The high cost of living in Boulder County is old news. You won’t be surprised to read that a 2011 report showed the state minimum wage was already $3.61 shy of providing an individual with a self-sufficient wage even at that time. Self-sufficient meaning a person could live on their paycheck with no reliance on government assistance. Even though the report, from the Colorado Center on Law and Policy, shows the discrepancy between the state minimum wage and what it takes to live in Boulder County, it still might not be realistic to expect Boulder County wages to go up that much even if Boulder were to pass what is called a living wage ordinance.
According to Claire Levy of the Colorado Center on Law and Policy, Colorado law prevents a city from raising its minimum wage above the state level, like Seattle and San Francisco have done. However, Colorado cities do have the authority to pass “living wage” ordinances that set a minimum wage for a certain small group of people: Boulder County is sponsoring a discussion about instituting a living wage ordinance for employees working on city contracts as maintenance workers, security employees, people in charge of public lawns, recreation centers and a variety of other services.
Unlike a higher minimum wage, a living wage ordinance would only affect a small percentage of Boulder County residents, those employed by city contractors. Yet Don Grant, a University of Colorado sociology professor who is the former spokesperson for a Tucson, Ariz. group that lobbied for living wages says, “[Living wage ordinances] set a good example for the larger community. I view this as a first step.”
Grant will appear with other panelists on Sept. 3 at the Boulder Chamber of Commerce for a forum on living wages. The forum is a collaboration between Boulder County and the Boulder Human Relations Commission, and will present both pros and cons of living wage ordinances. The public is encouraged to participate.
The outcome of the forum will dictate what the Human Relations Commission proposes to Boulder City Council for their 2015 working agenda, and for Eliberto Mendoza, the director of the Boulder City Community Action Program, it is important for the broader public to be educated on how much some Boulder County families are struggling on minimum wage.
“If nothing changes, if we stay status quo on this [living wage] issue, as well as other issues, what is going to happen is people will continue to struggle a lifelong struggle,“ says Mendoza. “People will still use food banks and other community resources, and all those resources get taxed.”
The first living wage campaigns were launched in 1990 and hundreds have been established nationwide to address poverty. A living wage is defined as a wage that meets basic needs and supports a decent standard of living within a specific community depending on the cost of living.
According to the 2011 report from the Colorado Center on Law and Policy, the minimum wage fails to provide a living wage for most families: To provide their family with a living wage, it would require each adult in a family of two adults and two children to work roughly 68 hours per week on minimum wage.
According to the report, a single adult would need to make a living wage of $11.61 per hour in Boulder County for self-sufficiency, $3.61 above the state minimum wage. Two adults with one preschooler and one school-aged child would need to earn a living wage of $16.08 per adult per hour.
Those numbers do not necessarily predict realistic expectations of a living wage ordinance if one were passed in Boulder County.
“We don’t know yet what a living wage [ordinance in Boulder County] would look like,” says Mendoza, who will act as the moderator at the Sept. 3 forum. “I’ve heard $12 to $15 per hour.”
Typically, living wage ordinances require wages to be set at 125 percent of the poverty level, according to Grant. For an individual, that would be a $14,363 yearly income.
According to the Colorado Center on Law and Policy, a Boulder County family would need an income three times the federal poverty level to pay basic expenses like housing, food and child care.
“Living wage ordinances are not by any means a cure for a city’s entire employment problems,” says Grant. “The real purpose is not so much to cure local employment problems as to raise awareness about them and set an example of what constitutes a good corporate citizen. The public should care about this issue if they do not want their tax dollars to be used by local governments to essentially subsidize a poverty-level existence through the outsourcing of various services to low-paying contractors.”
When a contractor wins a contract from a city, he or she is not required to pay the workers who provide the service at a certain rate, according to Grant.
“With a living wage ordinance, those workers hired by a contractor to provide a service with city money must be paid a living wage that puts them slightly above the federal poverty level,” he says.
Claire Levy, executive director at the Colorado Center on Law and Policy and a former Colorado Democratic legislator, says she thinks living wages are something City Council needs to think seriously about, but she does not believe living wages will truly be livable.
“What people may consider a true livable wage, meaning enough to allow someone to provide for all their basic needs without public assistance, would probably be unrealistic,” she says. “It should be pegged, though, so that someone working full time would not be below the poverty level.”
There is no set formula for the way a living wage ordinance must be structured and the forum will discuss various options, including requiring healthcare and other benefits.
According to County Commissioner Jose Beteta, the forum will consider the possibility of having a living wage that is staggered depending on family size.
“A living wage ordinance can take into consideration the number of people in a family, but in many cities, such as Tucson, it does not,” says Grant, who sees that issue as one of the many complications of living wage ordinances: While they might set a minimum wage that supports an individual, they may still fall short of providing a good standard of living for someone with a family.
Living wage ordinances can take into account benefits, like insurance, but they don’t have to, according to Grant, who says that 10 years ago Tucson required contractors to pay $9 per hour with medical benefits, $8 without insurance.
According to Grant, the city of Tucson calculated how much in tax dollars it would need to cover the costs of raising the wages of all of its subcontracted workers to at least 125 percent of the federal poverty level. The city also calculated the cost of hiring someone to ensure contractors complied with the living wage ordinance. According to the city’s estimates, the expense would be roughly $2 per citizen to cover the costs of the ordinance.
Though a living wage ordinance would impact a small portion of Boulder County employees, Levy says she believes it sets an example for the rest of the community.
“The [broader public] should demand that their city council and elected representatives have values,” Levy says. “City policies should not be to save money at all costs. If we as residents of this city are going to get upset over what Wal-Mart does, we need to look in the mirror and ask, ‘Are we benefitting as taxpayers from the city for exactly the same practices?’”
Respond: letters@boulderweekly.com
