Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 5.A Late Document 04 01/04/2010~~ x.14 From: Crump, Katie Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 8:25 AM To: - City Clerk Subject: FW": Living Wage Coalition and East. Washington Place development For the book -----Original Message----- From: martin bennett [mailto:mbennett@vom,com] Sent: Sunday, January 03, 2010 11:50 AM To: daveglass@comcast.net; david@davidrabbtt.com; mike4pet@aol.com; mthealy@sbcglobal.net; Ptorliat.t@aol.com; teresa4petaluma@comcast.net; tiff@designmotif.com Cc: Gaebler•, Bonne.; edanly@meyersnave.com; Brown, John; Crump, Katie Subject: Living Wage Coalition and East Washington Place development Petaluma City Council: See corrected letter below. Lt is not 2010 .:and not 2009!! Happy New Year !! Marty Bennett Petaluma City Council: Please see below a letter regarding why you should not certify the EIR nor the site map for the proposed East Washington Place development. Also, appended is a"longer version of a column about the proposed project that appeared in the Argus-Courier last week and that elaborates our reasons for opposing the project. Please do not hesitate to call me if I can provide more information about our position 939-8933. Marty Bennett Co-Chair, Living Wage Coalition cc: Petaluma staff January 3, 2010 To: Petaluma City Council From: Living Wage Coalition of Sonoma County We are writing to urge that you .not certify and accept the EIR and proposed site map for the Regency Centers proposed East Washington Place development. The EIR and site map are inadequate. Given the problems of the EIR, the council does not have complete information to determine if the project conforms to CEQA and the Petaluma General Plan. The EIR does not adequately analyze alternative land use at the site i such as light manufacturing, renewable energy, bo-tech, and other industries that could create good jobs with benefits, and substantial revenues for the city. Moreover, it is not clear if a Friedman's Home Improvement store with an outdoor lumber and materials yard will be included in the project. The EIR does not address this possibility. If ;Friedman's will become an anchor tenant, we believe this will require both a revised EIR and FEIA. Without more information another EIR could provide, the draft EIR and the fiscal and Economic Assessment (.FEIA), we believe, indicate that the project does not meet the test of General Plan conformity for the following reasons: 1) The project will create more than 600 low-wage and part-time jobs; half of the workers will not have medical benefits. The increase of aow-wage employment will only worsen the jobs-housing imbalance in the city and the county.. The growth of low-wage employment will also impact public services, such as emergency medical services at Petaluma Valley Hospital and county health clinics. 2) The project will also negatively impact other public services. The developer's contributions to public safety and fire services will not be offset by the increased costs of such a large project 3) The one-story buildings with 1500 parking spaces design are a suburban model of land-u'se development and not suitable for the urban core of Petaluma. The project is not mixed-use, but basically retail; nor does the project provide access to mass transit and promote alternative transportation like train, bicycles, or pedestrian. The General Plan clearly mandates that new developments. promote high density, smart, and equitable growth, and mass transit. 4) There is no work force or affordable housing in the project. The demand for affordable housing in the-city, particularly low and very low.-income housing, will spike significantly as a consequence of the dramatic increase of low-wage jobs. The contribution by the developer required under the jobs/housing linkage fee is insufficient to mitigate the increased'need for affordable housing. http://www.pressdemocrat:com/article/20091224/COMMUNITY/912239966?Title=Target-and-low-wage- employment- December 24, 2009 Petaluma Argus Courier Target and Low-Wage Jobs: What Are the Costs? On January 4th the Petaluma City Council will consider the proposal by Regency Centers for a shopping center on East Washington Street near the fairgrounds. A 140,.000 square-foot Target store is the anchor tenant for the project that will include other major retailers and possibly a Fried"man`s Home Improvement store. Last April, the City Council reviewed a Fiscal and Economic Impact 2 A sessment for the project completed by a consultant., .Bay Area Economics (BAE). However, Target and other proposed tenants in the project would not provide BAE with their wage and benefit data as the city requested. BAE attempted to estimate the wage levels for the 200. employees at Target (two thirds part-time) and for other tenants. The projected total employment is 331 part-time and 390 full-time. BAf