|
Comments:
Michael McC. - 2004-02-04 08:45:06 Ah. My mistake. (I can't stand it when people say "my bad"--how illiterate can you get?) thanks Michael. :)* * * * * * * * * * * * Michael McC. - 2004-02-04 10:47:16 I was kidding, really. Especially about the bus fare. I'm just irate about the fact that A2 has priced out all the non-richies.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-02-04 12:52:13 I know; I was kidding too. One wonders if A2 would have passed the ordinance at all had not Ypsi taken the lead.* * * * * * * * * * * * Michael McClatchey - 2004-02-04 13:13:58 It must affect an awfully small population. How many city services are contracted for, I wonder. It seems to me like a lot of it is in-house. Fire, police, trash, roads. Interesting question, yes?* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-02-04 17:20:24 Now that you mention it...that's true--it doesn't seem like a huge amount of people. Actually...now it's unclear whether this *does* apply to new in-house city hires--like, say, a clerk in the courthouse downtown--or just the extra salt truck that the city rents for a week during a blizzard...hmm.* * * * * * * * * * * * Murph - 2004-02-06 11:59:20 For one, living wages aren't based on whole cost of living; only on median rents in the area. It's something like the hourly rate at which you could work 40 hours a week and earn enough to spend 1/3 of your income on the median fair market rent (as calculated by HUD) in the area. Second, it's definitely a very limited thing in scope. I'm really not sure if, as you note, direct city hires are included. I think it mostly dictates who the city will do business with. Kind of like the Pentagon's rules on who can enter bids that lead to the clicheed super-expensive hammers and toilet seats.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-02-06 21:49:47 You gave some good info Murph; thank you. And as you say it does seem limited...so limited that I wonder how meaningful the ordinance is at all.* * * * * * * * * * * * add your comment: |