Living Wage in the News

LIVING WAGE COALITION IN THE NEWS

LIVING WAGE LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

December 12, 2003

Living Wages

EDITOR: A small group of workers in Sebastopol will find a special Christmas treat under the tree this year, thanks to the Sebastopol City Council.

Due to their sense of economic justice and compassion for the working poor, the first living wage ordinance in Sonoma County was adopted in Sebastopol on Nov. 18. The ordinance, offered by the Living Wage Coalition of Sonoma County, is based on two fundamental principles of justice: 1) No one working full time should have to raise a family in poverty, but should receive a livable wage providing for decent shelter, clothing, food and health care;
2) Public tax dollars should not be used to foster poverty by paying workers less than a living wage.

The working poor have a difficult time making ends meet any time of the year, but can you imagine how heart-wrenching it must be at Christmastime to have to decide whether to pay bills or buy gifts for your children? Most workers affected by the Sebastopol Living Wage Ordinance will be earning several dollars more per hour, plus health care. We hope this will make their families' Christmas a little brighter.

Happy holidays to all.

G. A. Hottel

Living Wage Coalition of Sonoma County,
Santa Rosa

_______________________________________________________________________________

November 25, 2003

Economic justice

EDITOR: The Sebastopol City Council passed the first living wage ordinance in Sonoma County at the Council meeting on Nov. 18. The Living Wage Coalition commends council members Linda Kelley, Sam Spooner, Craig Litwin and Larry Robinson for giving serious attention to the research sponsored by the coalition which established the basic wage needed to live in Sonoma County without public subsidies or private charity.

The adoption of a living-wage ordinance by a community sends a signal that the citizens support a high road economic development strategy that results in good jobs with benefits that creates a virtuous cycle of increased spending power leading to vigorous local business activity. Contrast this to the low road model we are assiduously sold by the economic predators who demand public subsidies, tax breaks and special treatment so that they can construct bottom feeder businesses that create poverty-wage McJobs and siphon money out of the county to be sent to off-shore tax havens.

We in the living-wage movement are reframing the issue around wages to support an equitable and sustainable economic development path. Our core belief is that no one who works full time should live in poverty. Economic policy should be centered on the health of the community. Join us in our work to create economic justice in Sonoma County as we move on to pass living-wage ordinances in every city in the county.

BEN BOYCE
Living Wage Coalition
of Sonoma County, Sonoma

________________________________________________________________________________

December 3, 2003
Santa Rosa Press Democrat

Reducing poverty

EDITOR: On Nov. 18, the Sebastopol City Council passed a living wage ordinance, which offers hope to hundreds of poorly paid wage earners in Sonoma County. I particularly appreciate this because I once served a faith community in Sebastopol that actively supports the working poor by contributing a site for the interfaith food bank and by providing a free medical clinic. It is not surprising that churches, synagogues and mosques are motivated to serve people in need. Charity to disadvantaged people is a major tenet of all faiths.

Having said this, I believe, however, that charity also tends to perpetuate that same economic disadvantage that drives people to need food charity and medical assistance. It is ironic that charity from the faith community detracts attention from the primary cause of poverty, which is low wages without health care. It is ironic that handouts falsely legitimatize the exploitation of wage earners that work for less than they can support themselves and their families.

I believe that the action of the Sebastopol City Council addresses the root cause of poverty: low wages without health care. By passing the living-wage ordinance, Sebastopol with its wonderfully caring citizens can lead our county toward the reduction of poverty. This offers the dignity of self-sufficiency to God's hard-working people and supports the moral principle that no wage-earner who works a 40-hour week should have to live in poverty.

THE REV. NORMAN L. CRAM JR.
The Living Wage Coalition
of Sonoma County, Sonoma

SUPPORT LIVING WAGE
Published on February 19, 2002
BYLINE: BARBARA GIORDANO, Santa Rosa

EDITOR: As the campaign season gathers momentum, I wish to challenge the candidates for office and the voters with the issue of a living wage. Since its inception in Baltimore churches, the living wage movement has sought to influence citizens to demand, politicians to support and employers to grant wages that meet the basic needs of earners. A concrete form of persuasion has been passage of a living wage ordinance. More than 90 such ordinances have been passed in this country, including ordinances in Oakland, Los Angeles and Santa Cruz. Here in Sonoma County, however, in Santa Rosa, the City Council of one of the most expensive cities in the country, failed to add their weight to this important movement, and even voted against a proposal merely to look into the idea of a living wage ordinance. What could they have against mere knowledge? Some who voted this proposal down are candidates again. I challenge them to revisit their decision to avoid informing themselves about the worth of a living wage ordinance for Santa Rosa. I ask all of our candidates to go on record about the issue, and I urge the voters to seek out and support those candidates who support a living wage.

