Three alderman, including one hungry for the jobs that a new Wal-Mart store would bring to her impoverished South Side ward, said they will switch sides and support Mayor Daley’s veto Monday of the big-box minimum wage ordinance.
It was the first veto in his 17 years as mayor, and he knew he had the support to make it stick.
“I am going to be changing my vote, joining the mayor in a veto,” said Ald. Shirley Coleman (16th). “The community wants me to make sure than an opportunity exists for people willing to work for something other than $10 an hour, and Wal-Mart has expressed strong interest in building in my ward.”
Ald. Danny Solis (25th), a Daley ally, said, “This was a difficult choice, but I’m going to go with the mayor. This ordinance is unfair. The Wal-Marts and Targets of the world can just set up shop on the borders of the city. I’m about a living wage, but not if it handicaps the city.”
In his veto letter, Daley said, “I understand and share a desire to ensure that everyone who works in the city of Chicago earns a decent wage. But I do not believe that this ordinance, well intentioned as it may be, would achieve that end.
“Rather, I believe it would drive jobs and businesses from our city, penalizing neighborhoods that need additional economic activity the most,” Daley said. “In light of this, I believe it is my duty to veto this ordinance.”
Ald. George Cardenas (12th), who voted in favor of the measure but signaled a possible switch shortly afterward, said he also will join with Daley.
Cardenas said he changed sides on the issue after the mayor spoke to him about the ordinance.
“My decision is based on Mayor Daley’s track record,” Cardenas said in a statement. “Chicago has never looked better.”
Cardenas, a freshman alderman elected with the backing of the pro-Daley Hispanic Democratic Organization, said the ordinance would harm “the very people unions are trying to help.”
“I am angry, but not surprised,” Ald. Joe Moore (49th), sponsor of the ordinance, said after Daley filed his veto letter with the city clerk’s office.
Other “living wage” advocates predicted that a new push for another, and perhaps broader, minimum pay measure would come in the future.
“We are not going away,” said Dennis Gannon, president of the Chicago Federation of Labor. “Labor has been in the city of Chicago for over 120 years, and because we may have lost this battle with the mayor, it doesn’t mean the war is over.”
Other supports echoed his statements.
“We are going to write another ordinance,” said Ald. Freddrenna Lyle (6th). “We are going to start over again. … Since everybody was complaining that this would only attack [big-box retailers], maybe we will go ahead and go after everybody this time and say everybody has to pay” a city minimum.
Only small store operators would be exempt under such a measure, Lyle said.
But opponents of the ordinance applauded Daley’s move.
“I think that this encouraging news is not only good for the business community, it’s equally good for parts of the city that need economic development and jobs,” said Gerald Roper, president of the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce.
The legislation was passed 35-14 by the council in July.
Moore would need to muster 34 votes to override the veto, but it appeared Monday that he would fall several votes short.
The ordinance would affect more than 40 existing retail stores in the city. There has been loud and lengthy debate over whether it would stifle plans by retailers for more big-box stores in neighborhoods hungry for economic development.
Wal-Mart, Lowe’s and Target Corp. said they were putting plans for future stores on hold pending the fate of the big-box ordinance–news that drew scorn from ordinance supporters who contended the Chicago market is too attractive for big retailers to bypass.
“We commend Mayor Daley for vetoing the ordinance and ensuring more jobs, more convenience and more choice for Chicago’s working families,” said Michael Lewis, a Wal-Mart senior vice president. “His action encourages desperately needed business investment and development in the city with job opportunities and savings for those who need it most.”
Solis said Wal-Mart officials assured him they would build at least five new Chicago stores if the ordinance were repealed.
“I think the mayor did the right thing,” said Ald. William Beavers (7th). “I voted against the ordinance, because I felt that $7 an hour was better than no dollars.
“It’s a union issue, but the unions need to get off their behinds and organize instead of coming to the City Council to try to get us to organize for them,” he said.
– – –
THE ORDINANCE
The big-box measure applies to stores of at least 90,000 square feet operated by firms with $1 billion or more in annual sales. By 2010, the minimum wage for employees will be $10 an hour and $3 in fringe benefits. Automatic annual cost-of-living increases will apply thereafter.
By comparison, the federal minimum wage is $5.15 an hour, while the state minimum is $6.50, though both amounts can be less if employees receive tips.
HOW RETAILERS HAVE REACTED TO BIG-BOX
The ordinance passed in July mandating that big-box retailers pay higher wages and benefits to workers sent a chill through the Chicago retail industry, from high-end department stores to hardware outlets.
Aside from Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the primary target of the hotly contested ordinance, the law would cover at least 18 retailers operating more than 40 stores in the city.
Nordstrom, Saks Fifth Avenue, Toys “R” Us, Home Depot, Lowe’s, Menards and Kohl’s are just a few of the stores affected, according to a list compiled by the City of Chicago’s Department of Planning & Development.
As Mayor Daley weighed whether to try to block the ordinance, some retailers shelved plans to build stores in Chicago. On Monday, Wal-Mart officials praised Daley’s veto.
– Lowe’s halted plans for two home-improvement centers in Chicago. The company’s concerns about the law caused it to shelve plans for stores at 83rd Street and Stewart Avenue and at 79th Street and Cicero Avenue.
– Officials of Wal-Mart Stores had said that as many as 20 new outlets in Chicago that had been in the planning stages were on hold because of the ordinance.
– Target Corp. has taken a similar stance on a list of planned stores here. They include one that was to have been an anchor of a $90 million shopping center on a long-vacant site at 119th Street and Marshfield Avenue and another that was to have anchored the Wilson Yard development, a $113 million project in Uptown.
———-
TELL US
Do you support or oppose the big-box minimum wage ordinance? Tell us at ritaredeye@chicago.com. Include your full name, age and neighborhood.
