I asked E-FORUM Readers to respond to Your Thoughts on Increasing the Minimum Wage in Richmond? March 06, 2014, with their suggestions of what a minimum wage should be, and if we should even go there. The item is supposed to appear on the March 18 agenda.

I got 58 responses, and all but seven were in favor of Richmond adopting a minimum wage. The most, twenty, favored the $11.00 level.

Eleven favored something around $12.30, and seven favored $15.00.

Eight thought it was a bad idea, and three were generally in favor but did not express a preference for a specific amount.

There was significant sentiment for the Council adopting it without putting it on the ballot.

Following are the comments, broken down by levels:

$11.00/hour

1. Let's start at $11.
2. $11.00 per hour
3. 11.00/hr with hopes that it is competitive in both attracting employees and employers. that is still, for a family of 4 poverty level
4. Thanks for asking: I go for a City Council vote at $11. p hr. The classy eco analysis at the bottom of your email would allow gov to support everyone except field laborers and household help...which is what they do now. BAck to Humphrey-Hawkins!
5. My views on minimum wage. Council should pass now rather than wait for election.  Those who will benefit should not be asked to bear the cost of delayed benefit. The immediate need is great. Council should pass $11/per hour without exemption, or $12.50/hour if exemption is kept. If Council wishes to provide stimulus for small businesses,  should do so through preferences and subsidies rather than ask workers to bear this burden. The distinction between increased minimum wage and worker subsidy is more than economic.  The former transfers power toward workers, the latter sustains power in government.  I am for transfer toward workers.
6. I believe $11.00/hour would be a good first-step, and a living wage would be closer to $15.00/hour. Most people that oppose an increase seem to miss the point that increasing the minimum wage means that a lot of workers would have more money to put back into the local economy.
7. Put it on the ballot at $11 and let the people decide.
8. I support $11.00   but tied to inflation, so we don't have to jump through these hoops every few years.
9. I'd like the council to approve a minimum wage of $11.00/hour. Second choice would be for it to be on the ballot. Keep up the good work, sir!
10. Thanks for letting us have some input. I've highlighted my responses using your email. Unfortunately, if this goes onto the ballot it will cost a lot of money and the big money (as with the soda tax) will spend a great deal defeating it. That does bring money into Richmond but just for a short time.
11. Thanks, Tom. I appreciate your invitation for us all to weigh in. I think it's a wonderful idea that Richmond is considering this. I like the idea of a graduated approach: For example, $11.00 to begin 6 months from passage to give businesses time to plan; $12.30 (or thereabout) to go into effect a year later; $13.50 (or thereabout) to go into effect a year after that, with further annual steps progressing so that by 2017 the minimum wage is $15.00. If the Council can pass something, that'll be excellent, but given the snarkiness and dysfunction, I'm not sure that's realistic. If they can't, then put it to a citywide vote. Perhaps the Council could at least come up with the specifics for us all to vote on. I hope this helps. I look forward to reading in the Forum what others think too.
12. I am concerned that putting it on the ballot will be costly and create more animosity in the community.  The city council was elected to make fiscal decisions and I think this is one of them.  If I am wrong about that, then it probably needs to e on the ballot.  I think the $11 and hour is where we need to start. 
13. Sure, At least $11.25.
14. $11.00/hour  $11.00 AN HOUR IS MY VOTE WITH INCREASES EVERY YEAR
15. I think $11. is the minimum you should consider because it was the minimum we should have considered more than 10 years ago.  I wish people would realize that we need to pay what things are worth, including a living wage for those who produce what we are buying.  I know it's the politically correct thing to let the voters decide, and Richmond's voters may go for a higher wage, but I would support the Council just doing it.  It will become a political football in the campaign either way...  I, personally, would love to see $15, but I think it is too great a stretch.  I think I'd like to see $12.  What's the 30 cents all about? 
16. It would be nice if the freaking City Council would increase the minimum wage to $11.00.  Putting it on the ballot is too expensive for something which boils down to "doing the right thing." Thanks for asking...I appreciate your solicitation of my opinion.
17. Tom, $11 per hour,  bypass an expensive public ballot, and  allow the city council to pass the measure. While at it fire the housing manager for his compensation is well over $200k and his performance is below average, and I suggest  taking a long look at Lindsay's supposedly 330k compensation for the is also overpaid and he doesn't even live in Richmond. The bar was  set so low for the  city manager position, due to previous city manager's performance, that that probably anyone hired in that capacity, would have been an improvement.  The city of Richmond with it's Pride and Purpose motto is a joke to me and, I would imagine, most other bay area residing individuals. Keep on trucking,
18. I vote for $1l.00/hour, and let the city council vote on it. Hopefully you will have enough votes. I suppose Nat Bates and Corky Booze will vote against it, although they claim to represent the poor and disenfranchised which is total baloney. They're both opportunists. They'll have some nutty excuse to vote against it.
19. I support this.  My lowest paid illegal alien gets paid $15/hr.  I think you need to talk with the employers of this kind of labor -- fast food.  Ask _______, but you already know what he is going to say.  I would start with the lowest min wage level.
20. $11.00/hour

