[0:36] [music]

[1:26] [music]

[1:59] » Mhm.

[2:31] » [music]

[2:57] [music]

[3:04] [music]

[3:51] [music]

[5:20] [music]

[5:26] [music]

[5:49] » Mhm.

[5:55] » [music]

[7:24] [music]

[7:50] [music]

[8:27] [music]

[8:39] [music]

[9:17] [music]

[10:57] [music]

[11:50] [music]

[11:57] [music]

[12:03] [music]

[12:20] [music]

[13:10] [music]

[13:17] [music]

[13:34] [music]

[14:07] [music]

[14:14] [music]

[15:03] [music]

[15:24] » Mhm.

[15:30] » [music]

[15:40] [music]

[15:50] [music]

[16:00] [music]

[17:01] [music]

[18:14] [music]

[18:21] [music]

[19:03] [music]

[19:14] » Mhm.

[19:59] » [music]

[20:13] [music]

[20:48] » Got it. Roll call. >> Roll call.

[20:50] » Hug. >> Here.

[20:51] » Melton. Row. >> Here.

[20:53] » Festerson. >> Here.

[20:54] » Goodwin. >> Here.

[20:55] » Harding. >> Here.

[20:56] » Mr. President. >> Here.

[20:58] » Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance and remain standing for

[21:01] opening remarks by council member Ron Hug.

[21:05] » I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,

[21:09] to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with

[21:15] liberty and justice for all. >> Be seated.

[21:23] Welcome to everybody to Omaha from across the world to

[21:27] wonderful College World Series. Uh Mr. President, we have such an

[21:32] important agenda today. I think we should move forward.

[21:34] » Thank you. >> An affidavit of publication is on file

[21:38] and a current copy of the open meeting act is posted in a white binder on the

[21:41] east wall of legislative chambers. >> Good afternoon. Welcome to this meeting

[21:46] of the Omaha City Council. As a courtesy to those in attendance and to facilitate

[21:52] the conduct of our business, we ask that you please silence or turn off all

[21:57] electronic devices. A reminder, you will have 3 minutes to

[22:01] speak on an agenda item. Please stay on topic.

[22:05] For those not providing in-person testimony and would like your comments

[22:10] entered into the public record, you can email the city clerk's office

[22:15] at cityclerk@cityofomaha.org.

[22:19] Council members receive these emails and read them.

[22:23] Finally, council members may ask members of the audience back up for clarifying

[22:28] questions, but not for extra time to speak.

[22:31] I like to remind council members to speak clearly into the microphones so

[22:35] audience members in attendance and at home can hear. And those that are

[22:40] going to speak today at our podium, please get between the two microphones

[22:44] so we can hear you and they can hear you at home as well. Thank you.

[22:50] » Item six, to consider a Class C liquor license for There There, located at 3020

[22:55] Leavenworth Street, Suite 1. >> The public hearing is now open on item

[22:59] six. Ms. Talley, good afternoon.

[23:07] » Good afternoon. My name is Catina Talley, um 2407

[23:12] Hanscom Boulevard, Omaha, Nebraska. And I own a few businesses here around

[23:18] town, [clears throat] the newest of which will be Via Farina,

[23:22] um located at 3020 11th Street, Suite 1. >> [snorts]

[23:28] » Um it's a joint venture with my partner Ivy Sutton. We will be opening a all-day

[23:33] cafe and wine bar specializing in European-inspired

[23:38] dishes and low-intervention wines. Uh hours of operation would be 7:00 a.m.

[23:45] to 11:00 p.m. And we're hoping to open in August.

[23:49] » Thank you. Stay close, I might have a couple questions for you when we're

[23:53] done. Thanks. Are there any proponents on item six here today that wish to

[23:57] speak? Seeing none, are there any opponents?

[24:03] Public hearing is closed. Miss Talley, uh couple questions for you.

[24:07] You mentioned other businesses you have in Midtown. Can you share with us what

[24:11] those businesses are that you currently have?

[24:13] » I can, yes. I own Sweet Magnolias Bake Shop. Um we have two locations here in

[24:18] Omaha. And I also own No Good Bagels and Brunch at also operating two locations

[24:23] here in Omaha. >> And this is your

[24:25] next venture and I I know based on your other businesses and

[24:29] one's in Millworks and one's in in two are in my district, actually.

[24:34] Um I know you're going to be successful and you're also active in the Hanscom

[24:37] Park Neighborhood Association, correct? >> I am, yes.

[24:40] » And you're from Friend, Nebraska, so I don't know if anybody's from Friend,

[24:43] Nebraska. Uh we're we're glad to

[24:46] Yeah, we're really glad to have you here. Uh tell us about the

[24:49] European-style plates that you'll have. Kind of tell us about those a little

[24:52] bit. >> Yeah, um

[24:55] I mean, working with my my partner, Ivy, we're both um drawn to

[25:00] European-style cafes, um looking to lean into some

[25:05] tinned fish options, bring that a little bit more of that to Omaha.

[25:09] Um some like lighter-style breakfast, toasts, leaning into like some

[25:14] sandwiches and and salads and such in the in the lunch hour, and then some

[25:19] handmade pasta in the evenings. >> Okay, well, look forward to getting down

[25:22] there when you get open and I I can't make a motion to support this, but I'm

[25:25] certainly supportive and thanks again for your being a great small business

[25:29] owner in Midtown. >> Of course, I try.

[25:31] » Got a motion and a second. No further lights, roll call.

[25:34] » Hug. Melton. Row. Festersen. Goodwin. Harding.

[25:39] » Yes. >> Mr. President.

[25:40] » Aye. >> Motion passed 7-0.

[25:44] Item seven, to consider a Class C liquor license for San Patricio's Cantina and

[25:49] Pub, located at 3232 L Street. >> Public hearing is now open on item

[25:54] seven. I believe we have the applicant by Zoom or Zoom right in front of me

[25:58] here. All right. Good afternoon.

[26:01] » Good afternoon. My name is Francisco and I bought Donahue's Pub from Mike a

[26:06] couple weeks back. It's been a bar for 26 years

[26:10] and we are keeping it an Irish bar and grill and we're

[26:14] open to continue to be open. We're currently open.

[26:18] Uh we're on a temporary operating permit.

[26:20] » Okay, we might have some questions for you. Thank you. Do we Do we get his

[26:24] Do we get your address? >> Uh 3232 L Street, Omaha, Nebraska.

[26:29] » And your first and last name? >> Francisco Gonzalez.

[26:31] » Thank you. Are there any proponents on item seven

[26:35] here today? Seeing none, are there any opponents?

[26:41] Public hearing is closed. Council member Hug, you're recognized.

[26:45] » Well, I certainly appreciate you taking the name Saint Patrick. Um

[26:51] the former St. Patrick's Church meant so much to the South Omaha

[26:57] community. Uh I don't know if you know the history,

[26:59] but it's originally built in 1910. Um

[27:03] and it served the immigrant community for 60 years until it stopped being a

[27:09] basically a church in the mid-70s. And uh

[27:13] so I appreciate that tip of the hat to the heritage in Omaha, especially to the

[27:18] immigrant community. Um also a little fact you may not know,

[27:23] uh Father Flanagan of Boys Town, >> Yeah.

[27:26] » he came to Omaha as associate pastor at St. Patrick's Church. So the very

[27:31] historical church name, a lot of history in South Omaha.

[27:37] So does Donahue's. >> Yes.

[27:39] » And uh you know, Donahue's has been part of the fabric of South Omaha for 26

[27:44] years, which in bar terms is a long time.

