Valparaiso's efforts to require developments getting city incentives to meet the same requirements as city projects will take a little more time to finalize.
The city council voted Monday to table the "responsible business practices" ordinance. It would require projects seeking at least $150,000 worth of incentives to make disclosures regarding payroll, business history, and the identities of their contractors. They'd also have to show evidence of an active apprenticeship program.
Council member Robert Cotton introduced the ordinance, citing allegations about cheaper, out-of-town labor being used on the Linc project. "There was a very large series of safety issues, as well as noted, documented conversations that revealed workers that didn't even know what city they were in, and that they were being paid cash. That's what these allegations were," Cotton said.
But Mayor Jon Costas asked council members to table the ordinance. He wanted more time to make adjustments, following discussions with union leaders and other stakeholders. Costas noted that there were two amended drafts of the ordinance being circulated, in addition to the original version.
"It will take some time to work out the details," Costas told council members. "Given the current situation and the positive steps forward, the Operating Engineers, the building trades and the Construction Advancement Foundation have all indicated a desire to finish the work we have started."
Costas worried that too much regulation would discourage investment in Valparaiso, ultimately leading to fewer local jobs.
But Cotton complained that he was excluded from the mayor's discussions. He also said some of the suggested changes would weaken the ordinance, like raising the incentive threshold and adding exceptions.
"People have had an equal amount of time to engage with us, but don't engage outside of us and then come to this body as though our responsibility, our role, isn't prominent and most important in this whole discussion," Cotton said.
During a public hearing on the ordinance, some argued that requiring an apprenticeship program would be unfair to smaller, non-union contractors. Union leaders denied that the measure would exclude anyone, saying the ordinance would improve safety.
