What is unique is that City of Ramsey (under Republican leadership at present, the gang-of-four made up of mayor, McClone, Wise and Elvig all being GOP to varying extents but all in that camp) is pushing the Flaherty-Collins thing as a "catalyst" effort indicative of what is hoped for by officials for the remainder of its Town Center raw land holdings, and that the Flaherty-Collins thing is highlighted as part of what's touted as a "public-private partnership [P3]" cooperative effort; with this particular ramp-wrap-rental hummer being set up to be bankrolled in part by City of Ramsey's HRA (i.e., with bonding to put money into the Flaherty-Collins adventure, as a loan to the shell LLC Flaherty-Collins has set up for its role in the things).
Or at least that is the latest public incarnation of plans of which I am aware. It would be great if Flaherty-Collins paid all the freight, it and its private-sector lenders, but the landlord seems disinclined to put in sufficient capital to make the thing happen that way. Or at least so far that is the public impression citizens such as me are left with by events as they've been revealed. Presuming the City does take a second lien position or other active role beyond infrastructure building, what then?
With that level of public involvement, and with title to rental site to be held in the hands of the landlord who is presently appearing to put less money at risk in this than the city, how should these Republicans, especially in light of union busting east or the Minnesota border in Wisconsin, treat the question one of whether prevailing wage should be a non-negotiable DEMAND that Flaherty-Collins acquiesce to if wanting the deal to go through with the citizens of Ramsey, many being union members, picking up a big, big, big chunk of the adventure's risk?
That is the question.
The alternative would be a potential undercutting of unions, of undercutting prevailing wage requirements, via a shell-game shuffle of what's private, and what's public, in this alleged public-private co-adventuring for Flaherty-Collins and for the remainder of the Landform effort to promote the CORpse resuscitation.
Labor should step to the plate, however I fear labor has not been aware of and attentive to the policy dimensions of "public-private" P3 "partnership" co-adventuring. See the lengthy SLIDE packet, this link:
http://156.142.212.178:8080/docs/2011/HRASpec/20110104_31/31_010411%20HRA.pdf
See, e.g., the 19th slide, and the 21st (click as needed to enlarge and read):
I would like a city government I could be proud of. I have already called this thing Republican socialism, and I do not change that view. Yet the socialized effort, in its slide 21 poses two questions which I see, in the context of a universal "COR" prevailing wage policy, to be questions having crystal clear answers. First:
What impediments to sucessful development would exist?
Labor disharmony would be an impediment, especially given that the entire thing the council is doing has little strong community-wide support, and assuring labor's interest in prevailing wage requirements would be a substantial real step toward a true effort to build more community belief and support. Disharmony could lead to informational pickets, or other steps which might slow construction or lead to the effort attaining bad public relations and press coverage if any aura of union bashing were to become apparent.
What partnership roles can the public play in overcoming those impediments?
The answer is obvious. Require prevailing wage clauses in any land sale - development contracts arise, in particular in the present Flaherty-Collins thing where the city is taking a financing stake, beyond infrastructural involvement. To be legitimate such a thing would need to bar Flaherty-Collins, which has its own building arm to do contracting, from bringing in out-of-state labor and instead making it a contract term that they hire locally. A first step would be for the mayor and city administrator to get into a conference call with Bill McCarthy of the above referenced labor organization, his contact info being on this page. McCarthy should be invited to the next council/HRA meeting at which Flaherty-Collins is on the agenda to discuss publicly, on camera, labor's role, incentives, and hopes in our area, under present economic pressures. A special council work session meeting could be held Monday, with McCarthy invited to first discuss things off-camera with the council and key city staff. Those steps would be real, and clearly indicative of an acknowledgement that labor has a stake in whether this Ramsey Town Center resuscitation effort bears fruit.
................................................
That public sector socialism in such ways as it is being done and touted per "The COR" may carry consequences regarding public-policy labor considerations of prevailing wage for all construction within the city's co-adventuring area, the Ramsey Town Center as renamed "The COR" (to cast off the stigma of failed policy), should have been foreseen by city officials and duly addressed before now. However, I have seen no evidence whatsoever of any such sensitivity or attention to labor as a factor in what is being advanced from the council table.
It is high time that be changed. And to be legitimate and percieved as such, it would have to come in the context of a city stepping out presently from all traditional roles into socialized development and into banking a second lien position in a landlord's venture wanting labor harmony in so proceeding, and taking clear, open and public affirmative steps to see this is done in a way honoring the existence of organized labor and its aspirations.
Anything less would be sowing the seeds of discord against a project the council gang-of-four seems hopelessly in love with, and one it is immune to seeing any ugliness or disaster in the thought or in how thoughts may be implemented.
Hopefully such myopia will be dispelled before any groundbreaking on the landlord effort of Flaherity-Collins happens.
Prevailing wage is a simple concept. It can be simply implemented, if a city will exists to see it done. If not, elections happen. Unfortunately, not soon enough if union-bashing is to be a part of what my city, City of Ramsey, is all about. Let us hope that labor harmony is recognized as a goal standing in everyone's best interest, and that the ballot box as a last resort is mooted by sound policy thinking on council.
Review that entire slideshow, again, this link. If it was produced with any aim beyond puffery and show, then weigh what it says, and how, if it disregards labor as having a stake in seeing prevailing wage honored, it is of a most questionable "public" value. Labor could ask that all jobs be union built, locally hired, or not done at all. I would actually prefer that since then only jurisdictional inter-union questions might arise but a no-strike clause could work if union labor be required, with the jurisdictional matters arbitrated among the unions without any work interruption. Labor might ask less, only that prevailing wage be paid with contractors free to hire locally among union or non-union labor, and other arrangements could be considered. However, now, not later is the time to address the legitimate expectations of labor, with union membership high among Ramsey residents where such citizens should be expected to want their legitimacy recognized when their money tax money is spent, and they might take offense at an attitude akin to sticking a pencil in the eye of labor, if that is how the cards fall. Harmonious steps seem to be the wisest road City of Ramsey could take.
______________UPDATE______________
Given how the GOP wishes to characterize the wealthy as "job creators," this is a chance to do so in harmony with unions, who can look to Wisconsin and elsewhere to see the GOP as union-bashers instead of job creators. Local GOP members on the Ramsey council, along with the wealthy gentlemen, Mr. Flaherty and Mr. Collins, can face this apparent dichotomy and act to disarm it, if a collective will in that direction exists.
It is time two sides on an issue talk reasonably to one another. Harmony is possible. All it takes is the will to harmonize on both sides. The city should contact McCarthy. McCarthy should contact the city. However, who takes step 1, is less important than what could result if reasonableness prevails among all.