►
From YouTube: June 6, 2017 Committee of the Whole
Description
Minneapolis Committee of the Whole Meeting
A
A
We
just
stepped
away
for
a
moment
in
town
for
Palmisano
I
want
to
note
that
counselor
Andrew
Johnson
would
desire
to
be
here,
but
he
has
been
having
some
some
health
issues
that
he
is
getting
some
treatment
for,
and
so
we
wish
him
the
best
and
know
that
he
will
be
back
as
soon
as
he
can
and
he
is
paying
careful
attention.
This
is
a
meeting
regarding
our
proposed
municipal
minimum
wage
ordinance
at
our
last
meeting
of
the
committee
of
the
whole.
Excuse
me
at
our
last
I
think,
council
meeting.
A
We
gave
a
direction
to
our
city
attorney
in
coordination
with
other
departments,
to
draft
an
ordinance
to
present
to
us
and
to
the
public
to
allow
us
then
to
have
some
further
public
discussion
on
of
how
to
continue
to
evaluate
the
elements
of
the
ordinance
and
so
I
will
ask
our
city
attorney
deputy
city
attorney
Eric
Milton.
If
he
would
please
step
forward
and
introduce
where
we
are
at
and
welcome
sure
Thank.
B
You
councilman
Berg,
Lydon
and
good
afternoon
council
members,
Eric
Nelson,
Minneapolis,
City,
Attorney's,
Office
and
I'm
here
to
present
the
proposed
minimum
wage
in
response
to
your
staff
direction
of
a
week
and
half
ago.
So
let's
get
right
to
it
just
to
review
this.
Was
your
staff
direction
the
elements
of
that
staff
direction?
The
council
directed
staff
to
draft
an
ordinance
that
was
applicable
to
anyone
who
works
in
Minneapolis
for
any
amount
of
time.
The
ordinance
should
have
a
universal
wage
level
of
$15
indexed
to
inflation.
B
All
workers
would
be
subject
to
the
minimum
wage,
regardless
of
tips
consistent
with
state
law.
The
council
directed
a
to
including
I,
need
a
training
wage
too
youth.
Under
the
age
of
twenty
years,
consistent
with
state
law,
there
was
a
request
for
a
tiered
phase-in
period
that
reaches
$15
per
hour
for
years
after
ordinance
adoption
for
large
business.
B
So
if
an
ordinance
is
adopted
in
2017,
that
would
be
2021
and
then
a
longer
phase-in
period
for
small
business,
with
consideration
for
up
to
three
tiers
of
business
size
and
then,
finally,
just
as
with
the
second
safe
ordinance
that
was
adopted
last
year,
enforcement
would
be
vested
in
the
Minneapolis
Civil
Rights
Department.
So
the
draft
ordinance
that
you
have
before
you
response
to
this
staff
direction
and
then
there
are
other
portions
of
the
ordinance
that
are
bracketed
because
they
are
indicative
of
policy
decisions
that
you
will
have
to
make
as
a
body
going
forward.
B
B
It's
a
state-run
program
covered
employers
includes
all
employers,
except
for
the
exceptions
listed,
which
were
the
same
exceptions
included
in
the
definition
in
the
sick
and
say
formance.
Oh
should
note
as
you're
aware,
the
question
of
the
extraterritorial
reach
of
the
sick
and
safe
ordinance
is
that
issue
in
the
courts.
Currently
oral
argument
is
scheduled
for
July
11th
at
the
Court
of
Appeals,
and
so
once
that
oral
argument
occurs,
we
would
expect
the
decision
no
later
than
90
days.
B
In
terms
of
that,
so
there
may
be
some
guidance
per
eye
there
may
be
not
with
regard
to
the
extra
toriel
reach
of
that
ordinance.
But
of
course
there
are
some
significant
differences
between
that
ordinance
and
this
or
second
day
Hortense,
there
isn't
a
the
issue
of
accrual
and
where
it's
your--it's
accrued
and
where
you
can
use
it
with
the
minimum
wage
ordinance.
It's
your
you
know,
pay
the
wage
where
you
work
so.
A
Mr.
Nelson
I'm
going
to
ask
I
think
if,
if
there's
something
in
here
that
we
didn't
ask
to
happen,
it
would
be
great
if
you
would
maybe
explain
why
and
I
know
that
there
is
a
reason
why
we
kind
of
heard
that
on
the
sixth
time
about.
Why
would
these
government
units
not
be
covered
under
the
ordinance,
and
maybe
you
can
tell
us
in
your
opinion
why
and
then
come
from
Andrew
Gordon
is
also
in
queue
for
questions.
Sure.
B
Delta,
one
again
is
not
entirely
sure
is
the
entire
debate
on
the
second
day
programs,
but
in
general
this
relates
to
the
ability
of
the
levels
of
government
to
regulate
one
another
and
in
general,
the
city
does
not
have
the
authority
to
regulate
the
activities
of
the
federal
government
or
of
the
state
of
Minnesota
and
state
agencies,
so
that
I
think
was
largely
the
decision
there.
Yeah.
C
D
Madam
chair
and
and
council
member
Gordon
on
the
there
is
an
appellate
state
court
decision
that
in
fact
it
related
to
the
scope
of
jurisdiction
of
our
Civil
Rights
Ordinance.