BARBARA GIORDANO
Santa Rosa

REVISIT ISSUE
Published on February 5, 2002
BYLINE: MICHAEL ALLEN, Santa Rosa

EDITOR: The recent study and counting of the homeless revealed that a significant number of persons are working gainfully but at wages that condemn them to live in sub-human conditions. We believe that Mayor Mike Martini's vote against studying a living wage ordinance is a tragic mistake. It is the hope of the Living Wage Coalition that the Santa Rosa City Council will revisit this issue in the near future, to consider the following: To rent a two-bedroom apartment in Santa Rosa requires a housing wage in excess of $14 per hour. Using public dollars to pay poverty wages is unjust, unwise and bad public policy. Why should an individual working full time depend on welfare and/or charity? More than 70 American cities have adopted successful living wage ordinances without harming municipal finances; in fact, economic studies show a positive effect on the local economy. It is time to do the right thing for the right reasons. Mr. Martini, listen to your constituents and provide positive leadership on this issue.

MICHAEL ALLEN
Santa Rosa

THE RIGHT THING
Published on January 11, 2002
BYLINE: RABBI MICHAEL A. ROBINSON, Santa Rosa

EDITOR: On Jan. 1, The Press Democrat published a page one story stating that the minimum wage in California has been raised to $6.75 an hour. What the article did not mention is that it is impossible for anyone to survive in California without assistance on $6.75 per hour. It is because it is impossible to survive on minimum wages in Santa Rosa that the Living Wage Coalition asked the City Council to study a living wage ordinance.

The coalition prepared a sample ordinance, borrowing heavily from those adopted by other cities in Northern California. We asked the City Council to appoint a task force to study our ordinance and how it has effected those cities that have adopted them, and to look at a study being completed at UC Berkeley on our proposed ordinance and how it would impact the city's budget, our low-income workers and the city's economy. The Santa Rosa City Council voted 4-3 not to appoint a task force to study this issue. We would hope that the whole council, which has supported a small shelter for 40 to 45 homeless people, would look seriously into this proposal to do economic justice in our life as a community. It is the right thing to do.
RABBI MICHAEL A. ROBINSON
Santa Rosa

NOT DEMOCRACY
Published on December 24, 2001
BYLINE: LARRICK McDOWELL, Santa Rosa

EDITOR: Whatever happened to the democratic process? In regard to the living wage proposal recently put before the Santa Rosa City Council, I was informed that 150 people showed up in support of this ordinance. These people represent a vast cross-section of our society: environmentalists, factions of diverse religions, nonprofit organizations, small businesses and labor unions to name a few. With all this swelling of ground support from the immediate community at large, how can the council, in good faith, turn its back on this issue without even giving the ordinance the investigation it so rightly deserves?

I've always been of the ilk that true democracy is government in which the people hold the ruling power either directly or through their elected representatives. My query is: Are our elected officials exerting the will of the populace (their respective constituencies), or are they doing the bidding of select special interest groups who may have in the past filled their campaign coffers with greenbacks?

After the council voted 4-3 in favor of not exploring the possibilities of working or partnering with this coalition, I'm convinced that democracy was not served. Justice? No. Just us.
LARRICK McDOWELL
Santa Rosa

RECONSIDER ACTION
BYLINE: TERESE VOGE, Family Action of Sonoma County
Published on December 15, 2001

EDITOR: As child and family advocates, we were disappointed in the Santa Rosa City Council's unwillingness to study an issue that is supported by a broad spectrum of the community. A large crowd came out last week to make a statement that they believe it is the responsibility of the city of Santa Rosa to make sure that the city and its contractors pay wages that allow the residents of Santa Rosa to meet their basic needs -- to feed, clothe and find housing for their families.

Despite this clear interest by the community, the council made a decision to dismiss the ordinance without having adequate information from which to make a decision in the first place. Numerous questions about the potential impact of the ordinance were left unanswered, yet a majority of members cited reasons for dismissal that drew on erroneous assumptions about the consequences of implementing the ordinance exactly as it was proposed. The ordinance was presented as a starting place, with the intention of coming to an agreement on what would be most acceptable to all involved parties.