[27:47] » Yeah. >> And hopefully you you hopefully you get

[27:50] to find that out. >> Yeah, we're trying.

[27:52] » Um so you're going to continue with the Tuesday dinners cuz I've had a lot of

[27:55] questions about that. >> pork and dumplings, we had it today and

[27:59] thank God we had a full house. >> Well, that's good and I and I hope that

[28:03] continues. And

[28:07] but the single thing that my constituents have asked me

[28:11] about, and uh this is very important to me

[28:14] personally as well, is the mural on the side of the building.

[28:17] » Yes, Mike told me about it and we are keeping the mural. Uh we have no

[28:22] intentions to take it out. We were going to ask uh if there's any possibility um

[28:28] and we're willing to pay for this, but we're trying to get some light inside.

[28:32] So all the four windows, including the kitchen window, are currently covered by

[28:37] the mural. So I wanted to contact the artist and

[28:41] see if there's any opportunity to maybe make them into an awning and and make it

[28:47] as non-disruptive as possible. And if it's not possible, then we'll

[28:50] keep the awning. Um you know, we we really like it. We want to light it up,

[28:55] so we uh have an electrician quoting us so that at night people can see it. Uh

[29:01] make it viewable to the passing uh cars during the day and during the

[29:05] night. >> Yeah, there's a lot of history in that

[29:07] mural. Um I was not part of that mural, but I was

[29:12] part of the Little Italy mural. And I know

[29:16] firsthand all the work and the history and the thought that went into that

[29:21] mural. And I know for sure that that went into that mural on the side of your

[29:25] building, too. Although we cannot make that a condition

[29:29] of your liquor license today, I assure you if I could, I would.

[29:33] » [laughter] >> So,

[29:34] but uh as long as you've talked to Mike and Mike's expressed that, you know, the

[29:38] community's concerned about saving that mural,

[29:41] and you we have your word here today that I make a motion we approve.

[29:45] » Second. >> Got a motion and a second. No further

[29:48] lights. Roll call. >> Hug.

[29:50] » Yes. >> Melton.

[29:51] » Yes. >> Rowe.

[29:52] » Yes. >> Sturgeson.

[29:53] » Yes. >> Goodwin.

[29:54] » Yes. >> Harding.

[29:55] » Yes. >> Mr. President.

[29:56] » Aye. >> Motion passed 7 to 0.

[29:59] » Thank you. >> Item eight, to consider a Class A liquor

[30:03] license for Craft Axe Omaha located at 2562 Leavenworth Street, Suite 100.

[30:09] » Public hearing is now open on item number eight. I believe Mr. Murphy is on

[30:13] Zoom. Can you hear us, Mr. Murphy?

[30:23] I think you're muted. We can't hear you yet.

[30:29] » Okay, now you should hear me. >> We got you. Get your name and address.

[30:33] Good afternoon. >> Good afternoon. Uh my name is Sean

[30:36] Murphy at 2562 Leavenworth Street, Suite 100. Um applying for a Class A liquor

[30:42] license for Craft Axe Omaha. >> Thank you.

[30:45] Are there any proponents here on item eight?

[30:50] Seeing none, are there any opponents? Public hearing is closed.

[30:57] This is in my district. Just a quick question for you, Mr. Murphy. Is

[31:00] anything changing other than the ownership?

[31:03] » Uh, primarily things will be the same. Um,

[31:06] uh, we are doing some minor aesthetic updates on the inside to help, um,

[31:12] elevate the space and bring it more in line with what, uh,

[31:16] and modern expectations are. Um, my wife is the creative director, so

[31:21] she's adding a a little bit, not too crazy, but a little bit of feminine

[31:25] touch. It's looking a lot, we're getting things done, but looks a lot better. Um,

[31:29] but otherwise much will be the same. >> Okay, and how about the the operating

[31:32] hours? >> Uh, we are operating from 4:00 to 9:00

[31:37] on Wednesday and Thursday. Um,

[31:40] 3:00 to 11:00 on Friday, 12:00 to 11:00 on Saturday, and 12:00 to 7:00 on

[31:45] Sunday. >> Okay. I can't make a motion to support

[31:48] this, but I wish you the best of luck and continued at that location. Thank

[31:52] you. >> Thank you.

[31:53] » Got a motion and a second. No further lights, roll call.

[31:56] » Hug. Melton. Rowe. Peterson. Goodwin. Harding. Mr.

[32:01] President. >> I.

[32:03] » Motion passed 7 to 0.

[32:06] Item nine to consider a liquor license addition application for Meadowlark

[32:10] Lounge located at 3302 Leavenworth Street 10 an outdoor area.

[32:15] » Public hearing is now open on item nine. Applicants here today? Good afternoon,

[32:19] gentlemen. >> Hey, uh, Ross Coley, 2438 South 48th

[32:24] Avenue, Omaha, Nebraska. >> Mike Wiedemier.

[32:28] » 1109 Howard Street, Omaha, Nebraska. >> Thank you. Are there any proponents here

[32:32] today on item nine? Seeing none, are there any opponents?

[32:40] Public hearing is closed. Mr. Coley, good afternoon. Just you're adding on a

[32:44] deck on the north end of the building, correct?

[32:46] » Correct. Yeah. Um there's a stairwell there currently now

[32:50] that'll go into our basement, which is an addition we're working on now for

[32:54] renovation. And it'll be kind of right above that.

[32:58] Uh right now the smoking section is right out the front door, which is

[33:02] right next to the 33rd. So

[33:04] » Sure. >> I think it's definitely going to be a

[33:06] much safer option for everyone that's a patron of our building

[33:11] you know, partakes in that. Plus people coming in and out, just keeping that

[33:14] area as less cluttered as we can. >> Great.

[33:17] » So I'll certainly be supportive of this here today. Thanks for coming down.

[33:22] » Got a motion and a second. Roll call. >> Hug.

[33:25] » Yes. >> Melton.

[33:25] » Yes. >> Rowe.

[33:26] » Yes. >> Festersen.

[33:27] » Yes. >> Goodwin.

[33:28] » Yes. >> Harding.

[33:29] » Yes. >> Mr. President.

[33:30] » Aye. >> Motion passed 7 to 0.

[33:32] » Thank you for all your service. We appreciate it. Also, congratulations and

[33:36] good luck. I'm dating a Donahue. So I know how important it is to the

[33:39] community. So best of luck to you. >> Yeah, thanks a

[33:42] » [laughter] >> Lots always have a lot.

[33:45] » Item 10, a resolution to approve a special use permit to allow automotive

[33:49] sales in the CC district located at 4801 Q Street. Planning Board and Planning

[33:53] Department recommend approval. >> The public hearing is now open on item

[33:57] 10. Is the applicant here today?

[34:10] Are there any proponents on item 10? Seeing none, are there any opponents?

[34:17] Public hearing is closed.

[34:22] » Move to approve.

[34:24] » Got a motion and a second. Roll call. >> Hug.

[34:27] » No. >> Melton.

[34:28] » Yes. >> Rowe.

[34:29] » Yes. >> Festersen.

[34:30] » No. >> Goodwin.

[34:34] » No. >> Harding.

[34:36] » Yes. >> Mr. President.

[34:37] » No. >> Motion failed, three to four.

[34:43] Consent agenda, any member of the City Council may cause any item placed on the

[34:47] consent agenda to be removed. Items removed from the consent agenda shall be

[34:50] taken up by the City Council immediately following the consent agenda in the

[34:54] order in which they were removed unless otherwise provided by the City Council

[34:57] rules of order. >> The public hearings on agenda items 11

[35:01] through 15 were held on June 9th, 2026. >> I move to approve.

