Miami-Dade Legislative Item
File Number: 102582
Printable PDF Format Download Adobe Reader  

File Number: 102582 File Type: Ordinance Status: Deferred by the Board
Version: 0 Reference: Control: Board of County Commissioners
File Name: RESPONSIBLE WAGES IN COUNTY CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS Introduced: 10/27/2010
Requester: NONE Cost: Final Action:
Agenda Date: 11/16/2010 Agenda Item Number: 7A
Notes: supplement # 102686- Title: ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR RESPONSIBLE WAGES IN COUNTY CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS; MODIFYING THE EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN PRIVATELY FUNDED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS; PROVIDING THAT CERTAIN PRIVATELY FUNDED PROJECTS WITH AN ESTIMATED COST LESS THAN FIVE MILLION DOLLARS SHALL BE EXEMPT; DELETING THE EXEMPTION FOR PROJECTS WHOSE ESTIMATED COST EXCEEDS ONE MILLION DOLLARS; AMENDING SECTION 2-11.16 OF THE CODE; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE [SEE ORIGINAL ITEM UNDER FILE NO. 102113]
Indexes: CONSTRUCTION
  ORDINANCE AMENDING
  WAGES
Sponsors: Natacha Seijas, Prime Sponsor
  Sally A. Heyman, Co-Sponsor
Sunset Provision: No Effective Date: Expiration Date:
Registered Lobbyist: None Listed