How can the council members dismiss this opportunity without even investigating the possibilities? Shouldn't we all have a chance to understand what the pros and cons of the living wage ordinance are? This City Council should reconsider and appoint a committee to thoroughly investigate the living wage ordinance.
TERESE VOGE
Family Action of Sonoma County

CONTINUE DIALOGUE
BYLINE: MONIQUE LUSSE
Published on December 4, 2001

EDITOR: It is every working person's right to receive wages and benefits that support themselves and their families. Anything less than that is unconscionable, and it is immoral for employers to exploit workers by paying poverty wages.
It is the city of Santa Rosa's ethical mandate to use taxpayer monies to pay its own workers a living wage and to expect its contractors to pay their workers a living wage. The Living Wage Ordinance presently before the City Council is a way to actualize that mandate. It is my enthusiastic hope that the council will find a way to give the Living Wage Coalition's Living Wage Ordinance the hearing that it deserves today; this means voting to continue the dialogue.
MONIQUE LUSSE
Living Wage Coalition

LIVING WAGE ISSUE
BYLINE: STEVEN A. BENJAMIN
Published on December 1, 2001

EDITOR: After reading the headlines in the Empire News section about the City Council's decision to possibly scrap the living wage ordinance, I felt compelled to write a response. I am shocked and outraged that the City Council of Santa Rosa is ready to dismiss this issue so soon after its initial proposal. Not even taking the time to properly investigate and research this issue is a slap in the face to all working people in Santa Rosa and Sonoma County. This ordinance has already been adopted by more than 70 cities nationwide, including: Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, and most recently Richmond. It can work here, too. All we are asking for is a fair chance to research, investigate and possibly modify the ordinance to fit Santa Rosa's needs. It is not our intention to bankrupt the city or county budgets. It is our intention to provide justice in the workplace, to allow working people the opportunity to live in decency and to be able to afford housing and health care for their families.

I find it disgraceful that our City Council agreed to give our city manager a $19,000 a year raise, and yet won't even allow this ordinance a fair chance. Reward the wealthy and punish the working poor. Shame on you and on us for voting you into office. I strongly urge the members of the City Council who oppose this ordinance to reconsider your position.
STEVEN A. BENJAMIN
Living Wage Coalition

LIVING WAGE STUDY
BYLINE: TIM WIESE, Annapolis
Published on November 30, 2001

EDITOR: Patty Streckfuss suggested on Nov. 17 that the Santa Rosa City Council should study economics before voting on a living wage ordinance. One might hope that this study would include a read of the new study of the effect of improved wages and benefits for SFO workers, published by Institute for Labor and Employment headed by University of California economics professor Michael Reich. Reich evaluated the impact of SFO's new Quality Standards Program that was instituted in January 2000, providing higher standards of recruitment, training, pay, and benefits for many airport workers, such as baggage screeners and boarding agents. Since the new standards have been implemented, turnover at SFO has dropped from 110 percent annually, to 25 percent. Employers have reported improvements in overall job performance, greater ease in recruitment, reduced absenteeism, fewer disciplinary problems, and higher morale. The study summarizes: ``Paying airport workers a living wage is proving to be successful at SFO.'' While I share Streckfuss' concern for the interests of taxpayers, I would point out that a living wage would likely make bottom-line economic sense in Santa Rosa as well. Increased costs of paying a living wage may well be offset by a more efficacious work force in addition to the obvious reductions in the costs of social services the working poor must rely upon.
TIM WIESE
Annapolis

ECONOMIC JUSTICE
BYLINE: GREGORY WONDERWHEEL
Published on November 25, 2001

EDITOR: The living-wage movement is about economic justice verses economic power.
It's a national movement that is not going away. Detractors say that the time isn't right when the economy is going strong. They also say the time isn't right when the economy is weak. To them the time will never be right. Why? Because the living wage challenges their economic power to exploit working people with poverty-level wages. The living wage ordinances around the country are simple. They say the people working for government, and under substantial government contracts, deserve to be able to afford a decent living in the communities benefited by their work. That is economic justice. It's fair. It's honest.

The Santa Rosa City Council asked its city staff to review a proposed living wage ordinance and provide a list of questions raised by the ordinance. Rather than outline a plan for obtaining the answers from those cities that have already enacted living-wage ordinances, the very well-paid city managers, speaking through Ronald L. Bosworth, department of administrative services, have recommended that ``the City Council not consider a living-wage ordinance.'' How reasonable or logical is it to provide a list of questions and then recommend that the City Council refuse to give itself the answers? What is Bosworth afraid of?

LIVING WAGES
Published on November 24, 2001
BYLINE: JOHN MORRISON, President, SEIU No. 707, Santa Rosa

EDITOR: A living wage ordinance proposed by nonprofits, religious groups, community leaders, students, instructors of history, unions of the North Bay, attorneys, Democrats, Greens, business and independents of all ages, cannot be classed as misinformed ``young socialists,'' but ardent responsive citizenry seeking social justice through a long consensus-building process.