[35:06] » Second. >> Got a motion and a second. Roll call.

[35:09] » Hug. >> Yes.

[35:10] » Melton. >> Yes.

[35:11] » Rowe. >> Yes.

[35:11] » Festersen. >> Yes.

[35:12] » Goodwin. >> Yes.

[35:13] » Harding. >> Yes.

[35:14] » Mr. President. >> Aye.

[35:16] » Motion passed, seven to zero. >> The public hearings on agenda items 16

[35:19] through 24 are today. If you wish to address the City Council regarding these

[35:24] items, please come to the microphone, indicate the agenda item

[35:29] number you wish to address, identify yourself by your name, address, who you

[35:34] represent, and if you are a proponent or opponent.

[35:39] I will open the public hearing on 16 through 24.

[35:44] Are there any proponents? Seeing none, are there any opponents?

[36:00] » Larry Storer, 515 Lafayette Avenue, Omaha, 68132.

[36:05] I'm opposed to number 24. I don't believe that Mr. Fazal has

[36:10] enough transparency in his pockets to be a good representative.

[36:15] Nobody's been able to fix this dot com system over the last 8 years that I've

[36:19] been attending. These speakers are a a real bad system.

[36:25] It should have been done long uh fixed long ago. Thank you.

[36:29] » Thank you. Are there any other opponents here on items 16 through 24?

[36:35] Public hearing is closed. >> Motion to approve items 16 through 24.

[36:40] » Got a motion and a second. Roll call. >> Hug.

[36:43] » Yes. >> Melton.

[36:44] » Yes. >> Yes.

[36:45] » Festersen. >> Yes.

[36:46] » Goodwin. >> Yes.

[36:47] » Harding. >> Yes.

[36:48] » Mr. President. >> I.

[36:50] » Motion passed 7 to 0. Item 25, an ordinance levying a special

[36:55] tax and assessment on real estate for snow and ice removal from sidewalks

[36:59] district number SWS R 2025-01. >> I will now open the public hearing on

[37:05] item 25. Are there any proponents? Seeing none, are there any opponents?

[37:13] Public hearing is closed. >> Item 26, an ordinance to transfer a

[37:18] permanent easement and land to MUD to relocate facilities on city city-owned

[37:22] property located near the southeast corner of North 21st Street and Pratt

[37:26] Street. >> Public hearing is now open on item 26.

[37:30] Are there any proponents? Seeing none, are there any opponents?

[37:36] Public hearing is closed. >> Item 27, an ordinance to authorize BMX

[37:41] Omaha to host the USA BMX National Event and to allow for overnight camping and

[37:46] parking at Hefflinger Park from July 29th to August 2nd.

[37:50] » The public hearing is now open on item 27. Are there any proponents?

[37:56] Seeing none, are there any opponents? Public hearing is closed.

[38:02] » Item 28, an ordinance to amend sections of chapter 11 of the Omaha Municipal

[38:06] Code relating to mobile food vendors. A is communication set opposition. B is

[38:10] amendment of the whole requested by the law department.

[38:13] » Public hearing is now open on item 28. Are there any proponents?

[38:20] Seeing none, are there any opponents? Public hearing is closed. Council member

[38:25] Festersen, you're recognized. >> Thanks, Mr. President. I just wanted to

[38:29] have an opportunity to clarify this issue, which was confusing for folks, I

[38:33] think in previous weeks, but I think has been corrected by this amendment of the

[38:36] whole. So, as we are not discouraging food

[38:39] trucks throughout the city, and they are not required to return to a permanent

[38:44] kitchen every 24 hours. Mr. Cozzi, would you Would you be the right one just to

[38:48] kind of give a summary of the amendment of the whole?

[38:54] » I'm sorry, the planning department and I were discussing the special use permit.

[38:59] With regard to the amendment of the whole, the only change that was made

[39:02] from the previous version that appeared in front of the council was the removal

[39:06] of the requirement that the um food trucks, for lack of a better word,

[39:11] have to return to a commissary every day, at some point every day.

[39:15] » Yeah, thank you. So, that's not will not be required under city ordinance should

[39:18] this be approved. >> That was That is not required under the

[39:21] city ordinance. >> Thanks. Motion to approve the amendment

[39:24] of the whole. >> I

[39:25] I next time >> Oh. Oh, thank you. And I I wanted to

[39:29] open the public hearing, Mr. Store. I miss you if you wanted to speak in

[39:32] opposition to that. The floor is yours. >> I'll go ahead and open it again.

[39:38] Is it all right if I open it again?

[39:42] Larry Store, 5015 Lafayette Avenue, Omaha, 68132.

[39:47] I am opposed to this because I do drive around Omaha a lot, and I see these food

[39:51] trucks all over the place. And in some cases, they're on somebody's

[39:55] private property. I don't think that's proper. The big

[39:58] example of this is Hamilton at Northwest Highway, Radio

[40:02] Highway. Right uh

[40:05] west of uh Mega Saver. Two restaurants, two

[40:10] uh quick trip type restaurants right on those corners.

[40:14] And these food trucks are parked on somebody's private property

[40:19] on the corner of Northwestern Hamilton. It just so happens that the guy that

[40:23] owns that property is on one of your committees.

[40:27] He has let the property on Northwest Saddle Creek Drive deteriorate over the

[40:32] years into something that is much worse than others.

[40:37] Uh and uh obviously he's going for TIF financing.

[40:42] He's allowing that lot where the old uh

[40:46] car lot was to be used for

[40:50] food vendors to vendors out of the truck of their cars.

[40:55] That's private property. He's got it up for sale. He should not be allowing

[40:58] that. And they should not be allowed to go

[41:01] onto a church property and back up into the corner to sell

[41:05] their goods. This is just getting a lot of out of

[41:09] whack. Thank you.

[41:13] » Thank you. I will now close the public hearing on item 28.

[41:21] » Item 29, an ordinance to create a new chapter of the Omaha Municipal Code to

[41:25] govern the establishment, implementation, and enforcement of a

[41:28] minimum wage. A's communication in support, B's communication in

[41:31] opposition. >> Public hearing is now open on item

[41:34] number 29. Are there any proponents who wish to speak on this item today?

[41:41] » Yes, there is. I got a list right here.

[41:46] » Mr. Owen Fusel, you were the first one to sign in. Please come up to the

[41:52] And the next one to keep this going in a timely manner, Eric Rider

[41:56] is the next one. The floor is yours. Thank you.

[41:59] » Good afternoon, presidents and members of the Omaha president and members of

[42:03] the Omaha City Council. My name's Owen Fusel. I live at 309 South 57th Street,

[42:08] Omaha, Nebraska 68132. Um and I'm speaking today on behalf of

[42:13] New Voices, um, which is the only youth-led statewide, non-partisan civic

[42:18] engagement organization in Nebraska. Um, and we're dedicated to making civic

[42:22] engagement fun, um, and more accessible for every Nebraskan. Um, first I want to

[42:27] thank Council Member Danny Begley for introducing this ordinance to establish

[42:31] a standardized minimum wage for all workers in Omaha. Um, this proposal

[42:36] recognizes a simple truth. Uh, if young people are doing the same

[42:40] work, they deserve to be paid fairly for that work. At New Voices, we work every

[42:44] day to help young Nebraskans participate in their communities, engage in local

[42:49] governments, and make their voices heard.