As
applied
to
the
University
of
Minnesota
and
the
court.
There
said
that
the
University
of
Minnesota
is
an
agency
of
the
state,
albeit
a
special
agency
of
the
state,
but
that
the
city,
at
least
for
the
purposes
of
our
Civil,
Rights,
Ordinance
and
other
similar
kinds
of
ordinances,
does
not
have
jurisdiction
over
it.
D
C
B
Thank
you.
The
next
slide
again
relates
to
the
business
years.
I
know
this
is
one
of
the
most
important
topics
to
discuss
the
the
staff
direction
requested.
That
staff
include
two
tiers,
a
large
and
small
tier
with
consideration
of
the
possible
third
tier
I
would
note
that
in
state
law
they
make
it.
The
state
law
makes
a
distinction
between
large
and
small,
and
it's
based
on
an
annual
gross
savelic
volume
of
sales.
B
It's
$500,000
in
a
year,
which
is
the
division
between
large
and
small,
based
on
the
policy
recommendations
of
staff
and
the
direction
staff
took
the
direction
to
mean
looking
into
drawing
a
distinction
between
large
and
small
based
on
number
of
employees.
In
this
case,
and
and
this
is
really
a
a
pure
policy
decision
for
you
to
make
I'll
provide
a
little
bit
of
guidance
here.
B
This
is
a
chart
that
shows
a
business
sites
breakdown
in
aggregate
in
total
for
the
city
there
are
a
little
over
300,000
employees.
You
can
see
that
the
there
are
only
57
employers
greater
than
with
greater
than
500
employees,
comprising
only
one
percent
of
the
total
number
of
employers,
but
that
also
has
the
highest
percentage
of
employees
at
37
percent.
The
greatest
number
of
employers
a
little
over
8,000
83
percent,
are
in
the
1
to
25
employee
category.
B
This
just
shows
you
that
that
data
and
a
little
bit
different
format.
This
is
it
examples
of
where,
if
you
drew
the
line
based
on
number
of
employees
between
large
and
small
at
various
levels,
how
many
employees
and
worker
workers
you
would
capture
so
at
250
employees
would
capture
approximately
half
53%
of
the
employees
in
the
city
at
100
would
capture
approximately
one
third
36%
and
at
50
you
would
you
would
capture
a
quarter
of
employees
a
little
more
industry-specific.
B
B
And
then
here
is
the
non
Hospital
healthcare
breakdown
only
including
nursing
care
facilities,
home
health
care
facilities,
assisted
living
in
other
residential
facilities.
100
would
be
49
percent
and
50
22%,
and
if
there
are
any
other,
you
know
types
of
data
that
you
would
like
us
to
get
in
terms
of
breakdown.
I
think
we
could
do
that.
We
obviously
need
some
time.
Did
you
guys,
but
it
certainly
responded.
B
We
included
this
provision,
one
because
it
is
the
most
prevalent
Nexus
type
provision
and
all
of
the
other
jurors
that
51
other
jurisdictions
that
we
reviewed
27
of
the
51
jurisdictions
include
a
two-hour
in
one
week,
employee
Nexus,
and
we
also
you
know,
based
it
based
in
part
on
the
current
legal
challenge.
The
second
safe
ordinance
felt
like
there
needed
to
be
at
least
a
minimal
nexus
present
on
that
that
we
could
rely
on.
I
would
note
that
it
does
not
include
those
traveling
through
the
city
for
work.
B
Again,
the
division
between
what
is
a
large
business
and
a
small
business
for
purposes
of
a
phasing
period
and
applicable
wage
rates
that
we
included
a
provision
that
is
based
in
part
on
the
sick
and
safe
ordinance.
Provision
regarding
how
one
would
determine
business
size,
and
so
it
is
based
on
the
average
number
of
paid
employees
per
week
during
the
previous
calendar
year
for
existing
businesses
and
then
for
a
new
business.
B
B
Ramped
up
to
15
by
July
1st
2021
I
would
note
that
the
again
the
state
minimum
wage
which
for
a
large
business
again,
is
based
on
a
different
metric.
It's
not
based
on
number
of
employees,
but
gross
volume
of
sales
is
for
large
businesses
950
per
hour,
currently
on
January
1st
2018
that
will
index
to
inflation.
So
it
will
go
up.
It
would
go
up
before
the
suggested
July
1st
2018
date
in
ordinance,
it's
tied
to
the
inflation
index
in
state
law
or
2.5%.
B
Whichever
is
less
upon
indexing
on
January
1,
the
maximum
amount
that
it
would
go
up
to
is
9
.
74
cents.
So
if
you
can
bear
nine
dollars
and
74
cents
to
the
first
increase
in
the
ordinance
of
1050,
that
can
give
you
an
idea
of
where
you
might
be
headed
in
looking
generally
at
the
small
employer,
phase
and
periods
for
those
that
reach
$15.
Ultimately,
they
generally
fall
between
four
and
seven
years,
and
this
was
mentioned
in
Maria's
presentation.
B
The
spread
between
where
to
draw
the
line
between
large
and
small
the
spread
is
typically
one
year
in
those
jurisdictions
that
have
that.
So
the
California
jurisdictions
are
often
have
five
for
large
business
and
six
for
small.
