Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07311990 - H.5 H. 5 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on July 31, 1990 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson and Fanden NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: Prevailing Wage Ordinance This is the time for public hearing on the proposed ordinance to provide prevailing wage standards and promote workplace safety for industrial construction within the unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County. Supervisor Powers introduced the proposed ordinance and commented that it was designed to promote workplace safety for industrial construction within the unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County. Supervisor Schroder noted that the Board had received correspondence from various agencies asking for more time to study the affects of the ordinance. Chair Fanden noted that she understood the ordinance would be for industrial construction only, and asked for further clarification of that definition. County Counsel reviewed the portion of the ordinance dealing with the definition of industrial construction, as opposed to residential and commercial. The Chair opened the public hearing and the following persons appeared and expressed their views with respect to the proposed ordinance. Walter E. Murray, Vice President, Industrial Association of Contra Costa County, requested that the Board defer action on the proposed ordinance to permit the Association, its membership and other members of the public to comment after review of the ordinance. Thomas Adams, Adams & Broadwell, Counsel for the Contra Costa Building Trades Council and Northern California Pipe Trades, District Council # 51, advised that the people he represents believe there would be economic benefits achieved by the ordinance as well as prevention of industrial accidents. He submitted, for the record of this proceeding, a copy of a study entitled: Local Effects of Employing Low Paid Workers in Industrial Construction. Greg Feere, representing the Contra Costa Buildings Trades, endorsed the ordinance and discussed the relationship of safety and unskilled workers on job sites. Doyle Williams, representing the Steamfitters Local 342, spoke in favor of the ordinance. Ray Trujillo, Ironworkers Local 378, spoke in favor. Aram Hodess , Plumbers & Steamfitters Union 159, spoke in favor. Henry A. Alker, Chair of the Governmental Affairs Committee of the Pittsburg Chamber of Commerce, requested time to review the ordinance and the materials presented this day so that his Board could consider taking a position. He expressed concern with respect to the safety issues discussed by earlier speakers, as well as with the impact this ordinance may have on industrial development . He suggested that the Board defer consideration to allow other organizations in the County to review the ordinance. Hal Downie, a Director of the Contra Costa Council, expressed concern that members of the Council did not have sufficient notice that this ordinance was to be considered and did not receive a copy in time to thoroughly review it. He requested that the matter be deferred to allow his organization time to review the ordinance and the material prepared in favor of it. Rick Vossekuil, representing the Contra Costa Council, presented a position letter from the Council in opposition to the proposed ordinance and urged that a decision on the ordinance be postponed. Richard McPeak, Business Representative for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 302 , urged an affirmative vote for the proposed ordinance. Michael Dunne, Director of Governmental Activities for the Concord Chamber of Commerce, agreed with the Pittsburgh Chamber of Commerce and the Contra Costa Council, commenting that there has not been sufficient time to review the ordinance nor take a position on the issue. Ken Cleaveland, representing the Associated Builders & Contractors, Golden Gate Chapter, spoke . in opposition to the concept of a prevailing wage ordinance. He urged the Board not to adopt the ordinance. Henry Clarke, Local 1, discussed the need for laws to protect the rights of workers at all levels of Government and his support for the ordinance. Peter Muller, representing the Associated General Contractors of California, advised that he had no knowledge of the proposed ordinance until yesterday and indicated his opposition to the adoption of it. Jonothan Dumas, 2155 La Mirada Drive, Richmond, advised that, as a craftsman and as an individual who works in the community, he was in favor of the ordinance. Robert Gilmore, Business Manager of the San Mateo County Building Trades Council, commented that this ordinance was much narrower than that adopted by San Mateo County. He urged adoption of the ordinance as soon as possible. Steve Roberti, Executive Secretary of the Central Labor Council, indicated support of the Central Labor Council for the proposed ordinance. There being no further speaker cards, the Chair inquired if there were any further comments. Supervisor Powers commented that he wished to introduce three letters received by the Board, one from Tosco Refining Company of Martinez, advising that they did not receive sufficient notice; and one from Senator Petris and one from Assemblyman Tom Bates supporting the ordinance. Supervisor Powers commented on the history of the concept of the proposed ordinance, and commented in general on the various aspects of the proposed ordinance. Supervisor Powers recommended that the proposed ordinance be introduced and that the second reading and adoption be deferred to August 14, 1990, Supervisor Schroder asked for clarification as to whether the Board would take additional public testimony on August 14 , and upon an affirmative response, requested that anyone who desires to give additional testimony or information to the Board, have it before the Board at least by August 10. Supervisor Torlakson commented on the various components of the the proposed ordinance. Supervisor McPeak noted that continuing the matter for two weeks should give all concerned an opportunity to review the proposed ordinance, and invited input by the public prior to the continued hearing. Supervisor Fanden commented on the various aspects of the ordinance and the need for safety on industrial construction sites. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the ordinance is introduced and the hearing is continued to August 14, 1990 at 11: 00 a.m. i hereby certify that this is a true and correct COPY Of an action taken and entered on the ndnutes of the Board ofSttpertriso On the date thoMm. ATTESTED: y PHIL BAT LOR, ,terk of t e Board By Cof Supe e/1nd County Administrate i Q ,Deputy cc: County Administrator Q County Counsel