[42:51] But civic engagement is difficult when basic necessities are out of reach.

[42:55] Many young workers rely on their paychecks to cover essential expenses

[42:59] such as gas to get to school or work, phone bills to stay connected, and food

[43:04] to meet their daily needs. When young people are paid less simply

[43:07] because of their age, it becomes harder for them to afford these necessities and

[43:11] fully participate in community life. And fair wages are not just an economic

[43:15] issue, they are a civic engagement issue. When young people have greater

[43:19] financial stability, um, we know that they're better able to attend community

[43:23] meetings, volunteer, or participate in local organizations, um, and generally

[43:27] stay informed about the issues that directly affect their lives. Um, they

[43:31] gain the time, resources, and confidence needed to become active members of our

[43:36] democracy. Um, this ordinance sends a powerful

[43:39] message that Omaha values the contributions of all of its workers,

[43:43] regardless of age. Um, and it affirms that people deserve dignity, respect,

[43:48] and a fair opportunity to support themselves while building skills and

[43:51] experience. Um, on behalf of New Voices, I urge you

[43:55] to support this ordinance and ensure that all workers in Omaha receive the

[43:59] same minimum wage protections. Thank you for your time and consideration.

[44:03] » Thank you.

[44:06] Next speaker is Eric Ryder, followed by Tamaya Wright.

[44:17] » All right, thank you. Uh my name is Eric Ryder, and I'm here today on behalf of

[44:21] Voices for Children in Nebraska. For nearly 40 years, our organization

[44:25] has worked to elevate the voices of children and youth and to advance public

[44:30] policies that ensure all young people can grow up safe, healthy, and supported

[44:33] in their communities. It is in that spirit that we are here in support of

[44:37] this ordinance, which would establish a minimum wage for the city of Omaha

[44:41] without carve-outs based on age. Our concern with recent state action,

[44:46] particularly LB 258, is its impact on young workers. The real- The reality is

[44:52] that young people in our community are not working to spend extra money. They

[44:56] are working to meet basic needs. Many are helping pay for groceries,

[45:00] transportation, and housing. Some are supporting themselves, and others are

[45:04] contributing to their families. For these young workers, wages are not about

[45:08] convenience, they are about survival. Consider housing. A full-time

[45:13] minimum-wage worker cannot afford a one-bedroom rental at fair-market rates.

[45:18] While affordable rent would need to be closer to 600 a month, average rents are

[45:22] nearly 900. That gap means a worker would need more than one full-time job

[45:26] just to keep up before even accounting for food, transportation, or health

[45:31] care. Lowering wages for young workers only makes these challenges more severe.

[45:36] This ordinance takes a different approach. It recognizes the value of all

[45:40] workers and ensures that wages reflect the real cost of living in our

[45:44] community, regardless of age. That matters not just for young people today,

[45:48] but for the long-term stability of families in Omaha.

[45:51] It's also important to note that Nebraska voters have already made their

[45:54] voices clear. They overwhelmingly supported increasing the minimum wage

[45:58] without age-based exceptions. This ordinance aligns with that intent and

[46:03] ensures that local policy reflects the will of the people.

[46:06] All families deserve the opportunity to thrive and economic security is

[46:10] foundational to that goal. By supporting this ordinance, you are

[46:14] investing in the well-being of young people and helping to build a stronger,

[46:18] more stable future for Omaha. We respectfully urge the council to approve

[46:22] this ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration.

[46:25] » Mr. Ryder, can we get your address also for the record? I forgot to get that at

[46:28] the >> Uh certainly, it is 319 South 17th

[46:31] Street, Suite 212, Omaha, Nebraska 68102.

[46:36] » Thank you. Our next speaker is Tamaya Wright,

[46:40] followed by Joseph Prime, followed by C.J. King.

[46:50] » Good afternoon. My name is Tamaya Wright. I'm representing Voices for

[46:54] Children. Address is 319 South 17th Street, Suite 212, Omaha, Nebraska

[47:01] 68102. I support having a standard minimum wage

[47:05] for all employees regardless of the age because young people deserve to be paid

[47:09] fairly. Many adults believe that young people

[47:12] just want extra money to spend it irresponsibly, but that is far from the

[47:15] case. Majority of teens use it to support

[47:19] their household, save for college, pay for transportation, and etc.

[47:24] Lowering the minimum wage shows that our work is looked less on and just simply

[47:29] because we are younger. Raising the minimum wage and having a standard

[47:33] minimum wage shows that our work is recognized, respected, and for the

[47:37] contributions that we make to our workplace and community.

[47:42] Thank you. >> Thank you.

[47:55] » My name is Joseph Prime. I live at 6630 Bedford Avenue. I am 16 years old. I

[48:01] have two jobs. I work at Runza and I am a lifeguard at the Keystone Club pool. I

[48:07] also have completed the Cadet Fire program in Irvington and now serve as a

[48:11] volunteer fireman. I work with people who are as young as

[48:14] 14 and as old as anybody on this board. We are all expected to pull our weight,

[48:19] work hard, and do the best jobs that we can and I strive to do just that. I

[48:24] don't treat any of my coworkers differently based on their age and I

[48:27] expect to be treated as an equal by everyone else regardless of age.

[48:31] At my high school, it was a big deal to turn 16. However, the school doesn't

[48:35] treat us any differently. We aren't graded on a curve depending on our age.

[48:40] The standards we have to meet are not age dependent. When I got my driver's

[48:44] license, my grandfather gave me a car but made it clear that the insurance and

[48:47] re-registration of the car was going to be my responsibility.

[48:51] When it comes to registering my car, they don't ask your age. They charge the

[48:55] same amount regardless, but that's not true of the insurance. My insurance is

[48:59] significantly higher based solely upon my age. That's right, it's significantly

[49:03] higher, not lower. But my employer hasn't decided to give me an increase to

[49:07] reflect that expense. So, I am here to say today that I don't think there's any

[49:11] reason to give lower wages to someone based solely on their age. I don't think

[49:15] it's appropriate for someone that's too old or too young and I hope that you

[49:19] will pass this order ordinance and ensure that everyone in the city of

[49:23] Omaha is treated with respect and not discriminated against based

[49:27] discriminated against based solely on the year that they were born. Thank you.

[49:31] » Thank you. Next speaker is C.J. King followed by

[49:38] T.V. Anna Robinson. >> Uh Clarence King 602 North 85th Street.

[49:44] I am the chair of the Douglas County Democratic Party and I'll disclose I'm

[49:48] Joe's grandfather. Um I Sorry you're here. I really am and I mean that

[49:53] because this was decided at the state level, and it should have you shouldn't

[49:57] be in this position. I think Eric said it passed I I believe

[50:01] it was about 60% statewide. I took a look I in the city of Omaha, it

[50:06] passed by greater than 70%, and not only that, and I don't know how how often

[50:11] this happens for anything that's that has opposition, but it passed in every

[50:14] single precinct. Councilman Roy, you had one precinct

[50:18] that was a dead tie, 245 a piece. Every other single precinct it passed. Okay,

[50:23] so this is about democracy, and it's about respecting the will of the people,

[50:26] and I don't understand what happened in a bipartisan way. I will I will

[50:30] absolutely owe it to say that to you in a bipartisan way in the legislature,

[50:35] they put in some rules that were highly inappropriate, but in the city council,

[50:39] I hope you'll you'll understand what the city of Omaha voted for and respect the

[50:43] will of the people. In addition to looking at the the votes,

[50:47] I also I went back and I I read the transcript of the hearing, the first

[50:51] hearing on the bill, and there were a couple arguments made, and one of the

[50:55] arguments was made really kind of galled at me. They said this is going to create

[50:59] more jobs for for young people. And uh we're in a we're in a we're in a world

[51:05] now where we celebrate the the world's first trillionaire.