Legislative History

Acting Body Date Agenda Item Action Sent To Due Date Returned Pass/Fail

Board of County Commissioners 11/16/2010 7A Deferred P
REPORT: Commissioner Seijas explained that the intent of this proposed ordinance was to require the use of skilled workers for any project that exceeded $5 million. She noted this proposed ordinance would be prospective. Commissioner Sosa suggested this proposed ordinance be amended to add the following language at the end of Section 4: “The requirements of this ordinance shall not apply to any contract resulting from a bid proposal or other response to a County competitive process, which has been opened by the County prior to the effective date of this ordinance.” Commissioner Seijas accepted Commissioner Sosa’s suggested amendment. Chairman Moss asked Commissioner Seijas whether she would accept an amendment that presented an even broader exception to County contracts that were in the bidding process. In response to Commissioner Sosa’s request to clarify whether her suggested amendment would protect any prospective County contract that already had a cost amount attached to it, County Attorney Robert Cuevas advised that Commissioner Sosa’s suggested amendment would protect any bid, proposal or other response to a competitive process that had been opened by the County. Chairman Moss expressed concern that the County had unopened bids that had already been submitted, which would not be protected by this proposed ordinance as amended. Commissioner Sosa clarified that this proposed oridinace needed to be amended to protect any bids or proposals to County contracts that had already been advertised. County Attorney Cuevas advised the amended language to this proposed ordinance should read as follows: “This ordinance will apply only to projects advertised after the effective date of this ordinance.” Commissioner Gimenez questioned whether the Miami-Dade Aviation Director had discussed with contractors the potential impact of this proposed ordinance. Mr. Jose Abreu, Director, Miami-Dade Aviation Department (MDAD), noted he had spoken with three contractors and they explained that this proposed ordinance could have a fiscal impact ranging from nine to 17 percent of the total project cost. Commissioner Gimenez pointed out that this proposed ordinance would only impact the labor costs. He questioned the impact of this proposed ordinance on labor costs. Mr. Abreu noted the three contractors he spoke with indicated the impact to labor costs would be 35-50%. He explained that Florida International University (FIU) would conduct a survey in January 2011 to better determine the impact of this proposed ordinance. Commissioner Gimenez noted that handwritten page 2 of this proposed ordinance indicated this proposed ordinance would not have a fiscal impact to the County, however, handwritten page 1 of Agenda Item 7A Supplement, Legislative File No. 102686, indicated this proposed ordinance would increase project costs in the county. He expressed concern that the increased project costs would deter private companies from doing business in the county, and that this deterrent would be done at a critical time in the economy. Commissioner Gimenez suggested the County understand the real fiscal impact that this proposed ordinance would have on projects. Commissioner Heyman noted the intent of this proposed ordinance was to help the “working poor” class of workers obtain better wages, and this class of workers, to a degree, were tied to public projects. She noted several respected companies called her and said this proposed ordinance would have a severe impact on them. Commissioner Heyman expressed concern that construction scope(s) may need to be reduced to compensate for higher wages. She requested clarification regarding the impact to the scope of projects. County Manager Burgess noted this proposed ordinance would have a fiscal impact, however, he did not know the exact amount of that impact. He clarified that Agenda Item 7A Supplement attempted to quantify the possible impacts of this proposed ordinance. He explained that if this proposed ordinance did not impact the revenue yield to the County or the cost paid by the County, then it could impact the scope of a project. Commissioner Heyman expressed concern regarding the unintended consequences of this proposed ordinance on the number of people who could be employed and the amount of work those people would do. Commissioner Edmonson noted this proposed ordinance had the potential to create jobs and ensure that these jobs paid the workers a living wage. Responding to Commissioner Edmonson’s question whether the County Manager recommended the Commission adopt this proposal, County Manager Burgess noted that this proposed ordinance would have a fiscal impact, and that the County Administration would not have introduced this proposal. Commissioner Edmonson questioned whether any other governmental entities imposed a living wage on public-private partnerships. County Attorney Cuevas advised that other governmental entities did. He noted he was unsure whether they had the exact same terms as this proposed ordinance. Commissioner Edmonson questioned when the County would receive the findings from the FIU survey. Mr. Abreu noted the County would receive a report from FIU probably at the end of March 2011. Commissioner Edmonson noted she supported the County waiting until it could review the FIU survey findings before voting on this proposed ordinance. Commissioner Diaz noted the intent of public-private partnerships (PPP) was to create more jobs. He expressed concern regarding the impact that this proposed ordinance could have on future PPP projects. He noted he supported the County waiting for the findings from the FIU survey. Commissioner Monestime questioned what the County could do to undermine the fiscal impact of this proposed ordinance. County Manager Burgess noted the County could not plan a way to undermine the impacts because they were unknown. Commissioner Bell asked the County Manager to provide the County Commission with a report that quantified the results of the FIU survey and applied those results to specific County capital improvement projects. She noted the County Commission should make a decision based on the net impact. It was moved by Commissioner Gimenez that this proposed ordinance be deferred until the County had time to review the FIU survey findings. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Diaz. Commissioner Seijas requested the South Florida Building and Construction Trades Council representative address the Commission. Mr. Alan Ishanbell, South Florida Building and Construction Trades Council, noted every project funded by the Federal government since 1931 under the Davis Bacon Act required a responsible wage be paid to workers. He explained that the same concerns regarding the same impacts were discussed in 1931. He pointed out that hundreds of projects across the county were done by private developers that paid the same wages required by this proposed ordinance. Mr. Ishanbell noted the County would save money by using more skilled workers who would provide a better product and would receive a wage that wouldn’t make them dependent on County services. Commissioner Seijas questioned whether the County Administration would continue to advertise projects while the County waited for the results of the FIU survey. County Manager Burgess noted he had been moving forward with the County’s capital improvement program. He pointed out that the County did not have a large number of PPP projects ongoing at any given time. Commissioner Seijas asked the County Manager to ensure that no privately funded construction projects proceeded until the Florida International University survey was completed and this proposed ordinance came back before the County Commission. Chairman Moss noted the economic situation at this time made it so he could not support this proposed ordinance. He clarified that the private sector did not always pay the living wage. He noted the County should not hold up PPP projects while it waited for the FIU survey results. Commissioner Jordan questioned Mr. Abreu regarding the FIU survey. Commissioner Jordan asked that she be listed as a co-sponsor to this proposed ordinance. She noted the County would not have the small business program if the cost of the project was the top priority. The County needed more information before implementing this proposal, Commissioner Jordan noted. Hearing no other questions or comments, the Commission proceeded to vote to defer this proposed ordinance to no date certain.

Board of County Commissioners 11/4/2010 7F Deferred P
REPORT: Commissioner Gimenez asked that the foregoing proposed ordinance be deferred. He noted that he had requested the County Manager provide information pertaining to the fiscal impact of projects.

County Attorney 10/27/2010 Assigned Hugo Benitez

Budget, Planning and Sustainability Committee 10/12/2010 1E4 AMENDED Forwarded to BCC with a favorable recommendation with committee amendment(s) P
REPORT: Assistant County Attorney Martin Sybblis read the foregoing proposed ordinance into the record. Vice-Chairman Martinez opened the public hearing on the foregoing proposed ordinance, and the following person appeared before the Committee: Mr. Alan Ishenbel (phonetic), 10059 NW 1 Court, Plantation, attorney representing South Florida Building and Construction Trades Counsel, spoke in support of this proposed ordinance. Vice-Chairman Maritnez closed the public hearing after no other persons appeared wishing to speak. Commissioner Edmonson suggested this proposed ordinance be amended to change in sections (i) and (j) “estimated cost is less than $5,000,000” to “estimated cost is $5,000,000 or less.” Hearing no other questions or comments, the Committee proceeded to vote on this proposed resolution as amended.