The
state
of
California
has
six
or
small
our
six
per
large
and
seven
for
small,
and
then
there
are
others
that
that
have
shorter
periods
as
well,
but
the
spread
is
typically
one
year.
You
could
go
more
though,
and
then
just
again,
noting
current
state
law,
minimum
wage
or
large
of
950
and
small
is
775.
B
B
The
national
data
for
personal
consumption
expenditures
is
determined
by
the
United
States
Department
of
Commerce
I
have
absolutely
no
idea
what
that
is,
but
I
do
know
that
the
state
of
Minnesota
is
the
only
state
in
the
country
that
uses
the
implicit
price
deflator.
Other
jurisdictions
commonly
use
the
Consumer
Price
Index
and
I.
B
Just
would
note
that
in
representative
Ellison's
bill,
HR
15,
introduced
at
the
end
of
May,
for
regarding
the
federal
minimum
wage
and
inflation
index
is
included
in
that
bill
of
the
annual
percentage
increase
in
the
median
hourly
wage
of
all
employees
is
determined
by
the
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics,
so
I
will
I
would
allow
those
with
greater
economic
minds
in
mind,
certainly
to
to
apply
on
some
of
the
advantages
and
disadvantages
they
use
and
what
might
be
the
best.
But
those
are
some
guidance
for
you.
B
Okay
again
in
response
to
the
staff
direction,
the
ordinance
includes
a
training
wage
for
employees
under
the
age
of
20
that
largely
track
state
law.
The
language
says
that
during
the
first
90
days
in
any
calendar
year
that
that
employee
must
be
paid
at
least
85
percent
of
the
minimum
wage
rate,
rounded
to
the
nearest
nickel
after
the
first
90
days
in
any
calendar
year.
B
That
employee
must
be
paid
at
the
applicable
minimum
wage
rate,
and
there
is
some
protection
that
tracks
the
language
exactly
from
state
law,
which
talks
about
how
no
employer
can
displace
an
employee
to
hire
another
employee
at
the
lower
rate.
So
there
are
some
protections
built
in
if
there
was
a
disingenuous
employer
who
tried
to
to
do
some
maneuvers
to
keep
an
employee
at
that
full
rate.
B
The
rulemaking
Authority
is
also
vested
in
the
Civil
Rights
Department,
just
as
it
was
with
the
sick
and
safe
ordinance,
and
there
is
a
provision
in
the
enforcement
part
of
the
draft
ordinance
before
you
that
notes
that
the
rules
for
the
minimum
wage
ordinance
shall
be
published
90
days
in
advance
of
the
first
scheduled
minimum
wage
rate
increase
in
your
that's
whenever
that
might
occur,
and
then
the
remedies
and
relief
in
the
ordinance
largely
mirror
this.
The
remedy
can
relief
in
the
state
minimum
wage
law
there.
B
D
B
B
B
And
then,
finally,
there's
a
provision
regarding
an
annual
report,
starting
in
this
case
in
2019
by
the
Civil
Rights
Department,
regarding
the
implementation
and
enforcement
of
the
ordinance
one
of
the
dates,
and
there
coincide
with
the
dates
of
the
reporting
requirement
for
the
second
safe
ordinance,
so
that
there's
some
sun
law
similar
it's
there
that
they
can
work
with,
and
it
also
includes
a
request
for
some
economic
data.
That's
noted
at
the
end
that
was
a
provision
that
was
was
actually
taken
in
part
from
the
Los
Angeles
City
ordinance,
noting.
B
The
report
may
also
include
recommendations
for
possible
improvements
to
the
article
again.
This
is
set
up
as
article
4
in
chapter
40.
The
first
three
articles
are
that
comprised
the
second
safe
ordinance
and
article
4
would
be
the
municipal
minimum
wage
ordinance
and
with
that
I
conclude
and
stand
for
questions.
A
And
then
you
told
us
very
fairly
that
you
believe
that
some
of
the
remaining
questions
there
was
not
perhaps
a
data-driven
driven
right
answer
so
to
speak,
and
these
were
really
policy
discussions
and
we
just
needed
to
find
a
way
to
have
our
own
discussion
of
that.
And
so
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
in
public,
because
I
think
some
council
members
have
that
the
city
attorney
would
make
that
presentation
to
us,
and
then
we
would
have
discussion
of
whether
we
agreed
with
that
proposal
or
not.
A
Another
thing
that
one
of
my
colleagues
did
say
to
me
today.
I
think
we've
come
to
number
right
because
there's
a
question
which
I
think
is
a
fair
question
to
for
us
of
whether
we
need
to
fill
in
these
blanks
or
whether
we
just
continue
to
take
input
or
not,
and
so
I
think
that's
something
that
philosophically
we
could
maybe
have
a
difference
of
opinion
on
and
again
I.
Don't
think,
there's
any
perfect
right
answer
for
that
I
think.
A
A
A
I
have
forwarded
it
to
those
on
a
diet
and
I
think
there
might
be
some
extra
copies
that
made
their
way
up
to
the
edge
and
I'm,
not
sure
if
there
are
other
additional
copies
and
just
a
couple
comments
before
I
describe
what
the
proposal
is
is
I
will
say,
I
feel
like,
even
though
this
seems
like
the
most
or
it
is
perhaps
the
part
of
the
conversation
where
we
honestly
just
have
some
differences.
Legitimate
differences
of
opinion
on
the
council.