[51:09] And it just it bothers the hell out of me if we're going to tell if we're going

[51:13] to tell 14 and 15-year-olds the only way their their fellow students can have a

[51:17] job is if they're willing to take a little bit less. If my grandson works 20

[51:21] hours, I don't think he should pinch him for 30 bucks and say that's the only way

[51:24] this economy works because that's not it at all. So, I just think it's

[51:28] appropriate that we that we correct this error that was made in the legislature.

[51:32] Again, I apologize it's on your shoulders, but thank you.

[51:35] » Thank you. Next speaker is Taviana Robinson. I hope I got that right the

[51:40] second time. All right, thank you. The next speaker after that will be Malia

[51:45] Moulton following. Thank you. >> Good afternoon. My name is Taviana

[51:49] Robinson. I'm here today presenting Voices for Children in Nebraska. The

[51:53] address is 31 319

[51:58] South 17th Street, Suite 212. I'm speaking in support of the bill to

[52:03] restore the youth minimum wage to $15 per hour. I come from a single-parent

[52:09] household where my mom works hard to support me and my older brother. Having

[52:12] a job gives me the opportunity to learn financial responsibility, contribute

[52:16] when I can, and save for my future. Lower wages make it harder for you for

[52:20] young people to achieve these goals. Many youth use their earnings to help

[52:24] with transportation, school expenses, family needs, and saving for college or

[52:28] other future plans. Fair wages allows us to gain valuable work experience while

[52:32] being compensated fairly for our time and effort. I support raising the youth

[52:36] minimum wage back to 15 because young workers deserve fair pay. This bill

[52:40] ensures that young workers are treated fairly and are compensated for the time,

[52:43] effort, and responsibility they put into their jobs. Thank you for your time and

[52:47] consideration. >> Thank you.

[52:51] Next speaker after Miss Moulton is Louise Jimenez.

[52:56] » Hi, Mary Lee Moulton, 2035 South 181st Circle, Omaha, Nebraska, 68130.

[53:03] League of Women Voters of Greater Omaha. In 2022, members of the League of Women

[53:07] Voters collected signatures in support of a ballot initiative to establish a

[53:12] minimum wage statute known as as Initiative Measure 433. The measure

[53:17] raised the state's minimum wage from $9 gradually to $15 per household in 2026.

[53:24] Our support was grounded in the League's national position on social policy and

[53:28] meeting basic human needs, which affirms that social policy should promote

[53:32] self-sufficiency for individuals and families. We believe the most effective

[53:37] social programs are those designed to prevent or reduce poverty, and this

[53:41] measure represents meaningful progress toward that goal. The League of Women

[53:46] Voters of Greater Omaha supports the proposed ordinance to maintain the

[53:49] minimum wage standard approved by Nebraska voters in 2022. We encourage

[53:55] the Omaha City Council to pass this ordinance. Thank you.

[53:58] » Thank you. Mr. Luis Jimenez is followed by

[54:04] Ken Smith. Mr. Smith, are you here?

[54:08] » Yes. >> Please come up.

[54:15] » My apologies. Uh good afternoon, members of the City Council. My name is Ken

[54:19] Smith. My address is 4339 Shirley Street, and I'm here representing

[54:23] Nebraska Appleseed in support of this proposal. Uh Appleseed is a nonprofit

[54:27] law policy organization that works for justice and opportunity for all

[54:30] Nebraskans, and we support this proposed ordinance because it restores important

[54:34] wage protections for Omahans that our legislature recently stripped away. In

[54:38] 2022, Nebraskans voted to update our wage laws in two significant ways. The

[54:42] first is to gradually increase our minimum wage so that by January 1st of

[54:46] 2026, uh the minimum wage for all workers would be $15 per hour.

[54:51] And secondly, the voters installed annual adjustments so that wages would

[54:53] increase to keep up with the cost of living. Um and that's measured by

[54:57] looking at the year-over-year percentage change to the consumer price index, um

[55:01] and then adjusting our minimum wage accordingly. Unfortunately, this past

[55:04] session, the Nebraska legislature passed a bill that undermines the core purposes

[55:08] of this voter-approved initiative and rolls back important wage protections.

[55:12] It makes two harmful changes to the state wage laws. First, it caps those

[55:15] annual adjustments at 1.75%, which means that the minimum wage will

[55:20] once again fail to keep pace with increases in the cost of living. And it

[55:24] also creates a subminimum wage for certain youth workers, which not only

[55:27] creates an equity in the workplace where employees doing the same job are paid

[55:30] differently, but it also ignores the reality that for many youth workers,

[55:34] their income is a vital resource for themselves and their families. So, this

[55:38] proposal would restore for Omahan's the important wage protections the

[55:41] legislature just rescinded. And it makes it clear that youth workers should be

[55:45] included with the rest of the workforce in being guaranteed

[55:48] a fair wage. And I just want to zoom in a little bit on the annual adjustments.

[55:52] The purpose of those annual adjustments that voters overwhelmingly approved and

[55:57] that the legislature just capped was to protect against the value of wages

[56:00] eroding over time. So, we saw when we raised our minimum wage in 2014 to $9 an

[56:05] hour, we know that the purchasing power of a dollar, you know, receded from from

[56:10] 2014 to 2025. So, voters in 2022 acknowledged that and said, "We want to

[56:14] adjust our wage floor so that workers don't once again fall fall behind." We

[56:19] know that everything from gas to housing to child care to medicine is continuing

[56:23] to get more expensive. Um so, I think the question in front of the city

[56:27] council um is is simple. It's that as the cost of living in Omaha rises,

[56:33] should the value of labor of a worker's labor in Omaha fall? Uh Omahan's, as you

[56:39] heard, a vast majority of Omahan's turned out in 2022 and answered that

[56:42] question and said no. So, we we would urge the council to approve this

[56:45] measure. We thank Councilman Begley for bringing it. Uh thank you.

[56:49] » Thank you. Our next speaker is Michael Duffy followed by Jason Whitmer.

[56:59] » Well, my name is Michael Duffy. My address is 1011 South 35th Street. I'm

[57:04] speaking on behalf of AFSCME Local 251. I'm in Councilman Begley's district and

[57:08] I'm just thrilled as can be that it's my councilman who introduced this

[57:12] ordinance. So, thank you for that. Um you know, working people have really

[57:17] lost trust in their civic institutions. And who can blame them? We've seen

[57:23] stagnating wages over the past decades. And when the voters passed

[57:27] overwhelmingly a remedy to this, the legislature, their duly elected

[57:33] representatives, introduced several position uh

[57:38] introduced several uh things to gut it. Uh in particular, getting rid of the

[57:44] increases based on the uh annual cost of living increases and

[57:50] instead capping it at 1.75%. Now, I looked this morning uh since last

[57:55] year, the CPI has increased 4.2%. That's a significant difference and that's

[58:01] coming out of all of our pocketbooks when we go out to pay our bills. Working

[58:06] people are surrounded by apartments that they can't afford to live in. They're

[58:10] surrounded by goods they can't afford to purchase.

[58:14] And I just hope that you take this opportunity today to restore people's

[58:18] trust in their civic institutions and let people know that you hear them and

[58:22] that you care about what they're going through. Thank you.

