Laserfiche WebLink
The council was joined for the item by Human Resource and Risk Services Director Lauren <br />Chouinard. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ excused but did not recuse himself from the discussion because of the perception of <br />conflict of interest that had been raised by the Eugene-Springfield Solidarity Network (ESSN) and <br />others. He wanted the discussion to focus on economic and policy issues rather than on whether <br />he had a conflict. Mr. Pap~ clarified that his action was not a precedent for the future regarding <br />this or another issue, and it should not be taken as a precedent for any other councilor. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey determined from City Attorney Jerome Lidz that Mr. Papa's future participation in <br />action related to the living wage was not precluded by his excusing himself from the discussion. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling declared a possible conflict of interest as his wife worked for the Metropolitan <br />Partnership, an organization partly funded by the City. He noted she was paid more than the living <br />wage being proposed. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey solicited a two-minute round of comments. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon said that she did not support a living wage ordinance as it was not good public <br />policy. She said that it would apply to those who already have jobs and did not address those <br />without jobs. She could not find data in support of claims that the living wage would reduce <br />poverty. Ms. Solomon suggested that it would be more appropriate for the council to focus on <br />economic development tools that create jobs if its goal was to reduce poverty. She further <br />suggested that that the council should address the high cost of living in Eugene mentioned by <br />living wage proponents. <br /> <br />Speaking to those who suggested that the City's adoption of a living wage would force private <br />sector wages up, Ms. Solomon said she had seen no data to support the conclusion, and <br />questioned why the public sector should drive market wages. It was a market-driven, not a <br />needs-based, process. The living wage would be unfair to the consumer, who would pay twice for <br />its costs, and to the Iow-skilled laborers who would be displaced by higher skilled workers. <br /> <br />Regarding the potential of a phased implementation of a living wage, Ms. Solomon termed it bad <br />public policy to spend money that may or may not exist in the future. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said that the goal of a living wage was to reduce poverty. While it was indisputable <br />the goal of the living wage was worthwhile, he questioned whether a living wage was the right tool <br />to accomplish the goal. The council was being asked to devote a large amount of money toward <br />realizing the goal, but he needed to be convinced the living wage was the most effective way to <br />use the money to reach that goal. He did not think the issue of the effectiveness of the living <br />wage had been examined. Regarding the potential of a phased implementation, Mr. Meisner <br />noted the Budget Committee's priority-setting exercise and said he was uncomfortable with <br />placing the living wage as a higher priority over extra police officers or firefighters when the funds <br />were available. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman believed there was a bias emerging on the part of the council against the working <br />poor. It was willing to provide tax breaks and incentives to multi-national corporations and fund <br />certain economic development strategies from the General Fund, but it was unwilling to address <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 29, 2003 Page 5 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />