Item 3: Ratification of Intergovernmental Relations Committee Actions

Home Browse Search

Mayor Piercy suggested the staff recommendation might be different if the bill did not address low-income housing. Mr. Weinman did not think so. He said the bill would also affect other City projects, such as downtown projects. Ms. Bettman determined from Ms. Wilson that the BOLI Commissioner supported the bill. Ms. Bettman said she would like to see a living wage bill that the City could support. Mr. Weinman did not perceive the bill as being a living wage bill. Mayor Piercy said the bill touched on living wages and equity and she needed more information to take a position. However, the bill appeared to be badly written and she could oppose it on that basis. She said there was a tension between wanting the best deal for the City and the best deal for citizens. Ms. Bettman recommended the committee monitor the bill. Ms. Wilson suggested that the committee support the prevailing wage element of the bill but limit the public works definition that the bill applied to. Ms. Bettman was willing to exempt low-income housing but did not think that other general public works projects should be exempted. She suggested the City should take on the issue of the BOLI wages rather than continue to oppose living wage bills. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to take a position of Priority 2, Monitor, on the bill. Mr. Pryor was willing to support the motion but thought the issues of wages needed to be well thought out. There were many factors that affected how people were paid because they were interconnected. He agreed the council should have a conversation on the topic. He thought it was difficult to take a position on such bills without that conversation. He thought that as other such bills come up, the committee should take a position of monitor pending that discussion. Mayor Piercy suggested it would be helpful to asterisk such issues because they come up every legislative session. At the end of the session, the council could have more extensive discussions to be prepared for the next session. Ms. Bettman also wanted to discuss bills that could be introduced by the City. She said the City continued to come against State statutes on particular issues, and if the council thought people should be paid adequate wages, it should introduce a bill to that effect. The motion passed unanimously, 3:0. HB 3005 Mr. Cushman said he recommended a position of Monitor because the bill, which was related to sex offender reporting, could be amended. He said that it was unlikely the City would support it because it was unlikely the Sheriff’s Office would be able to do the work needed. Ms. Bettman liked the idea of a local reporting structure for sex offenders as a better means of tracking such individuals. Mr. Cushman said the County already had many mandates and he did not think it had the staff to meet the three-day reporting requirements included in the bill. Ms. Bettman asked how many sex offenders were registered in Lane County. Mr. Cushman did not know. He said that currently, sex offenders could register with any police department, which diffused the work load. MINUTES—Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations April 19, 2007 Page 4