A
I
personally
feel
like
we're
in
a
pretty
close
zone
of
what
we
think
the
phase-in
should
should
to
look
like
and
feel
like
that
and
I
say
that,
based
on
other
public
comments
that
council
members
have
made
at
some
of
our
other
recent
meetings
and
so
I
just
want
to
say.
Thank
you
to
my
to
my
colleagues
for
being
part
of
the
discussion.
I'll
also
say
probably
the
person
I
have
had
the
most
discussion
with
is
councilmember
fry
and
I
really
respect
his
opinion
and
I
think
we
were
trying
very
hard
to
find.
A
We
have
where
we
would
get
exactly
on
the
same
page
and
we
just
were
close
to
each
other,
but
maybe
not
exactly
in
that
spot.
So
I
just
want
to
say,
I
really
respect,
councilmember
Fry's
opinion,
and
you
know,
in
the
end
I
just
felt
that
this
was
a
conversation
we
just
had
to
put
out
for
public
rushon
and
we'll
kind
of
see
where
it
ends
up
landing.
Today.
This
is
not
the
last
time
we
are
going
to
be
able
to
give
direction
or
make
a
change
to
this
ordinance.
A
In
reality,
this
is
perhaps
the
first
time
that
we're
maybe
making
any
adjustment
and
again
fully
filling
in
the
blanks.
If,
in
fact,
we
vote
to
do
that
today,
this
will
not
be
actually
amending
the
ordinance.
This
would
probably
be
again
giving
a
staff
direction
to
our
city
attorney
with
more
specificity,
so
that
any
blanks
and
the
ordinance
can
be
filled
in
and
then
asking
them
to
publish
that
as
soon
as
possible,
so
that
whatever
that
product
is,
is
then
available
to
the
general
public,
and
we
will
be
able
to
get
comment
on
that.
A
So
in
my
original
motion
that
I
made
to
give
direction
to
staff,
I
had
made
a
proposal
for
a
five-year
phase-in
the
council
at
that
time.
It
made
an
amendment
to
that
and
we
did
not
really
have
a
lot
of
discussion
of
that
amendment,
and
the
amendment
was
that
we
should
start
the
phase-in
at
four
years.
I
think
help
summer
Gordon
made
that
amendment
so
I
just
want
to
acknowledge
that
and
say
I
again.
This
is
I
have
made
a
proposal
and
it
is
again
about
a
five-year
phase-in.
A
The
proposal
and
I'll
read
this
language
is
to
ask
the
city
attorney
to
prepare
ordinance
language
that
includes
a
phase-in
period
for
large
business
defined
as
employers
that
employ
a
greater
than
100
employees
and
for
smaller
businesses
defined
as
employers
that
employ
100
or
fewer
employees
with
steps,
and
then
I
described
some
steps.
What
the
proposal
does
is
it
phases
in
both
large
and
small
business
to
come
to
a
wage,
a
full
wage
of
$15
an
hour
by
July,
first
of
2022,
which
is
within
five
years?
A
However,
the
proposal
would
front-load
increases,
so
there
would
be
larger
increases
for
the
larger
business
size
in
the
earlier
years,
and
the
smaller
businesses
would
have
much
smaller
increases
in
the
earlier
years
and
a
larger
increase
at
the
tail
end.
So
that
was
again
a
way
to
try
to
accommodate,
perhaps
different
capabilities
of
those
businesses
again
using
size
as
a
differentiator,
which
is
a
little
bit,
not
always
the
perfect
differentiator.
But
it's
kind
of
I
think
the
best
we
can
do
in
the
city
to
try
to
accommodate
those
those
differences.
A
I'll
say
maybe
just
a
couple
more
comments,
and
then
my
guess
is
that
there
will
be
some
discussion
and
I
don't
know
if
others
may
have
some
amendments
or
different
changes
that
they
want
to
try
to
propose.
But
I
did
ask
our
city,
deputy
city
coordinator,
Maria,
Rivera
van
der
Meyde,
to
help
me
with
understanding
the
other
jurisdictions
that
have
to
date
done
some
sort
of
increase
in
the
minimum
wage.
That
includes
primarily
cities,
but
some
states,
as
well
as
a
few
counties.
Maybe
six
counties
I
think
in
all.
A
There
are
51
jurisdictions
that
have
increased
the
wage
of
those
jurisdictions.
The
majority
I
think
a
little
bit
more
than
two-thirds
have
chosen
to
not
have
a
different
tearing
or
different
way
that
you
get
to
the
ultimate
wage
that
they
have
all
businesses
come
or
the
uniform.
Let's
get
to
the
same
year
at
the
same
time
schedule
so
I'll
just
note
that
that
is
something
not
all
jurisdictions,
but
a
good
number
of
jurisdictions
have
said
that
they
think
is
an
effective
way
as
a
policy
decision
to
make
these
changes.
A
That
we
can
kind
of
grab
grab
onto
what
are
those
things
that
are
going
to
provide
a
more
tangible
benefit
and
I.
Think
that's
what
we
have
asked
our
staff
and
the
coordinators
office
to
oversee.
My
belief
is
that
we
need
to
combine
whatever
we
are
doing
here
with
the
wage
increase
with
targeting
some
additional
ways
to
outreach
to
that
smaller
business
community,
with
more
tangible
assistance
with
how
do
you
make
sure
you're
able
to
have
the
business
planning
capability?