claims the average hourly wage will be $.14..00 an hour for jobs created by the project. The Living Wage Coalition believes this estimate is inaccurate and that BAE underestimates the costs of the project to the taxpayer and the community. We commissioned a peer review of the BAE report by Dr, William Lester, a researcher at the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education. He found that nine out of ten employees at Target are in three occupational categories that include retail sales, stock clerks and cashiers. Based upon California Employment Development Department data, Dr. Lester calculates that the median wage for these occupations in 2008 ranges from-$9.91 to $11.60 an hour---considerably less than BAE's estimate. The wages for Target employees and other tenants fall well below the current rate of $13.64 an hour without benefits that the Petaluma 'Living Wage ordinance (passed in 2006) mandates city contractors pay their employees. Moreover, the wages for most workers employed at the shopping center are substantially less than the self-sufficiency standards for the county. The Insight Center for Community and Economic Development estimates that in 2008 a self-sufficiency, or 'living wage,' for Sonoma County was $14.90 an hour for two parents working full-time to support two children and to pay for housing, transportation, health care, child care and food. Further, William Lester estimates, based upon U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data for 2008, that 47 percent of the workers employed by Target and other department and general merchandise stores in the project will not have health care benefits. UCLA researcher Chris Tilly investigated large retailers in California and found that annual employee turnover rates are 40-80 percent, depending on the type of retail firm. High turnover and lengthy wait period for health benefits, particularly for part.-timers, combined with high co-pays and deductibles, drive down health coverage rates for workers in the retail sector. The project will generate sales tax revenue, but what are the hidden costs of poverty-wage jobs? First, in 2002 the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education reported that each year California state and local government provide $110.1 billion in public subsidies to families with at least one full-time low-wage worker who are eligible for federal and state programs such as:. Med-Cal, Healthy Families, Earned Income Tax Credit, Section 8 Housing Vouchers, and Food Stamps. California counties alone spend $1.8 billion annually to provide health care for 1.3 milliop uninsured adults according to a 2006 report by the New American Fowndaton. Low-wage workers without 3 health benefits will turn to hospital emergehcy rooms and public health clinics for their health care. Second, adding hundreds of low-wage jobs to our local economy will contribute to the growing mismatch between jobs and housing in the region, given the stagnation of wages and the relative rise of housing costs over the: last decade. According to the Santa Rosa Press Democrat, between 1996 and 2005 rents increased by 29 percent in Sonoma County, but median household income declined by 2 percent. A 2004 study by the Mendocino Council of Governments concludes "the dramatic increase of housing prices within the North Bay region has far exceeded wage gains and have left housing unaffordable to the majority. Long distance work trip commutes will be inevitable if current patterns persist." How can we encourage smart growth and transit-oriented development if workers cannot afford to live near their work places or the downtown SMART train station? Finally, part-time and temporary workers comprise nearly 30% of the work force and, since the 1970s, part-time and temporary employment has increased faster than that of the overall work force. The Bureau of Labor Statistics has acknowledged that the official unemployment rate is significantly higher if part-time workers seeking full-time jobs were counted as unemployed. What is the impact on family life, educational achievement for children, and citizen involvement in politics and civic life if more and more workers must work two or three jobs to make ends meet? The jobs new jobs at the proposed project do not conform to section 9-P-1 of the General Plan That states that the city should attempt to attract employers "who pay wages commensurate with the cost of living in Petaluma." The Living Wage Coalition urges the council to reject this project. Martin J. .Bennett teaches. American history at Santa Rosa Junior College and serves as Co-Chair of the Living Wage Coalition of Sonoma County. For more information please go to: http://lvingwagesonoma.org Dept. of Social Science Santa Rosa Junior College 1501 Mendocino Ave. Santa Rosa, Ca. 95401 (707) 527-4873 Office (707) 522-27.55 Fax (707) 939-8933 Home Office 4