Council fails to override Daley big box veto

Sponsors of the city's big box ordinance said Wednesday the fight for fair wages will not end with the City Council upholding the mayor's veto. On Monday, Mayor Richard M. Daley vetoed the ordinance passed by the City Council in July. The mayor said the ordinance - which proposed retail stores with more than 90,000 square feet of space and $1 billion in annual profits begin paying employees $10 an hour and $3 in benefits by 2010 - would keep economic development out of communities sorely in need, especially those that are predominantly African American. Sponsors of the ordinance, Ald. Freddrenna Lyle (6th) and Ald. Joe Moore (49th),entered new legislation as the council sustained Daley's veto in a 31-18 vote. "This is a delay, not a defeat," Lyle said. She introduced a non-binding referendum that would appear on the citywide ballot Feb. 27. It would ask voters if the city should enact a "living wage ordinance," that would essentially require the same businesses targeted in the ordinance minus the space provision, to pay employees $10 an hour and $3 an hour in benefits. Ald. Howard Brookins (21st) called Lyle's move for a referendum on the February ballot a non-sequitor. When the big box ordinance passed in July, several large retailers threatened to pull out of planned development deals in the city, including development planned for his ward. "This is truly a red herring and a non-issue. It's still based on the stores coming in. As long as we're guessing, I'm going to err on the side of the companies are not bluffing," Brookins said. Moore said the companies, which have saturated rural and suburban markets, would still come to Chicago. "They will do it because this is one of the best markets in the world," Moore said. "But we want them to come in on our terms, not on their terms." Moore, who attended a funeral before joining the council Wednesday afternoon, said the issue will not go away and promised to introduce another living wage ordinance at next month's meeting. The new ordinance will propose national companies with more than 1,000 employees pay a "living wage." Opponents of the vetoed big box ordinance said the measure would keep the stores out of economically deprived areas on the South and West Sides of the city. Ald. Leslie Hairston (5th) said that while she supports a living wage, and supported the ordinance two years ago when it included stores with more than 45,000 square feet, in its current form, the ordinance provides so-called living wages for a select few workers. "There are only 43 big box (stores) in the city, so only those who work in those stores get a living wage," Hairston said, adding that the stores are in commercial corridors not located on the South or West Side. "This is a bait and switch. The bait is the $10 an hour and the switch is that it doesn't apply to everyone." In the two years the City Council has considered the ordinance, aldermen on either side of the issue have not negotiated the terms of the measure, she added. "We're still the last hired and the first fired, but given the chance and a level playing field, my neighbors can compete with anybody," she added. "Let's worry about wages after we find people jobs." Daley needed at least three aldermen to change their votes in order to sustain the veto. Ald. Shirley Coleman (16th), who gave an impassioned speech at the July council meeting supporting the ordinance, changed her vote to support the mayor's veto. "I had to do a lot of soul searching in order to support you," Coleman told the mayor. In July, Coleman said that as a former single mother on welfare, an extra $2 an hour would have made a difference to her household and could help countless families in the Englewood community. But Wednesday, Coleman remembered when 63rd and Halsted streets were part of a vibrant shopping district that included three movie theaters and a Sears department store. Those businesses have long since left and have not been replaced. "I don't want to deny some young people in my ward the opportunity to work in the community," Coleman said of her change of position. "We at least want to have something instead of nothing." Ald. Helen Shiller (46th) said she abstained from the July vote because she was conflicted, but voted in favor of the mayor's veto Wednesday. Brookins, who supported the veto, said though while some have accused the mayor of using the economic plight of the Black community to garner support - especially notable since it is during an election season in which he is facing at least two Black candidates - he is not cynical of the mayor's actions. "The timing is not suspect," Brookins said. Ald. Toni Preckwinkle (4th), who supported the big box ordinance, questioned why the issue became so divisive in the Black community. "We've been at each other's throats on this issue. I am very troubled over the way this campaign was conducted and I would suggest it was used as a wedge issue to divide us. In whose interests is the Black community divided?" Preckwinkle said. Lyle said she agreed with Preckwinkle and suggested a "paid provocateur" split the African American community on the issue. "They didn't go after the white or the Hispanic community," Lyle said. Ald. Ed Smith (28th), who also supported the living wage ordinance, said a clergyman threatened him in his community. The minister allegedly told the alderman to change his vote or they would "get" him during the election. "We want the companies, but we want them to come in with integrity and dignity. Companies ought to be able to pay people a decent wage for the work they do," Smith said. Though he could declare a victory in the defeat of the big box ordinance, Brookins called it a "sad day" for African Americans in the city. "It's a sad day when we are fighting over $7 an hour jobs. It's a sad day when we have $110 million in development projects in the 21st Ward, but Blacks only have 9 percent of the contracts," Brookins said. "The fact is that we have not kept our eyes on the prize. We have somehow been fooled into believing $10 an hour is a living wage. But it's not a livable wage." Black children too, through a lack of education, are led to believe retail jobs are what they should strive for, though few of those jobs are in their communities, Brookins added. "The economic reality is that these stores would not come into (Black) wards. For 40 years no retailer would take a chance on our community. But we need to take hold and ownership of our situation. We need to teach our kids that these stores are not the end-all, be-all. They need to get skills and stay in school because the highest wage jobs require some training," he said. "We have to tell our kids to get a good education so they're not forced to work at the Wal Mart."

» Return to "In the News"