$12.30/hour

1. 15 is best but i'd support the council passing a 12.30 for now( since oakland is going for that number) , saving some bucks(?) from a ballot measure  but allowing for one if chevron spends a billion to try to impeach the council.
2. Can you say in a nutshell what specific "labor market conditions" Professor Saez, UCB, cites to justify "gov subsidy to keep min wages low," and, more importantly, are such "labor conditions" relavent to Richmond's labor market?  Probably not. Without having pored over Saez's paper, I submit that his conclusion is not applicable to the Bay Area. The cost of living in the Bay Area is so high, and getting higher, and the tax situation in California so dysfunctional, (ie, any proportional increased gov subsidy to the poor is not realistic), that ONLY a push for wage increases makes any REAL sense to me. Consequently, I would push for equity with Oakland's $12.25, (either by ballot or Council vote), if there is current Richmond voter survey data that significantly supports a min. wage increase. If there is such voter data, I prefer that City Council expedite process and take a vote on it.  If that fails, then submit issue to general ballot next. Thanks for asking our opinions
3. Thanks for reaching out and asking our opinions.  I urge you to use the power granted to you by the City charter and adopt an ordinance raising the minimum wage in Richmond. I don't think it's OK to expect someone who works full time to try and get by on $1,280 per month gross.  ($8 x 160 hours).  That's probably about $1,000-1,100 net after taxes.  Even after the CA minimum wage goes up goes up to $9 in July, that's still only $1,440 gross (maybe $1,200 net). Can you imagine living on that?  How do you pay for rent, food, transportation, utilities and other basic necessities? One-bedroom apartments these days go for at least $1000 per month.  And what if you have kids? Increasing the minimum wage will boost the local economy, because many workers will then have more money to spend on eating out, entertainment, and buying clothes or other items at local businesses. Many employers may say they can't "afford" to pay more, or they may oppose the change because they don't want to pay more.  If they really try, they can figure out a way to do it.  There's currently a national dialogue on reducing income inequality, and this is a great way to start doing that.  Employers don't have to raise their prices, all they need to do is flatten the range of their salaries a bit.  Those who earn the least get a little more, and those who earn at the top end get a bit less (but still have above average and enough to live comfortably). In terms of attracting new businesses to Richmond I see this as a big plus.  It sends the message that we value ourselves and our community and we welcome businesses that pay their workers a decent wage. I urge you to vote at City Council to raise the minimum wage in Richmond to at least $11 per hour and if possible to $12.30, with built in cost of living increases each year.  Richmond will again be one of the leaders in social uplift that will spread to other communities and ultimately statewide and nationwide.
4. Here are my thoughts for what they are worth. I would choose either of the 2 lower levels. The november election is going to be particularly ugly as Chevron attacks everyone but nat bates. I do not want to see this on the ballot then. Or perhaps ever. I would prefer that the council vote on it. Better to have a couple of dreadful council meetings (ok, I don't have to be there so it's easy for me to say) and get it over with then a long drawn out thing throughout the election season. I chose the lower two to stay w/in range of nearby cities as companies are already complying without the world coming to an end (Costco according to someplace on the internet starts at $11.50). You know the politics of these things better than I do. I'll trust your judgment.
5. I believe a $12.30 rate is the best and most realistic choice.  I don't believe in government programs to subsidize inadequate wages paid by employers . It has the same feeling to me as section 8 vouchers. People think of that program as subsidizing poor people but as a landlord I came to realize it was actually a program to subsidize landlords paying them above market rents for substandard dwellings and concentrating the recipient's in slum neighborhoods.  There is no good reason to wait for November. If the Council can muster four votes  it should take responsibility doing it now and giving poor working people a prompt raise
6. I think the City Council should do it.  While I think that $15 an hour would be more likely to provide a living wage, I think to avoid an uproar you should go for $12.50.
7. People who serve us food, clean our homes and businesses and perform all those other tasks that many are unwilling to do must be able to live without taking two or three jobs.  I urge the council to pass the law here in Richmond that sets a livable minimum wage at $12 or more per hour. Even then it will be tough for many workers to make a living.
8. I would definitely support $11.00 and probably support $12.30. Why put it on ballot if the council has the votes? It would turn it into an issue in the election so Chevron could buy the result it wants when it should be a no brainer
9. It should just be set at $12.30 per hour and forget the terrible expense of a ballot issue and the confusion it always generates.  The more money is available in the pipeline, the more people have to spend to boost the economy.  Just bumping it up to $11 won’t be that much of a help and will become the new old standard, so be a forward thinking city and hit the middle increase.  As a popular advertising phrase said:  JUST DO IT!
10. It is obvious that this has to be mandated at the local level, there will be no National minimum wage hike, approved by Congress. Much as Richmond wishes to be ahead of the curve on many issues, I think we should have a minimum wage that is in line with that of other local communities. I am not opposed to the higher amount, but the middle level, $12.30, is almost the same as Oakland, and might be easier to pass if it is a ballot vote. If the city council will pass it, then we can save ourselves the fights at the ballot box. There is certainly local precedence for raising the minimum wage, but I imagine big businesses would put up a fight. (I don’t know why. People need to make a living wage, and even $15 might not be enough.) But can this pass at the City Council level? This is certainly NOT a bad idea. We have far too much poverty, even within households where adults work fulltime.
11. I readily admit I am in favor of an increase as it is hard for me to imagine any adult living with any dignity on the current minimum wage. At the same time I truly do not know what the impact on businesses will be.  I suspect that business owners will predict doom and workers will predict a panacea; so the truth likely is somewhere in the middle. My suggestion is an annual step up from the current minimum to a target of 12.25  over them next two to three years then future increases tied to either the CPI or the rate of inflation. I can't envision the City Council being able to agree on anything as substantive as this and a ballot seems to insure a thumbs up from voters.   I don't know which is better. Thanks for all your thoughtful and diligent work!

