HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 5.B Late Document 1 06/06/2011I i Y ill„ i
�1 From: �11Crump, Katie ull
I .
Sent: Monday, ,June 06, 2011 8:37 AM'
To: - City Clerk
Subject: FW Annual COLA for City`Living Wage Rate
Attachments: COLA City of Petaluma Living Wage.doc
Late,document
- - - -- Original Message - - - --
From: martin bennett fmailto:mbennett(@vom.coml
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 3:46 PM
To: councilman. albertson(@gmail.com councilmemberkearney( Mme .com
mike4pet@aol.com mthealy@sbcglobal.net t
�� eresa4pe.taluma(@6omcast,.net tiff(@designmotf.com
tiff(@tiffan.yrenee.com
Cc: Brown, John; Crump., Katie:; edanly(@meyersnave.com
Subject: Annual COLA for City Living Wage Rate
LIVING WAGE COALITION OF SONOMA COUNTY
June 2, 2011
To: Petaluma City Council
From: Marty Bennett, Co- chair, Living `.Wage Coalition of Sonoma County
City staff recently recommended that there should be no cost of living adjustment to the city
living wage rate (currently $12'..46 with medical benefits and, $13.99 without) for the upcoming
fiscal year. I am writing on behalf of the Living Wage Coalition of Sonoma County to urge
that the council not approve the resolution proposed by city staff. We recommend that the
council'approve the 1.5% cost of living adjustment (COLA) to the living wage rate as mandated
by 836.060.D of the Living Wage Ordinance (LWO).-
There are four compelling reasons for this:
1) All cities should strive to become model employers, and implementation of a LWO is one
important step towards this goal.
Currently, the California Budget Project calculates that of 'a living wage for Sonoma County
in 2010 is $19.11 for each of two parents working full -time to support two children: By'not
approving the annual-COLA for the living wage rate, employees of the city and city
contractors covered by e' "LWOwil.l not make progress towards a self - sufficiency wage that
actually reflects the cost of living in the City of Petaluma-.
2) Section 9 -P - -1 of.the'General Plan states that the city should encourage employers that
"pay living wages commensurate with the cost of living" to locate in Petaluma. Further,
Section 9 -P -10 of .the General Plan.states that the city will " "encourage' "economic development
j opportunities c
g s
y by providing incentives for
fir w enhance
firms [to locatein�Petaluma] that r t
paywagesthatenableworkersto lve.in Petaluma." By
freezing the city living wage..rate fo,r the next year the city - council will move away from
compliance with the spirit and intent of the General Plan.
1
3 One of the ,ma 'or problems ) p blems with the California minimum wage,is that it is not adjusted for
inflation. According to'the California Budget Project the purchasing power of the California
state minimum - wage (currentl,y $.8.00 an hour) has declined approximately 30% since its high
point in 1968. Most of the 140 living wage laws implemented by cities and counties require an
annual COLA. The states of Washingo
wa Ore ining -the COLA for gon., Florida, and V ermont also index their state
er
minimum wa e rates to inflation. B mainta e.cty living wage rate, the
City of Petaluma is sending a message to:Sacramento.'that' the statewide minimum wage rate
should be indexed to inflation.
4) The cost to the City for the.COLA is very modest -- about $6 „782 from the City General
Fund.
If I can provide more information please do not hesitate to contact me at 939 -8933 and
mbennett(@vom.com
Dept. of Social Science
Santa Rosa Junior College
1501 Mendocino Ave.
Santa Rosa, Ca.
95401
(707) 527 -4873 Office'���
(707) 522 -2755 Fax
(707) 939 -8933 Home Office'�'”' "'
2
L.IVtN`G ° AGE ,. �OAL OF SONO.MIA COUNTY
P.O. Box 427, Santa Rosa, CA 95402 ,„
(707) 623 -7395
livingwagesoco @gmaiL com
http./ /www.livingwagesonoma.org
June 2, 2011
To: Petaluma City Council
From: Marty Bennett, Co -chair Living Wage Coal tio'6'o&Sonoma County
City staff recently recommended that there should be no cost of living
adjustment to the city living wage rate (currently $12.46 "with medical
benefits and $13.99 without) for the upcoming fiscal year. I am writing on
behalf of the Living Wage Coalition of Sonoma County to urge that the
council not approve the resolution proposed by city staff. We recommend
that the council approve 1.5 % cost of living °adjustmeent' (COLA) to the
living wage rate as mandated by Section 836.060.0 of the Living Wage
Ordinance (LWO).
There are four compelling reasons for this:
1) All cities should strive to become model employers and implementation
of a LWO is one important step towards this Wage goal. Currently, the California
. .
Budget Project calculates that of a living ge for Sonoma Count y m 2010
is $19.11 for each of.-two parents working ifull-tirme to support two children. I;
By not approving the annual COLA for the living wage rate, employees of
the city and city contractors covered by the LWO'will not make progress
towards a self- sufficiency wage that actually reflects the cost of living in the
City of Petaluma.
2) Section ^9 P -1 of the General Plan states that the city should encourage
employers that "pay living wages commensurate with the cost of living" to
locate in Petaluma. Further, Section 9- P -10,of the Generai Plan states that
the city will "encourage economic development thati Will enhance job
opportunities for existing city residents by providing incentives for firms [to
locate in Petaluma] that pay wages that enable to -live in
Petaluma. By freezing the city living wage rate for th'e' next. the city
council will move away from compliance with the spirit and'intent of the
General Plan.
All e.
3) One of the major problems with the California -ih inimum,wage is that it is
not adjusted for ,inflation. According to,,the ti Cali r forni ,a,I,Budget,,Project, the
purchasing powe' g ( rrently $8:00
y 0 wage cu
an hour) has declined approxim'a °4lu
r 6f , the state minimum
tel., 30 /o since its ' point in 1968. Most
ed b Florid unties require an
of the 140 living ",wage. lawsl,implement y cities and.co
fie sta I a g to Ore , Hb i
annual COLA T tes of W shin ton, o, , g " a, a Vermont
also index their tate rii nimum wage rd b in f a y Maintaining the
COLA for the city living wage rate, the City of Petaluma is- sending a
messa ` minimum wage rate should be
indexed to inflation.
e. that "the statewide
.I
4) The cost to the, City for the COLA is very modest -- about $6,782 from
the City General Fund.
If I can provide more information please do not hesitate to contact me at
939 -8933 and mbennett(a-vom.com