A
To
think
of
how
do
you
effectively
increase
wage
and
do
some
of
those
other
things
so
I'll
just
put
that
out
there
again,
as
some
things
that
I
feel
like
I
have
heard
from
businesses
and
other
people
are
hearing
from
other
stakeholders,
and
that's
just
as
important
so
I
will
go
ahead
and
make
this
motion.
I
will
say
the
staff
direction
joining
me
and
making
the
staff
direction
as
council
members
a
vendor
and
were
Sami
and
I
am
sure
that
there
will
be
some
discussion
of
this.
E
Every
time
we
talk
about
this
I
want
to
stop
and
pause
and
note
how
important
it
is
that
the
City
Council
Minneapolis
has
such
strong
agreement
that
we
are
raising
the
minimum
wage
in
the
city
to
$15
an
hour,
and
we
should
all
feel
really
proud
about
the
ways
that
we
are
leading
as
a
city
and
the
ways
that,
as
a
council
and
policy
makers,
we've
been
able
to
come
together
on
consensus
on
a
lot
of
the
big
questions
about
the
ordinance
and
I.
Think
really.
E
The
credit,
though,
always
goes
to
the
workers
and
the
advocates
who've
been
asking
for
this
policy
and
who
have
engaged
so
thoughtfully
over
years
to
help
build
the
political
and
public
support
for
raising
the
wage
for
workers
in
our
city.
I've
also
had
so
many
thoughtful
discussions
with
our
business
community.
Over
the
past
several
years,
I
have
over
400
licensed
businesses
alone
in
the
10th
Ward.
E
Many
of
them
are
owned
by
my
constituents
and
almost
all
would
fall
under
a
definition
of
small
or
medium
sized
businesses,
and
so
I've
sat
in
pizza
shops
and
restaurants
and
retail
businesses
over
the
last
several
years.
Talking
with
my
constituents
and
business
owners
about
how
our
workplace
policies
are
impacting,
businesses
and
those
have
been
very
instructive,
I,
don't
pretend
to
know
what
it's
like
to
run.
E
A
business
in
our
city
and
I
have
been
really
I've
learned
a
lot
from
those
discussions
and
one
of
the
things
that
councilmember
Glidden
just
said
that
I
really
want
to
strongly
echo.
You
know
my
business
owners
have
a
lot
of
different
perspectives
about
raising
the
wage
in
Minneapolis
to
$15
an
hour.
Some
just
really
don't
want
us
to
do
it.
Others
have
a
more
nuanced
perspective.
A
decent
amount
are
actually
paying
close
to
15.
E
E
I
have
been
open
and
interested
in
talking
about
what
the
phasing
looks
like
for
big
versus
small,
but
I
haven't
wanted
to
leave
too
many
workers
on
that
longer
phase
in
time,
because
actually
you
get
up
to
as
that
presentation
showed
it's
pretty
striking,
how
fast
you
end
up,
leaving
behind
30%
or
50%
of
our
workforce.
If
that
number
between
big
and
small
gets
too
high,
and
that's
been
very
compelling
for
me-
and
you
know
again,
I
mentioned
briefly
the
smaller
businesses.
E
I've
been
open
to
having
a
longer
time
frame
overall
for
small
businesses
and
I
remain
open
to
that
discussion
as
we
go
forward
and
again
hear
more
through
the
public
hearing
process
before
we
vote
on
a
final
ordinance
at
the
end
of
June
and
then
there's
a
couple
things
I
wanted
to
note
quickly
that
enforcement
is
really
important
and
I.
Think
I
appreciate
the
detail
that
the
staff
has
put
into
this
proposal.
E
The
wage
theft
is
a
really
big
problem
now
in
our
city,
and
so
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
giving
the
city
and
workers
adequate
tools
to
make
sure
people
are
getting
pay,
what
they
should
be
getting
paid,
and
then
the
last
note
was
about
the
youth
wage,
so
I've
gotten
a
lot
of
context
about
this
I
just
haven't.
Had
we've
been
pretty
focused
on
kind
of
getting
this
overall
phasing
correct,
so
I
really
do
want
to
talk
more
with
staff
about
how
they
arrived
at
the
proposal
they
have
now
and
I've
voiced.
E
Just
because
this
proposal
here,
which
I
was
happy
to
co-author,
is
one
of
many
that
I've
discussed
with
lots
of
council
members
over
time
and
those
are
the
things
that
I'm
thinking
about
and
open
to
and
again
just
want
to
thank
all
the
businesses
and
constituents
and
workers
advocates
who
button
us.
Thus
far
in
the
discussion
council.
F
C
To
say,
when
the
ordinance
came
out
with
the
four-year
timeline,
I
appreciated,
seeing
that
and
seeing
how
we
could
get
people
to
make
at
least
$15
an
hour
within
four
years.
I
know
that
the
ordinance
was
silent
on
what's
a
small
or
a
large
business,
so
it
was
hard
to
imagine
how
many
would
be
actually
be
left
out
of
that,
depending
on
how
we
define
large
business.
C
So
the
fact
that
a
hundred
percent
under
the
staff
direction
before
us
now
would
be
covered
within
five
years
as
a
plus,
even
if
it
means
that
no
one
will
get
to
15
within
four
years.