[58:25] » Thank you. Next speaker is Jason Whitmer followed

[58:28] by Mary Royers.

[58:34] » Good afternoon. My name is Jason Whitmer. I'm here on behalf of the ACLU

[58:37] of Nebraska, 134 South 13th Street, Lincoln, Nebraska 68508.

[58:44] And we are here in support of this minimum wage ordinance which simply

[58:48] states that it honors the voters overwhelming vote for statewide for the

[58:55] uh minimum wage and as was said, more than 70% of I believe Douglas County

[59:00] voters. That vote reflects that if people are

[59:04] working, their wages should be and should have a chance to keep up with

[59:10] the real cost of living as we all know is dramatically raising.

[59:14] Just my cost of gas here was extraordinary. I think there was a great

[59:18] example of uh I'm getting a little off course, but the

[59:22] this example of our insurance

[59:25] most of us have children, dramatically high for children, minors, and the cost

[59:31] of living that we're expecting them to maintain.

[59:35] Many of us can't support our children as others,

[59:39] and so they support themselves in that way.

[59:41] However, the voters made this decision statewide.

[59:45] The legislature has changed this. This was already

[59:48] uh details given, so I will go on to

[59:52] With that happening, uh trust has eroded. Democracy requires

[59:58] trust. When a voter approves a clear policy, they should be able to be they

[1:00:02] should be able to believe that their decisions will be carried out honestly

[1:00:06] and not narrowed through exceptions that weakens their effect. The initiative

[1:00:10] process exists because Nebraskans reserve for themselves the power to

[1:00:14] shape public policy directly. We are the second house.

[1:00:19] That power loses meaning if voters come to believe that the details they can't

[1:00:22] they approved could later be narrowed or rewritten after the election is over.

[1:00:28] And yes, reasonable people can argue and disagree about minimum wage and how what

[1:00:34] it should be. However, that debate occurred, Nebraska weighed in,

[1:00:39] and voters rendered this decision. The question before us now is

[1:00:45] does the democratic democratic out the Sorry. The question is now is does the

[1:00:51] democratic process deserve respect? And yes, this is also about dignity.

[1:00:57] I mean, our youth, they

[1:01:01] they show up on time, they do the same work, they serve the same customers,

[1:01:04] they clean the same stores, they herd the same cattle, they feed the same

[1:01:08] hogs, so they should not automatically be valued less. This is a floor.

[1:01:16] Furthermore, as was said, the list of youth, what

[1:01:19] they are doing, paying for school uh

[1:01:22] activities, supporting their families. And what this ordinance is doing

[1:01:28] is it's respecting their labor as well as respecting

[1:01:33] the voters. We'd like to thank you, Council Member

[1:01:37] » minutes. I'm sorry. Got to I got to stop you at your 3 minutes. Absolutely.

[1:01:41] Thanks for being here today. Our next speaker is Mary Royers followed

[1:01:46] by Gab Rima.

[1:01:50] » [clears throat] >> Excuse me. Hi, my name is Mary Royers. I

[1:01:53] have had my address requirement waived and I live in District 2.

[1:01:56] I'm speaking to you today not representing any particular school

[1:01:59] district or organization, but as an educator, an aunt of two teenagers, and

[1:02:03] the guardian of two minors in support of what Council Member Danny Begley is

[1:02:07] proposing. To quote him directly, he is simply putting before us what the voters

[1:02:11] have already passed years ago. In a red state, this minimum wage ballot measure

[1:02:15] has passed overwhelmingly. Um as as mentioned before, it's not about party

[1:02:20] lines. It's about keeping our community affordable and respecting Nebraska

[1:02:24] voters. Not only would this ordinance be wildly popular for our future voters and

[1:02:28] their families, it's simply the right thing to do. I challenge anyone in this

[1:02:32] room to say that they've recently saved money at the gas pump.

[1:02:36] Anybody spending less on the basics at the grocery store?

[1:02:41] Uh what about on our rent or our homeowner's insurance?

[1:02:44] Anybody get a really good claim with their car insurance lately? Or at the

[1:02:48] doctor's office with that copay? I don't need to read the statistics to

[1:02:53] you because everybody in this room is feeling the shift in our economy and the

[1:02:56] increased prices that are surrounding us. Having our next generation foot the

[1:03:00] bill for adult business owners by cutting their wages is not a sustainable

[1:03:04] answer. The unfortunate truth is that many young

[1:03:07] Omahan's pick up jobs not for spending money to get the Baja Blast at Taco

[1:03:11] Bell, but to help their struggling families to make ends meet. The reality

[1:03:14] is that a lot of our young people are growing up in a world differently than

[1:03:17] the one that we might have navigated as teens or young adults. We're talking

[1:03:21] about having money for an urgent care visit or to get fresh fruit or

[1:03:23] vegetables on the table. Money to save up for college or for trade school. I've

[1:03:27] been an educator for 14 years. I spent the bulk of my career teaching in Omaha

[1:03:31] where I witnessed high school students struggling to balance school and work

[1:03:35] because they needed to work anywhere from 15 to 30 hours a week in order to

[1:03:39] support their own households. With increased cost of living and the

[1:03:42] benefits being cut in our community, I had to witness students dropping out of

[1:03:46] high school to pick up more hours and help their families stay afloat. I

[1:03:50] remember begging my students to consider an alternative to dropping out, but

[1:03:53] ultimately they did not have any other choice. Working their minimum wage jobs,

[1:03:57] they had no other option but to seek more hours and give up on their dream of

[1:04:00] graduating high school. I understand that these conditions may sound

[1:04:04] hyperbolic, but I promise you from personal experience they are

[1:04:07] depressingly quotidian in our city. Whether we're talking about students

[1:04:12] taking on adult fiscal responsibility as children or teenagers wanting to spend

[1:04:16] money just to be teens, I cannot imagine lowering the minimum wage in a world

[1:04:20] where Omahan's are increasingly feeling the crushing weight of economic

[1:04:23] pressure. I appreciate Council member uh Danny Begley for respecting Nebraska

[1:04:28] voters and for his interest in ensuring that Omaha communities are affordable

[1:04:32] family friendly places to live, and I urge you to consider joining your

[1:04:36] colleague in passing this overwhelmingly popular ordinance. Thank you for your

[1:04:39] time. >> Thank you. Next speaker is Gab Rima

[1:04:43] followed by Nate Asch Dyck.

[1:04:50] Ms. Rima, are you here?

[1:05:00] » Good afternoon. My name is Gab Rima, and I have had my address requirement waived

[1:05:04] for this meeting. I'm here today as a proponent of this ordinance to restore

[1:05:08] full minimum wage rights to teen workers, and I want to thank the council

[1:05:12] for considering this. As someone who follows state and local

[1:05:15] politics, I often hear elected officials talking about young people as sort of an

[1:05:21] abstract concept, like you might talk about the exotic animals at the zoo.

[1:05:26] Um like young people seem agitated with their current habitat. Um I often hear

[1:05:33] young people are leaving Nebraska. Nebraska's workforce is dwindling cuz

[1:05:37] young people aren't getting jobs here. Young people are going out of state for

[1:05:41] college. I hear about brain drain and about

[1:05:44] strange plots to get more young people to live here.

[1:05:48] But all we keep doing is pushing young people further and further away,

[1:05:52] continuing to make the state more and more hostile.

[1:05:56] If I were a teenager right now, and I was a teenager in Omaha,

[1:06:00] I would absolutely be upset with getting my first job and being told that my

[1:06:05] labor wasn't even worth the minimum wage. Being told that once I got the

[1:06:09] right age to vote, that wouldn't even matter.