$15.00/hour

1. Thank you for asking.  $15 is the only way to go.  Less than that and government is subsidizing businesses through workers' use of food stamps and medi-cal/medicaid.  I know that is technically not the problem of Richmond, but the more that cities raise their minimum wage, the more pressure there is on California and businesses to do the same.  I (and my family) have lived here in Richmond on less than $15 an hour and it is very difficult to do.  One has to pinch every penny and there is no money for anything other than rent/food/transportation.  Fortunately it was not a long-term situation.  There are lots of people in this situation for years.  They need the boost. There is information that Obamacare is boosting the economy because people are now spending less on heathcare and have money to spend on other things.  Here are two links to articles about it: http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2014/03/03/obamacare-effects-account-for-most-of-income-spending-increases/ http://ezkool.com/2014/03/report-obamacare-is-boosting-personal-income-and-the-economy/ A minimum wage would do the same. 
2. My vote is for $15/hr.  If YOU think you can get the City Council to pass it, that would be my choice as to how to go about it.  I am sure that the vast majority of the citizens of Richmond would vote for a $15/hr minimum wage.  I am concerned that putting it on the ballot will get Chevron and all the rest of large business in Richmond to expend inordinate sums of money to defeat it.  However, if you don't think If businesses with less than 10 people would be exempt, what would the required hourly pay be?  What do businesses with 10 or less employees pay their workers now?  How many such businesses exist in the City of Richmond?
3. I'm all for $15.00/hr.  If they were lucky an employee would be full-time (which we know they wouldn't be) they'd pull in what $30k excluding over-time?  That's  pittance for a quality of life salary in the Bay Area. Not to mention insurance costs, savings, etc.
4. I would encourage going for $15/hour.  This is barely a living wage currently.  I suppose it needs to be voted on but I'd prefer it to just happen!
5. I hesitate to respond to this email, because I am sublimely ignorant on the subject (though this state seldom seems to stop other people from expressing their uninformed opinions). Generally, I am in favor of other people being paid a living wage. Few things are more damaging to a person's self-esteem -- not to mention, life style -- than to be a member of the working poor, to have a full-time job and still have to try for food stamps. Or, most likely, just be a wage-slave, knowing you will probably never do better in life than you are doing right now and are only one paycheck lost to illness or accident from living in your car. $11/hour seems too low to me. I think it would be great if the minimum wage in Richmond were $15/hour -- that would actually be a living wage, even for someone like my brother, who works for CVS, which cut all their employees back to 32 hours and called that full-time employment. (When he needs more money, he goes on vacation and they pay him on the basis of 40 hours.) I wonder, though, what the chances are of our getting a higher minimum passed on a ballot than what Oakland is trying for? Are rents and sales of homes higher in Oakland than in Richmond? See, I just don't know. Do we have a minimum wage already in Richmond? If so, what is it? And what is the mean wage in this city? What is the cost of living here? What are Richmond businesses already paying their workers? In fact, what businesses in this area would be affected by a new minimum wage? City government, for starters? And would a new minimum also affect companies that city government does business with, if they have more than 10 employees, even if not all 10 work within the city limits? If you put a proposal on a ballot, a lot of people who are even more ignorant than I am will weigh in -- and, frankly, I don't feel that establishing a living wage is something that should be put to a vote. It's right to pay people enough to live on, and that's that. On the other hand, I do cringe a bit to imagine how a simple city council vote to establish a minimum wage in Richmond would be greeted by local business interests. What would I do, if this situation were mine to shape? I would try to determine what wage level is in fact fair compensation -- because we surely don't want to go through this process again. Then I would try determine what businesses would be affected by the new minimum -- because we don't want them to leave in a huff. Then I would advertise what a great thing we are about to do for people in Richmond (perhaps even making it possible for them to buy homes in the same city where they work) -- thus removing the element of surprise and also giving people a chance to air their objections, some of which may even be relevant. Then I would, yes, probably just pass it with a City Council vote, assuming that is even possible, given the backwardness of the usual dissenters on the council. BTW, I am one of those people who have no objection to paying an extra quarter for my coffee mocha or my designer pizza, if it means that the person serving me doesn't have to couch-surf to survive
6. I think 15.00 is closer to what it should be in all of the Bay Area, and with smaller businesses exempt find it reasonable. Having said that, I am not a business owner and businesses should be able to make a good profit.
7. Personally, I think the minimum wage has been too low for years.  In the bay area especially, a worker should earn at least $15 an hour - maybe with a lower rate for students.  Not a popular opinion, I'm sure, but it's what I think.