I
was
just
trying
to
get
out
my
calculator
here
and
I
was
looking
at,
and
so
that
means
instead
of
on
July
1
2021,
getting
to
$15
an
hour.
The
people
in
the
tier
1
large
businesses
would
get
to
1425
an
hour.
C
C
It's
also
my
understanding
that
this
concept
or
idea
has
been
vetted
with
some
of
our
stakeholders,
and
it
has
some
support
coming
from
the
community
and
I
think
that's
important
to
acknowledge
out
here
and
if
that's
not
true,
I
hope
people
will
make
sure
that
I
find
out
about
it
after
this
meeting.
If
you
have,
because
my
understanding
is
that
there
was
some
discussion
about
this
this
morning,
and
some
key
stakeholders
came
in
around
this
and
that
significant
to
me
as
well,
and
that
included
business
and
labor
representatives
and
others.
C
C
We
would
get
to
the
cutoff
point
after
I
had
some
discussions
from
our
last
meeting
of
50,
because
that
still
leaves
25%
of
the
workforce
in
those
small
businesses
that
will
be
lagging
behind
so
seeing
the
number
of
100
employees
is
defined
for
small
businesses
seems
like
that's,
going
to
put
a
significant
number
behind
and
I.
Don't
have
the
slide
in
front
of
me,
but
thousands
of
people
will
be
behind.
So
that's
I'm
not
going
to
propose
that
amendment
right
now,
but
I
just
thought.
C
G
Thank
You
councilmember
Glidden,
so
I
wanted
to
say
that
you
know
I've
been
really
proud
of
the
process
that
this
piece
of
public
policy
has
taken.
I,
remember
back
in
2014,
when
my
first
started
convening
internal
meetings
with
some
of
our
colleagues
here
and
staff
to
talk
about
advancing
this,
this
piece
of
legislation
and
since
then
you
know
this
process
has
grown
gotten
more
robust,
have
gotten
much
more
engagement
from
our
community
and
all
the
different
stakeholders
that
will
be
impacted
by
it
and
just
leading
up
until
today.
G
Personally,
growing
up
in
a
low-income
family,
you
know
I
grew
up
in
a
mobile
home
park
and
then
had
five
people
growing
up
in
a
one-bedroom
home
and
then
was
privileged
enough
to
represent
our
9th
Ward
community,
which
is
one
of
the
most
diverse
communities
in
the
entire
city
and
also
one
of
the
most
low-income.
It's
natural
that
someone
like
me
would
be
the
first
to
support
15
publicly
back
in
2014,
the
first
to
take
a
stance
against
any
tip
penalties.
G
And
so,
as
such,
you
know,
I
would
prefer
that
this
would
read
for
years
implementation,
because
I
know
our
families
need
this
Economic
Opportunity.
So
much
and
as
I
was
meeting
with
some
of
the
groups
today,
I
just
wanted
to.
Let
them
know
that
I
would
be
supporting
what
what
would
be
presented
here
today,
because
I
wanted
to
respect
the
amount
of
work,
expertise
and
in
thinking
that
have
gone
behind
this
proposal.
G
That
brings
together
a
large
group
of
interests
and
people
and
companies
and
businesses
and
livelihoods,
and
so,
while
I
would
prefer
that
this
would
be
a
four
year.
Implementation
phase
for
our
large
businesses,
I
will
likely
be
supporting
this
moving
forward,
because
I
acknowledge
that
so
many
different
groups
have
come
together
to
try
to
make
this
work
for
our
city
to
make
our
city
better
for
both
businesses
and
workers
and
an
overall
for
for
our
one
Minneapolis.
G
H
H
I,
believe
that
the
fastest
way
to
lose
faith
in
government
is
to
implement
laws
that
we
can
enforce
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
every
bit
of
this
minimum
wage,
ultimately
and
regardless
of
what
it
looks
like
is
enforceable
and
I
can
talk
a
little
bit
more
extensively
about
the
private
cause
of
action,
but
not
broadly
speaking,
I
do
want
to
acknowledge
how
much
work
has
gone
into
getting
to
this
point.
It's
not
like
this
happened
overnight.
It's
not
like
this
happened
in
the
last
week.
H
This
has
happened
over
a
period
of
a
couple
of
years
and
while
people's
opinions
and
and
calculations
have
have
shifted
over
time,
I
do
think
we
are
moving
in
the
right
direction
right
now.
Cities
are
very
much
becoming
the
laboratory
of
democracy,
especially
at
a
time
when
we've
got
gridlock
at
state
and
federal
legislatures,
and
we
are
in
a
position
to
act
to
help
people.
H
H
I
will
say
that
I
thought
and
continue
to
think
that
there
should
be
a
different
Faizan
for
small
and
local
businesses
than
large
corporations.
I
still
believe
that,
sitting
here
right
now,
we
have
a
very
rich
small
and
local
business
community
in
our
city,
small
local
businesses
of
six
or
eight
or
even
50
employees,
a
function
dramatically
different
from
entities
that
have
storefronts
throughout
the
entire
country,
hundreds
and
perhaps
thousands
of
them.
That
is
not
the
same
dynamic
and
I
do
think.
H
We
need
to
account
for
that
and
by
the
way,
the
the
proposal
that
was
put
forth.