Legislative Text


TITLE
ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR RESPONSIBLE WAGES IN COUNTY CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS; MODIFYING THE EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN PRIVATELY FUNDED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS; PROVIDING THAT CERTAIN PRIVATELY FUNDED PROJECTS WITH AN ESTIMATED COST LESS THAN FIVE MILLION DOLLARS SHALL BE EXEMPT; DELETING THE EXEMPTION FOR PROJECTS WHOSE ESTIMATED COST EXCEEDS ONE MILLION DOLLARS; AMENDING SECTION 2-11.16 OF THE CODE; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE

BODY
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MIAMIDADE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Section 1. Section 2-11.16 of the Code of Miami-Dade County, Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows:1
Sec. 2-11.16. County construction contracts.

(a) In addition to the other elements of the term "responsible bidder" in law or in the discretion of the Board of Commissioners of Miami-Dade County, as applies to competitively bid County contracts in excess of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) for the construction, alteration, and/or repair, including painting or decorating, of public buildings or public works, shall mean a bidder who provides documented
proof in its bid that the various classes of laborers and mechanics will be paid no less than the specified overall hourly rates as set forth in the contract specifications. All leases and contracts entered into after the effective date of this ordinance which provide for privately funded construction, alteration or repair of buildings or improvements located on County-owned land [[whose estimated cost is greater than or equal to one million dollars ($1,000,000.00)]] shall require laborers and mechanics performing such work be paid no less than the overall hourly rates required on competitively bid County construction contracts under this Section >>unless specifically exempted below<<. Fees for monitoring compliance with this Section shall be charged as provided in the most current County-wide Budget as follows: for County construction contracts, the Department of Business Development shall charge the using department therefor; for leases and contracts which provide for privately funded construction, alteration or repair of buildings or improvements on County owned land, the party contracting with the County shall be charged therefor.

* * *

(i) Exemption for certain privately funded construction. This Section shall not apply to leases and contracts entered into after the effective date of this ordinance which provide for privately funded construction, alteration or repair of buildings or improvements located on County-owned land whose estimated cost is [[greater]] >>equal to or less<<2 than [[or equal to one]] >>five<>5<<,000,000.00) which are financed:

(1) Solely through private sources, without one dollar ($1.00) or more of financing provided through any federal, state, county or local governmental entity or bond sources including Industrial Development Authority (IDA) bonds or similar type of bond funding; or

(2) by entities which meet all of three (3) of the following conditions: exemption from Federal Income Taxes under section 501(c)(3), not-for-profit and community-based.
(j) The foregoing notwithstanding, any lease or contract entered into after the effective date of this ordinance which provides for privately funded construction, alteration or repair of buildings or improvements located on County-owned land whose estimated cost is [[greater]] >>equal to or less<< than [[or equal to one]] >>five<>5<<,000,000.00), receives IDA bond financing and also receives State and/or local development incentives (including but not limited to: waiver of or reduced impact or permit fees and reduced property or other taxes) based on job creation shall not require payment of the overall hourly rates provided by this Section. Such lease or contract shall provide that in the event the job creation requirements on which the foregoing development incentives were conditioned are not fulfilled, the lessee shall be required to pay a penalty of up to twenty (20) percent of the cost of such construction, alteration or repair. Said penalty shall be in addition to any rental or other payments required in each lease or contract to which this subsection applies. Said penalty shall be paid to Miami-Dade County for deposit in the Department of Business Development Compliance Trust Fund and used to cover the costs of monitoring compliance with this Section.

Section 2. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or provision of this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance shall not be affected by such invalidity.
Section 3. It is the intention of the Board of County Commissioners, and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance, including any sunset provision, shall become and be made a part of the Code of Miami-Dade County, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such intention, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section," "article," or other appropriate word.

Section 4. This ordinance shall become effective ten (10) days after the date of enactment unless vetoed by the Mayor, and if vetoed, shall become effective only upon an override by this Board.

1 Words stricken through and/or [[double bracketed]] shall be deleted. Words underscored and/or >>double arrowed<< constitute the amendment proposed. Remaining provisions are now in effect and remain unchanged.

2 Committee amendments are indicated as follows: words double stricken through and/or [[double bracketed]] shall be deleted, words double underlined and/or >>double arrowed<< constitute the amendment proposed.



Home  |   Agendas  |   Minutes  |   Legislative Search  |   Lobbyist Registration  |   Legislative Reports
2014 BCC Meeting Calendar  |   Miami-Dade County Code of Ordinances   |   ADA Notice  |  

Home  |  Using Our Site  |  About Phone Directory  |  Privacy  |  Disclaimer

E-mail your comments, questions and suggestions to Webmaster  

Web Site 2014 Miami-Dade County.
All rights reserved.