No

1. Where does it end?  I have 5 grandchildren working for the same fast food business in Indiana.  One is a new hire, a couple have been there for a year or more, and two have gone through training and have become shift managers.  Obviously they are not on the same salary level. If the lowest employee gets boosted up to something like $11.00 hour, the longer employees and the shift managers are certainly going to want a raise too, especially if without a raise they are working for the same wage but have added responsibilities.  I realize that it is difficult to live on a low minimum wage, but most of these workers are high school or college students, senior citizens looking for a few extra dollars, or the second wage earners in a household.  I would like to see a maximum salary at the top of the salary level.  Why should CEOs and big sports personalities made more money than they can possibly spend -- so they can built houses with more bathrooms than bedrooms.  Are we better off when salaries go up, if everything else goes up too. 
2. Against my wife’s recommendation, I will give you a brief response.  First of all, I do believe the minimum wage should be raised, by the State of California.  Having municipalities’ going rogue not only causes great harm and confusion but more importantly it drives up “Prices” of goods, services and rentals rates at a much faster rate.  __________________ can more readily absorb such an increase (by raising its prices) but this proposal would be catastrophic to my ___________ operation.  This is not hyperbole Tom, it is just a fact.   After twenty years of being a __________ franchisee I have struggled with and have barely survived a host of economic downturns, labor shortages and an inept political processes, primarily the runaway costs of Worker’s Comp rates, that threaten the very existence of my business. This would essentially would be a deathblow.  I have already have been positioning my ___________ business to be not only aligned with the State’s increase this summer, but to exceed the mandated minimum wage rate.  However, __________ is at in a very precarious situation as it sits now:  Working toward higher salaries for our teammates all the while having the ever increasing Worker’s Comp rates hanging over our head.  (The numbers are staggering!!)   Not to mention not having an even playing field to compete against Independents _____________ . (The “___________” typically pay no taxes, no insurances and/or Worker’s Comp) So my vote is let State of California worry about polices of minimum wage on a macro level and not have the City Council create an unfriendly business climate to damper Richmond’s recent successes. If you wish to talk more…..you know where to find me. 
3. We shouldn't be paying higher than SF.   It shouldn't cost more to do business here  than SF.   Cost of living is much lower (especially rents) than SF.   State min. wage will be $9.00 in July and $10.00 in 2016.   That actually sounds about right.   Maybe go to $10.00  sooner.  Maybe we keep Walmart  and other low wage company's, and the jobs.   
4. Richmond's economy cannot afford to make it more expensive for companies to do business here.  There is already the City's reputation, which although conditions are getting better, there is still a perception that it is not a safe city and not a good place to open a business.  Adding to labor costs is the wrong move at this time.  I think it is smarter to keep the wage favorable in comparison to these other locations that will price themselves out of the Bay Area labor market and make Richmond more attractive.
5. I think it’s hilarious. ________ should raise the wages of its admin staff. The lowest we pay is $19,not much above the proposals below, and .. .as an engineering firm I’m told we should be towards the top of remuneration ! haha!  That said, I’m no economist and I would surely expect an economist’s analysis before moving anywhere. Costs in Richmond are NOT what they are in SF; Oakland is being squeezed due to SF’s overflow, but again, not the same for Richmond. “Apparently…” Who the heck is placing it there, RPA? The presenter should present the economic analysis. I mean, is this to bail people out of mortgages that were inappropriate to begin with? Guess I’m firmly nowhere on this except… “really??!!” So many mom & pop’s just making it with nary a “Buy Local” campaign to support them. IMHO raising wages would necessitate a marketing campaign to increase business volume to support the increased wages. Thanks for making us aware, Tom !