It's
not
as
if
it
has
it
is
dramatically
more
simple
simply
because
they
come
to
the
same
dollar
figure.
At
the
same
time,
I
mean,
if
you
look
at
it,
as
of
July
1st,
were
at
11:25
for
large
1025
for
small
July,
1st
2019
1225
for
large
1125
for
small
July,
1st
13
to
20
2013
25
for
large
1225,
so
small.
So
there
still
is
complexity
to
it.
H
The
question
that
I
would
only
pose
that
we
should
be
reviewing
over
the
next
several
weeks
is
whether
we
should
have
a
different
finality,
a
different
reaching
that
$15
period
for
large
businesses
and
small
and
I
believe
that
we
should
have
a
faster
phase
in
for
large
businesses.
Any
slow
or
phasing
for
small
businesses,
and
although
it
is
not
accounted
for
in
this
ordinance,
I
still
think
necessary
to
put
something
down
on
the
table.
H
I
think
it's
great
work,
15
bucks
and
another
thing-
that's
important
to
recognize
is
there's
been
a
whole
lot
of
talk
about.
$15
$15
is
still
not
a
life
and
I
think
that's
what
we
need
to
be
striving
towards
now,
so
you
should
have
a
staff
direction
in
front
of
you.
A
chair,
Glidden
I,
don't
know
if
you
want
to
add
it
to
yours
and
I'll
just
serve
as
a
co-author
or
if
I
do
mine
separately,
I'm
fine,
either
way.
I
A
So,
let's
than
have
in
front
of
us
council
member
fries
amendment
to
add
language
asking
staff
to
graph
an
ordinance
section
that
would
provide
for
a
private
right
of
action,
any
discussion
on
council
member
fries,
amended
language
I,
don't
see
that
I'll
just
say
that
I
certainly
support
this
and
I
really
appreciate
council
member
Frye
bringing
this
forward.
My
understanding
from
reviews
of
other
ordinances
around
the
country
again,
is
that
this
is
I'm
not
sure
there's
even
another
jurisdiction,
maybe
there's
one
or
two
almost
all
include
a
private
right
of
action.
A
So
this
is
sort
of
one
of
the
fundamentals.
I
think
that
other
jurisdictions
have
included
to
ensure
that
enforcement
can
happen
properly.
So
on
approval
of
councilmember
fries
amendment
say
yes,
I
opposed!
No,
so
that
is
approved
and
added
to
the
longer
staff.
Direction
Council
President,
Johnson
I.
I
We
want
to
treat
them
and
respect
them
and
last
budget
we
added
two
positions
to
work
as
small
business
navigators
in
the
city,
but
you
know
we've
done
some
things
to
them
that
we
should
be
concerned
about.
You
know
we
I'll
just
give
a
few.
Since
you
know
we
ban
styrofoam,
which
all
the
little
small
restaurants
made
them
increase
their
costs
for
the
takeout
food
that
they
have.
I
You
know,
we've
we've
told
convenience
stores
that
you
could
see
the
list
of
products
that
convenience
stores
have
to
carry
it's
about
a
three
page
list
of
what
convenience
starts
at
Sela
can't
sell
white
rice.
They
only
can
sell
brown
rice.
They
can
only
sell
this
kind
of
beans,
not
that
kind
of
beans.
I
You
know
we
we
we
ban
plastic
bags,
but
I
guess
bears
legislature
told
we
couldn't
do
that,
but
you
know
can't
sell
flavoured
cigars
and
all
of
these
we've
done
these.
All
of
these,
for
reasons
that
are
that
are
important,
but
I
think
we
have
to
think
about
what
we've
done
and
not
think
that
we're
not
impacting
small
businesses
and
we've
made
it
all
good
by
putting
two
navigators
in
place
to
deal
with
the
issues
that
that
a
lot
of
it
we've
created
ourselves.
I
So
I
also
look
at
this
phase
in
of
small
business,
and
it
goes
to
what
represent
refer.
I
was
saying
this
last
jump
for
small
businesses.
If
we
do
it,
the
way
that's
been
suggested,
as
this
matrix
shows,
does
what
essentially
a
contract
or
D
does,
which
is
give
them
a
great
big
balloon.
At
the
end,
they
have
to
absorb
a
great
big
increase
to
get
them
up
to
fifteen
dollars
at
the
end
of
that
five
years,
and
that's
going
to
be
a
challenge
for
them.
I
So
I,
you
know,
while
I'm
fine,
to
have
this
in
front
of
us.
I,
just
really
want
us
to
think
seriously
about
the
challenges
that
small
businesses
face
in
this
community
that
we're
doing
the
right
thing
by
raising
the
minimum
wage,
but
I
also
think
we
really
have
to
be
careful
and
thoughtful
about
how
we
stage
this
and
adding
a
big
balloon
at
the
end
for
small
businesses.
I
think
the
real
challenge
for
them.
What
did
I
see
in
our
you
know?
Our
numbers
were
eighty.
I
I
That's
going
to
be
a
challenge
for
them:
49%
of
the
health
care
people,
although
I
did
hear
today
from
some
of
the
health
care
people
that
reimbursement
rates
have
been
increased
and
a
lot
of
their
wages
are
in
the
health
care
in
the
healthcare
outside
of
hospitals
that
their
that
their
wages
are
on
par
with
what
we're
suggesting
for
in
in
the
ordinance.
