06/06/2000 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 6/6/2000 respectfully disagreed. Instead, one side attacked with unproven, unwarranted accusations that reach to the very soul of individual respect. She did not, nor will she ever, accuse an organization that fundamentally disagrees with her of being less than honest. During the process, she was told of questionable practices, unfair labor issues, a lack of respect for the working man on the part of those organizations that oppose this ordinance. Yet, those accusations were not made from her because she has more respect for the human beings behind the position. Everyone has a right to their position, their opinion and their approach to their job. She would never personally attack that right or anyone who exercises it. She expects that in return. Finally, she would challenge the Mayor to move forward with project labor agreements (should this tabling pass and the ordinance be, in her opinion, destroyed) at the appropriate time and the appropriate projects since Council has been told that he has that discretion and right with or without the ordinance. Roll call continued: Miller, no, with comment that he too would like to see this brought back into committee rather than see the efforts that have been put forth simply tossed in the trash can. A lot of work has been put into this. He thinks that the comments from the Law Director indicate that this can be fine-tuned and improved. As Ms. Kasler said, a better product in the end for the citizens of the city--and that is what we are interested in. He is disappointed that some people feel that because this has a chance of passing that the city may be "subject to a lawsuit." Anybody that goes out of the room tonight and gets in a car may be subject to a lawsuit. It is that simple. Sometimes you have to take a stand, and his stand is that we go forward with this. Roll call continued: O'Grady, no, with comment. It is important to understand that what has transpired is a project labor agreement ordinance was on third reading. Yesterday or today, members of Council received a legal opinion from the Director of Law that raised some concerns with that ordinance. The proposal that was made and the action that is taking place now is to table the ordinance. That effectively kills it. The comments that have been made by the two previous speakers are his comments as well. If there is a question with the ordinance, put it back in committee, address the questions and see if they can be resolved. If they can't be resolved, we should not have the ordinance. But to say, because a question has been raised, that the ordinance and more than a year's work should be thrown away is to him just appalling. There have been issues raised with regard to the worthiness of the project labor agreement. He and the Mayor worked together to draft this, and then they were joined by every member of Council on this ordinance. The reason behind it was because it's a good idea that serves the residents of this city and looks out for their best interest. This ordinance would not have closed anyone out of anything. The example he points to time and time again is Fire Station 1. Who was it that built Fire Station 1? It was such a large and complex project, that the only people that could have built it were the people who did it: union labor. In the future, this project labor agreement would only apply to those same type of projects. If it's going to be union labor anyway, why not take the extra protections that a project labor agreement brings. Why not take the protection of on-time performance. The protections of not having work stoppages or strikes affect your project. It makes sense, it's a good ordinance and it's a good idea. And to take it and throw it away because there's a question at this point he thinks is wrong. Roll call continued: McKay, yes, with comment. The Law Director is the advisor to Council, and his advice is that this is not a good piece of legislation. As in the past, he respects the Law Director's opinion. Roll 4 .~ ._, __. _ _ I