6. How can we ask companies to come to Richmond and then price them out of the market? We cannot compete with foreign companies that pay $1.00 per day.  I have been asking the Federal Government to stop charity with tax dollars when the receiving countries can raise the price of goods sold to other counties and tax themselves to raise the same amount of money. Thanks for asking the public if the minimum wage increase will help or hurt the economy.
7. Richmond should not be compared to Oakland, San Francisco, or San Jose. Richmond is struggling like every other city and the only major business that keeps the City afloat is Chevron, which your Mayor and several colleagues would just as soon shut them down as to drive by there. I grew up and worked in Richmond and have seen the City change a lot over the years - both good and disappointing. It seems to me that the City Council is trying to act as if they are the largest city in the state or a medium sized city trying to gain national fame. For example - the soda tax which people shot down because the perceive that you and your colleagues are trying to force them to do things that they will not do, i.e. drink less or pay more. Stop trying to act like Richmond is LA and concentrate on fixing the REAL problems like the Housing Authority, the Port, and keeping crime down. Oh, did I mention economic development? Forget raising anything - your egos on the Council are already above the roofline.
8. I am extremely supportive of a minimum wage increase in Richmond. I suspect that putting it on the ballot will be controversial and increase voter turnout, which is good for our democracy. I would also be in favor of requiring employers to give vacation and medical leave to employees. I think there is a mistaken notion that min. wage jobs are transitional, or only for young people starting their careers. But these jobs are careers to a lot of people, including many people struggling to raise a family. Even if you're not in a prestigious job, full-time work should allow you to live with dignity. Raising the standard of living for those workers at the base of the pyramid makes us a more fair and inclusive society, and lifts up all of us. The prevailing trend in our society is toward greater inequality, and we should be taking measures to counteract this. I do wish however, that the wage hike was either state-wide or region-wide. I am a little worried about leakage of employment and economic growth to neighboring areas with lower wages. I think Berkeley and SF can get away with mandating higher wages without fearing job losses, because employers and residents are attracted to these cities for all sorts of intangibles. Maybe a decade from now Richmond will be chock full of restaurants, cafes, and galleries that make people want to move in, but right now, one of the main draws to Richmond is lower prices and lower cost of doing business. That said, California recently raised the min. wage to $10, and another hike probably won't come for a few years.  I'm extremely proud of Richmond leading the way on some of these important issues.

No Level Stated

• My preference: 1. Shortcut the ballot process and just pass it with a City Council vote. 2. If we don’t have the votes on the Council, put it on the ballot and let the people decide. Since only business with 10 or more employees would be affected, I think this will have a minimal effect on businesses and will have much more positive than negative effect. Every worker deserves a living wage.
• Council sets the level, the public votes yea or nay. By no means should the Council pass this themselves. Maybe you can apply your investigative talents to interviewing some of the major businesses here in Richmond like Mountain Hardwear, Nutiva, Kaiser, etc. and see how the feel about this?
• The thought that companies can hire full time employees who don't pay enough to keep the employee above the poverty line so the rest of tax payers get to subsidize the business!  We have to force businesses to be civil to their employees.