employees in Florida, has about 12,300 workers or dependents eligible for Medicaid.
In Jebs State
Typically, two children could qualify for Medicaid if their parents' combined income is less than $19,350 a year. A pregnant woman could make up to $17,704 a year and her baby would automatically be eligible for Medicaid for up to a year. A family of four is eligible for KidCare if the parents earn less than $38,700 a year.
At least JoMo took a stand and voted.
Compare that to chicken shit Helen Shiller.
Find out more about Helen Shiller at What The Helen.
Post a Comment