[1:06:12] I would also be fantasizing about leaving as soon as possible.

[1:06:16] I keep hearing arguments that teenagers don't need the money, or that teens

[1:06:20] shouldn't be making $15 an hour to spend on frivolous things. But the young

[1:06:25] people that I know are not spending their money on frivolous things. They

[1:06:29] are incredibly aware of the rising cost of higher education.

[1:06:33] They are aware that their parents are taking on second or third jobs to make

[1:06:37] it through. That maybe right now isn't a good time

[1:06:40] to ask mom or dad for money to go on a field trip or for a new pair of shoes.

[1:06:46] And ultimately, I don't think young people should have to justify

[1:06:49] themselves. If you think a teenager is good enough to work at your business and

[1:06:53] good enough to get the job done, then they're good enough to make the same

[1:06:57] wage as anyone. This ordinance is about fairness. It's

[1:07:00] about labor rights, and it's about democracy.

[1:07:04] I'm grateful to see Omaha standing up for the rights of young people, and I

[1:07:07] hope you'll all vote yes on this ordinance. Thank you.

[1:07:10] » Thank you. Mr. Nate Astyk followed by Scott

[1:07:14] Dombeck.

[1:07:20] » Hello City Council. My name is Nate Astyk. I live at 9380 Western Avenue

[1:07:25] 68114 and I'm here today as a proponent of

[1:07:30] this ordinance. Something that I really think is

[1:07:36] important is that we're working to restore the trust that the public has in

[1:07:41] our institutions and even the capability of

[1:07:46] us as a people to self-govern. If time and time again we see

[1:07:51] resolutions and initiatives being passed by the people and then getting

[1:07:56] overturned, these finer details getting ignored that really are

[1:08:01] a core solution to a lot of the problems we're seeing. Take for example the

[1:08:05] consumer price index matching for minimum wage increases.

[1:08:10] If that goes into law, we see an actual systematic fix to the way that wages are

[1:08:15] working where as prices rise, they're going to match. Putting it in kind of

[1:08:19] dollars and cents terms here, if we were to take this uh

[1:08:24] you know, May to May last year to May this year and look at that increase

[1:08:28] under the 1.75% increase, that's only 26 cent an hour wage gain for minimum wage

[1:08:33] workers as opposed to if we were matching inflation, it'll be a 75 per 75

[1:08:39] cent wage gain. That is almost a 50 cent difference which that, you know, working

[1:08:44] full-time, that is $20 a week. That adds up year after year and it allows us to

[1:08:50] move forward, you know, being in that position to talk about more

[1:08:55] actually innovative policy options where how do we then on top of having a

[1:09:00] established wage standard that is high enough that's

[1:09:04] actually transformational that people can live on, move to building more

[1:09:08] housing, making that more accessible, creating these amenities. And a big part

[1:09:12] of that is uh actually making sure people can

[1:09:17] afford to get by. And so that is just something that I

[1:09:21] thought would be good to uh bring up in all this that I haven't really seen

[1:09:25] discussed in addition to the very eloquently put um reasons that youth

[1:09:31] workers who are performing the same labor should of course be given the same

[1:09:36] sort of wage. We need to keep young people here in Omaha and Nebraska and

[1:09:41] just making sure that people are able to build those savings where we can have

[1:09:44] low costs and high wages and all these other things where instead of falling

[1:09:49] behind a lot of the major metropolitan areas both in the Midwest and regionally

[1:09:53] for job opportunities, for wages, we're actually attracting that to deepen the

[1:09:57] community here to uh really just have a great sort of

[1:10:03] sense of feeling valued and living those values. So, thank you for introducing

[1:10:08] this and considering it and I hope it goes well. Thank you.

[1:10:12] » Thank you. Mr. Scott Dombeck followed by Jayden

[1:10:16] Perkins.

[1:10:20] » [clears throat] >> Good afternoon. Scott Dombeck, 4309

[1:10:25] South 61st Street, Omaha. Um I'm speaking today on behalf of

[1:10:29] AFSCME Local 251 which which represents uh City of Omaha civilian employees. Uh

[1:10:37] we support this ordinance. Uh the ordinance establishes a city a minimum

[1:10:42] wage as well as protects the cost of living increases that were uh codified

[1:10:49] in the um well, [snorts] uh

[1:10:53] protects and extends the cost of living increases that were part of the uh

[1:10:57] ballot initiative in 2022. Um while local 251

[1:11:03] um only has several job classifications

[1:11:07] that start at the current minimum wage, um there are also large numbers of other

[1:11:13] city employees in other departments uh working as part-time parks department

[1:11:18] employees, uh part-time employees in other departments

[1:11:22] uh that are uh currently starting uh at minimum wage.

[1:11:26] Um we believe in the principle of equal pay

[1:11:31] for equal work. And that's what this ordinance

[1:11:36] guarantees. It guarantees that no matter what your

[1:11:40] age is in the city of Omaha, you will be paid equally

[1:11:44] whether you work for the city of Omaha or whether you work for a private

[1:11:48] employer. The sons and daughters of working

[1:11:53] families in the city of Omaha, the sons and daughters of city of Omaha

[1:11:58] employees, the sons and daughters of local 251 members often contribute to

[1:12:04] their household budget both directly and indirectly. We've

[1:12:09] heard testimony from a number of young people up here

[1:12:12] today about the real struggles that they face

[1:12:16] in relationship to their wage and the cost of living

[1:12:21] uh in America today. Uh we believe that this ordinance helps

[1:12:27] to address those problems. And don't be mistaken in thinking that, you know, the

[1:12:32] minimum wage is actually a living wage because it's not. Uh we heard testimony

[1:12:37] earlier from um Appleseed, uh Nebraska Appleseed. Uh

[1:12:41] they've uh released studies that show the minimum wage should be actually be

[1:12:46] closer the a living wage would be actually closer to $22 an hour.

[1:12:53] So, um as I stated, um many many young people

[1:12:58] contribute uh to the household budget. Uh in 2022, uh the uh uh voters in the

[1:13:04] state of Nebraska uh passed a ballot initiative

[1:13:08] 433. Uh that ballot initiative was undone

[1:13:14] by certain members of the state legislature and the governor.

[1:13:18] The ballot initiative was unambiguous. There was no question in there as to who

[1:13:23] this would apply to. >> Beckmann, I'm going to have to ask you

[1:13:25] to Okay. cease now. Your 3 minutes is up. Thanks for being here today.

[1:13:29] Next speaker is Jayden Perkins followed by Alexander Lu.

[1:13:35] » All right. Uh good afternoon, council members. My name is Jayden Perkins. I'm

[1:13:41] at 210 South 16th Street. I'm an Omaha resident, grassroots organizer, and

[1:13:46] founder of Boots on the Ground Strategies. I have spent years

[1:13:50] organizing in coalition alongside working-class folks and community

[1:13:54] members across the city. And that's why I'm here today in support of this

[1:13:58] ordinance. Through that work, I have helped mobilize campaigns to pass

[1:14:02] minimum wage increases and to protect and expand paid sick leave because no

[1:14:07] one should have to choose between their paycheck and their health

[1:14:11] and or fall uh behind the cost of living uh while uh

[1:14:16] costs keep rising. Uh when we the people voted to raise the minimum wage in 2022,

[1:14:21] we also voted for annual cost of living adjustments to ensure wages didn't fall

[1:14:26] behind inflation. But this year, the Nebraska legislature rolled back and

[1:14:31] capped those inflation-indexed increases at just 1.75%.