So
that
gives
me
some
comfort.
I
I
was
concerned
that
we
might
be
just
adding
patient
load
to
people
who
have
a
really
hard
job
already
so
I,
just
I'm
happy
to
have
this
out
in
front
of
us,
but
again,
I
am
not
satisfied
with
having
small
businesses
be
impacted
in
the
exact
same
way
at
the
end
of
the
ordinance
as
big
businesses.
Are.
That
really
is
not
very.
C
Thank
you,
I
just
done,
I
see
that
the
staff
direction
well.
First
of
all,
I'll
note
that
nobody
seemed
to
be
very
interested
in
my
wonderful
bait
that
I
put
out
there
about
lowering
it
to
75
or
50
so
I'll.
Let
that
go
at
this
point
and
I
guess
to
cut
out
said
100.
It
seems
like
most
people
are
satisfied
with
that.
I
do
see
that
the
tier
2
does
take
a
more
gentle
approach
with
the
smaller
businesses,
though,
and
I
did
want
to
just
acknowledge
that.
C
I
also
noticed
that
balloon
at
the
end,
and
one
of
the
things
that
I
thought
about
is
that
by
with
the
time
we're
in
2020
and
2021,
we
might
see
a
lot
of
difference
in
terms
of
the
market
and
the
wages.
There
might
actually
be
enough
time
for
the
council
whoever's
here
at
that
point,
to
evaluate
and
look
at
that
I
think
in
all
likelihood,
they'll
be
pressure
on
from
the
market
and
from
potential
employees.
C
The
wages
might
even
have
to
be
higher
just
to
attract
people
and
I've
already
heard
of
a
lot
of
people
who
are
already
paying
more
than
they
expected.
They
might
have
a
couple
years
ago,
just
so
they
can
have
good
people
working
for
them.
So
we
may
find
that
that
that
by
2021
a
lot
of
people
are
already
well
above
the
30
25
an
hour
and
working
in
Minneapolis,
and
maybe
everybody,
but
it
also
gives
us
same
chance
to
look
at
that
again
in
the
future.
If
it
looks
like
somehow
that
payment.
G
C
Last
year
is
a
big,
a
balloon
payment
I
have
a
hunch
that
a
lot
of
the
businesses
will
be
in
sync
with
one
another:
buy
them
in
and
all
approaching
15
together,
but
we'll
have
to
see
I
think
it
will
be
good
to
have
ordinance
language.
That's
firmed
up
before
we
go
into
the
public
hearing,
so
we
can
potentially
discuss
that
and
hear
people's
input
from
it
and
make
amendments
to
it.
So
I
heard
a
lot
of
consensus
with
passing
this
and
moving
forward.
F
It
could
have
very
well
an
appearance
based
on
our
discussion
that
we're
making
up
our
minds
in
advance
of
final
public
hearing
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
communicate
to
every
corner
of
the
city
into
every
stakeholder
group
that
their
public
hearing
is
a
real
process.
It's
the
real
deal
and
clearly
there's
not
100%
consensus
on
how
we
get
to
our
wage
increase.
F
There
is
obvious
commitment
on
the
Dia's
here
to
move
forward,
but
the
how
is
still
in
question,
even
though
there's
a
lot
of
proximity
as
councilmember
goodnes
pointed
out,
but
nonetheless
there
should
be
room
for
conversation,
debate
and
discussion.
I
say
this:
in
light
of
one
of
the
constituents:
I
have
that
served
on
the
advisory
group
just
resigned
with
a
sense
of
not
being
heard
right,
really
wrongly
I'm,
not
judging
her
opinion
on
this,
but
we
don't
want
that
to
be
a
prevailing
sentiment
moving
forward.
We
want
the
stakeholders
to
be
here.
E
That
is
a
good
starting
point
for
us
to
have
accustomed
over
I
just
said
the
public
discussion
that
we
are
planning
to
have
and
I
hope
members
will
dig
in
and
get
engaged
in
those
details,
because
they're
really
important
and
it
is
difficult
to
work
it
out
all
at
the
last
minute.
So
we
do
have
some
time
here
to
get
more
involved.
A
Thank
You
councilmember
bender,
so
not
seeing
any
further
comments.
I'll,
just
kind
of
maybe
go
back
to
reiterate
a
couple
things
I
said
before
one
is
that
I
do
think.
Council
members
had
thought
we
would
have
a
proposal
from
staff
and
discuss
it,
and
so
I
just
want
to
acknowledge
again
that
was
kind
of
the
place.
I
think
some
of
my
colleagues
were
coming
from,
and
so
I
really
appreciate
the
thoughtfulness
with
which
council
members
are
trying
to
send
a
message
to
stakeholders
that
we
appreciate
feedback
and
clearly,
at
least
from
my
perspective
here.
A
In
this
conversation
we
do
sound
like
we're
kind
of
in
this
we're
in
a
zone,
but
we
have
a
few
differences
of
opinion.
I
think
that's
where
the
public
hearing
process
will
help
us
to
be
able
to
iron
out
what
maybe
these
final
details
to
satisfy
some
of
the
additional
thoughts
and
concerns,
some
of
which
have
been
laid
out
here
today.
So
again,
thank
you,
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
then
ask
for
a
vote
on
the
staff
direction.