Businesses contracting to the city serve no one by paying poverty wages. With a reasonable study and investment, the city can promote social equity through a living wage. A living wage minimizes crime, welfare, commuting, homelessness and social dependency. A living wage maximizes worker retention, health care, dignity, family values, economic savings and purchasing power. It would serve the status quo of Sonoma County in public service to provide for economic stability and reinvest in its community which is diverse and hard working. High-road economics is a long-term benefit. It's very American to work hard and get paid a fair share of the American pie. Low-bid-peanut butter from the sky may help the enemy. The American worker is not the enemy but the foundation of our society. Let's come together and fight economic terrorism. Endorse a Sonoma County living wage.
JOHN MORRISON
President, SEIU No. 707

LIVING WAGE APPLAUSE
Published on November 22, 2001
BYLINE: SHARON BOYCE

EDITOR: As an employee of a local human service nonprofit organization, I applaud the Santa Rosa City Council's willingness to take a first step toward enacting a living wage ordinance.

Its agreement to spend this month examining studies of how the living wage has impacted other cities is a good beginning, as is their expressed intent to meet with community members to craft legislation that works for this city and for the non-profits that will be affected by it. It is heartening to see that the majority of the City Council members understand that people who work full-time should not live in poverty nor have to rely on public assistance. They have shown their compassion and concern for the overall good of the community in their efforts toward a homeless shelter. Now it's time to make a difference for the workers and families who will benefit from a living wage ordinance. The bottom line should be not how much can we squeeze from our workers for how little money, but what is the quality of life in this community and how fairly is our money being distributed. People who earn a living wage put it back into the community.
I see the day coming when the workers who provide care, food and solace to our citizens receive their fair share of our community's wealth.
SHARON BOYCE

THE RIGHT THING
Published on November 20, 2001
BYLINE: G.A. HOTTEL, Santa Rosa

EDITOR: Seventy cities around America have adopted living wage ordinances: Detroit, Denver, Chicago, Miami, New York, Boston, L.A., San Francisco, Oakland, to name a few. Why should Santa Rosa join them? It is the right thing to do: a moral issue applied to the real world of human beings. Why should a full-time American worker have to raise a family in poverty? Families should be honored and supported. A living wage values the family as the basic social unit at a time when families are financially beleaguered. Almost 25 percent of California children live in poverty. They deserve better. It is in the American tradition of self-reliance. Which is better -- to have the working poor dependent on public services (food stamps, housing subsidies, health care, child care, tax breaks) or to pay workers a living wage and allow them to be responsible for themselves? Which approach promotes self-reliance, dignity and citizenship? Why are we willing to house criminals in relative physical luxury but deny our law-abiding working poor a living wage? Why are we willing to spend billions on corporate welfare but deny children decent lives?
G.A. HOTTEL

LIVING WAGE
Published on November 8, 2001
BYLINE: CHRISTINA CARPENTER, Sustainable Sonoma County

EDITOR: Why would Sustainable Sonoma County endorse the Living Wage Campaign? Think about sustainability as taking care of the needs of today in ways that allow future generations fulfilling lives in a livable world.
To underscore the connection between socio-economics and sustainability, I refer to The Natural Step, a sustainability framework developed by a team of 50 renowned scientists. TNS outlines four system conditions, three of which are purely scientific. The fourth condition states that, to ever achieve the first three principles, resources must be shared efficiently and equitably. I also speak as a single mother -- challenged to provide basic needs but also to provide reasons for my children to become contributing members of society, crafting meaningful lives with hope for the future. Sustainability is about being valued as individuals rather than economic units. It recognizes a new ``bottom line,'' affirming that individual worth, environmental health and vibrant communities really matter. I commend the Santa Rosa City Council for exploring this issue. SSC supports a collaborative process to consider how the ordinance may fit with the world we want to create and the values we're building upon for the future.
CHRISTINA CARPENTER
Sustainable Sonoma County

REALISTIC SOLUTION
Published on September 15, 2001
BYLINE: R. MILES MENDENHALL, Sebastopol

EDITOR: Thank you for printing the guest editoral by professor Marty Bennett about living wages.

In these times, with homeless encampments along Santa Rosa Creek and economic retrenchment in the global economy, the cold, hard statistics that show the shrinking of the middle class and the continuation and growth of poverty in our country are a necessary reminder of the daily reality of many working people. The need for a raise in pay for low-income working families is just as crucial as the poor have always known it's been. Americans want to work -- we work longer and harder than any other industrialized country in the world. But we need to be paid enough to live on, and a great number of us are not. The living wage movement is a beginning to a realistic and moderate solution to the problem of systemic poverty in our nation. It is the right and just thing to do.
R. MILES MENDENHALL
Sebastopol

BACK TO NEWS INDEX

LIVING WAGE COALITION OF SONOMA COUNTY
Phone: 707-623-7395
Email: livingwagesoco@gmail.com
PO Box 427
Santa Rosa, CA 95402