Minimum wage increase is no longer local issue

By Zsombor Peter
Staff Writer

GALLUP — City voters aren't the only ones talking about increasing the minimum wage.

Their federal representatives are doing the same thing in Washington, except their deliberations have the potential to raise wages across the country. And now that the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives have both passed minimum wage bills, the prospects of a national increase are growing.

Local activists and business owners, however, don't agree on how much of a good thing that is for Gallup.

The Gallup Committee for a Minimum Wage Increase, the sponsor of a wage proposal on the city's March 6 ballot that would affect Gallup only, likes its plan better. Gallup business owners want any increase to apply to their neighbors as well.

Committee member Bill Bright said he faced plenty of questions about the prospects of a federal increase while going door to door collecting the signatures the group needed to put its proposal on the city ballot.

"What we say," said Bright, "is that if the people lead, the leaders will follow."

After watching both state and federal lawmakers talk about raising the minimum wage for the past several years and seeing no results, the committee decided to stop waiting. If Gallup was going to have a higher minimum wage, the committee decided, it would be up to Gallup voters. It started collecting signatures for a city referendum on the matter last summer.

If voters approve its plan, the local minimum wage would jump to $6.75 within 60 days, to $7.50 by 2008, and by a proportional change in the consumer price index beginning in 2009 and every year thereafter.

"We're not happy with what the state or federal leaders are able to do on an issue that's so important to the average worker," Bright said.

And just because the House and Senate have passed their own versions of a wage increase, he added, it's no guarantee that a federal increase will happen.

"It's not a done deal yet," he said, "even if negotiations are ongoing in D.C."

Because the House and Senate versions don't match the Senate version, passed Thursday, includes $8.3 billion in tax breaks the two entities must work out a compromise before it can move on to the president's desk. Many Democrats oppose the tax cuts. Republicans, including the veto-wielding president, support them.

Gallup business owners with all but a few exceptions seem squarely opposed to the committee's plan. Some say the government city, state, or federal has no business telling them what they can or can't pay their employees. But even those open to an increase worry about what could happen if Gallup voters approve a local increase and state or federal lawmakers fail to follow suit.

No one doubts that a wage increase will raise prices. It's just a question of how much.

"Everyone knows we're in a regional market," said local restaurant owner Jennifer Dowling. "If the minimum wage affects only the city of Gallup ... we could put ourselves at a competitive disadvantage."

She sees customers travel 60, 70 and 80 miles to shop in Gallup and doesn't buy the argument that the city has nothing to worry about from places like Farmington.

"Our customers are very mobile," Dowling said. "They're used to traveling long distances."

If prices go up just in Gallup, she fears, many customers will choose to do their shopping elsewhere. A state or federal increase, on the other hand, would keep the proverbial playing field level.

Dowling isn't opposed to a minimum wage increase, as long as it's imposed gradually and at a state or national level. Ten years without an increase, she said, makes an increase "inevitable."

"It's no longer 'Should we increase it or not,' " said Dowling. "It's a question of 'How much should we increase it and how should we do it?' "

If Congress and the president can come to terms on a federal increase, it doesn't necessarily spell the end of a local increase. Both the committee's proposal and a competing proposal placed on the ballot by the City Council would raise the local minimum wage to $7.50, 25 cents above the House and Senate versions.

The only danger a federal increase before March 6 poses to the committee's plan is that Gallup voters might decide that a local increase is no longer necessary. But because neither the House nor Senate versions include an annual cost of living adjustment, Bright disagrees.

Even if voters do approve the committee's proposal, it's only an ordinance, free to be nullified at the City Council's will.

Bright doubts the council would exercise that option. If a local, $7.50 version passes, Dowling hopes the council would at least think about it.