Item B - Econ.Dev.Comm. Recomm. - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

No changes Page 6 No changes Page 7 After a brief discussion members agreed to add the concept that while the committee attempted to narrow the ideas for economic development it discussed, it was still able to address only a few of numerous possibilities because of time limititations. Page 8 Mr. Korth said that he was not comfortable using the term "family-wage" and did not know what it meant. Members agreed and decided to address it when discussing page 9. Mr. Kahle suggested added the phrase "and more time than the general public" after "City Councilors" in the second sentence of the first paragraph. Page 9 Ms. Teninty said that she liked this section of the report and thought that it provided a general guiding statement for the City Council. She suggested adding a fourth issue which the committee discussed and thought was important. The fourth bullet point would be Local Revenue Impacts. After discussion, members agree to delete the following phrase from the first sentence under the first bullet point, Family Wages: and that higher wages for low-income workers merit more policy attention than higher wages for high-income workers. Members asked the staff to rework the following phrase in the third sentence of the paragraph under Family Wages: that increasing wages for lower-income workers should be an important goal... After discussion about what terms to use for "increasing wages" or "family-wage jobs," Ms. Teninty suggested using the following list of conditions under number 3 on page 7 of Mr. Braud's memorandum: a. Attractive wages b. Employee benefits c. Job training and advancement opportunities d. Job retention Members agreed. MINUTES--Mayor's Committee on Economic Development June 28, 2004 Page 9