[1:14:36] Additionally, this created a new provision allowing 14- and 15-year-olds

[1:14:40] to be paid below the voter-approved minimum wage. That decision didn't stop

[1:14:44] inflation. It only stopped workers' wages from keeping up with it. And now,

[1:14:50] with additional changes in state law set to take effect, workers are at risk at

[1:14:54] further of falling even further behind. If this ordinance does not pass, those

[1:15:00] state-level rollbacks will lock in a system where wages cannot keep pace with

[1:15:04] rising cost. That means every year the real value of a paycheck will continue

[1:15:09] to shrink, especially for young workers, parents, seniors, and for the hundreds

[1:15:13] of thousands of people who keep Omaha running.

[1:15:16] At the same time, our social safety nets are being rolled back. From cuts and

[1:15:21] restrictions to Medicaid here in Nebraska to federal efforts under Trump

[1:15:25] that weaken and means-tested programs employees or programs families rely on

[1:15:30] when times get tough. While support systems for working families are being

[1:15:34] stripped away, corporations and out-of-state developers continue to

[1:15:38] receive generous public subsidies and tax incentives, corporate welfare our

[1:15:44] communities are told will trickle down someday.

[1:15:47] Workers don't get that luxury. We don't get public subsidies to cover rising

[1:15:51] rent or groceries. We don't get incentives to keep our families afloat.

[1:15:56] All we get is the paycheck we earn. I know a lot of people who are doing

[1:16:00] everything right and still falling behind because their wages stay flat

[1:16:04] while everything else keeps climbing. Restoring the will of the voters at the

[1:16:08] city level is one of the most responsible steps you, as local

[1:16:12] representatives, can take. It gives employees clarity. It gives workers

[1:16:17] stability. And it honors the spirit of what we the people voted for, a living

[1:16:22] wage for all that doesn't erode over time. I would urge you to stand with

[1:16:26] Omaha's working class families by voting yes in this ordinance. Thank you.

[1:16:32] » Thank you. Alexander Lu, followed by Jen Day.

[1:16:44] » Here.

[1:16:47] There we go. Hello Gwinnett City Council.

[1:16:51] Uh my name is Alexander Liu, um a l a x a e Sorry, a l e x a n d e r l i u and

[1:16:59] then this is Kego. Um my address is 435 Sorry, 4354 North

[1:17:06] 88th Plaza. Um I do hold uh elected offices in the state and uh county

[1:17:12] parties for the Nebraska Democratic Party and Douglas County Party, but I'm

[1:17:15] not speaking on behalf of those. I'm actually speaking on as a demographic of

[1:17:19] the party or of the people that the councils generally concerned are leaving

[1:17:24] Omaha and the state overall, which is just younger people, right? So, if the

[1:17:29] goal is to make living in Omaha more attractive and increase then increasing

[1:17:32] the minimum wage is actually very necessary. Um the I know I understand

[1:17:36] that this is kind of ironic since I'm speaking in

[1:17:39] in proposed uh sorry, in as a proponent of this as somebody on disability.

[1:17:45] Uh so, this would actually uh be applying something called the efficiency

[1:17:49] wage theory. Um so, this would increase wages and it would uh be a net benefit

[1:17:53] to the city of Omaha since it would be make moving here more attractive and

[1:17:58] benefit local businesses with the increase in spending since we are giving

[1:18:02] more increase in the wages to workers. So, this would still be going to local

[1:18:06] businesses, which is going to benefit Omaha as a whole.

[1:18:10] Um and then over time of the people that the councils generally concerned are

[1:18:12] leaving Omaha and the state overall, which is just younger people, right? So,

[1:18:14] if the goal is to make living in Omaha more attractive and increase then

[1:18:15] increasing the minimum wage is actually very necessary. Um the I know I

[1:18:17] understand that this is kind of ironic since And it is recommended by

[1:18:21] organizations such as the Roosevelt Institute that the minimum wage be a

[1:18:24] raised to a living wage of at least $25 by 2038, though of course with

[1:18:30] gas prices and everything else and inflation, it's probably going to be

[1:18:33] higher than that. Uh you know,

[1:18:36] fairly soon. I'm sure if they're going to raise that a bit more.

[1:18:39] Um but I will also want to point out that uh since I am on disability um and

[1:18:43] the streetcar construction has taken away even more spots around City Hall

[1:18:46] that um I actually had to pay for parking just to come up here and that

[1:18:49] the media spots around here >> stay on topic.

[1:18:51] » Although this is related since uh again with since we're talking about minimum

[1:18:54] wage increases that you know, this is a pay issue. So, I'm just pointing out

[1:18:59] that these are kind of it a problem. Um so,

[1:19:04] these are just pay-related issues that

[1:19:07] city councilors should probably look into.

[1:19:09] Um but again, just that as

[1:19:14] somebody who does have to look into these, you know,

[1:19:17] pay problems that the city council should be more aware of people who are

[1:19:23] on limited means that it is a big impact that when you do have an

[1:19:29] increase even if it is smaller

[1:19:33] that it does make a big impact and then it goes from the bottom up. It's going

[1:19:36] to be uh you know, it is going to affect the city as a whole and it will be more

[1:19:39] attractive for businesses um and people wanting to move into the city and then

[1:19:44] impact the city as a whole. So, thank you.

[1:19:47] » Thank you. Next speaker is Jen Day followed by

[1:19:50] Aaron Feisinger.

[1:20:01] » Good afternoon, City Council President and members of the Omaha City Council.

[1:20:05] My name is Jen Day and I am the Policy Director for the Women's Fund of Omaha

[1:20:09] located at 4601 Catalyst Court, 68106. And I'm here today to share our strong

[1:20:15] support for Councilman Begley's proposal to ensure all Omaha workers, including

[1:20:19] those between the ages of 14 to 19, are paid at least the state minimum wage as

[1:20:23] was expressly requested by the Nebraska voters in 2022.

[1:20:28] Initiative 433, which set the state minimum wage at $15 by 2026 with yearly

[1:20:33] increases thereafter connected to the consumer price index was approved by

[1:20:38] nearly 60% of a majority excuse me a nearly 60% majority of Nebraska voters

[1:20:44] in November 2022. More specifically as it relates to the Omaha City Council the

[1:20:49] measure was approved by nearly 72% of Omaha voters. Your voters your

[1:20:53] constituents approved of a $15 minimum wage with no exceptions for age by

[1:20:58] nearly a three to one margin over those who did not.

[1:21:02] Unfortunately the Nebraska legislature used the very little time they had this

[1:21:05] past session to pass LB 258 which created a sub minimum wage for workers

[1:21:10] ages 14 and 15 and a training wage for workers ages 16 to 19. Additionally the

[1:21:15] yearly increases would be capped at 1.75% as opposed to being tied to CPI.

[1:21:20] These provisions display an alarming detachment from the financial reality

[1:21:24] faced by many Nebraskans today. The rising cost of food housing and basic

[1:21:28] necessities has forced families to count every penny with some working two or

[1:21:32] three jobs just to pay rent and buy groceries. Further for many families

[1:21:37] having children who work is not optional. It is a necessity to keep up

[1:21:40] with the cost of living. More specifically capping the annual

[1:21:44] increases and in minimum wage at 1.75% will essentially function as giving

[1:21:49] workers a pay cut. Inflation in typical economic circumstances is roughly 3%

[1:21:55] annually annually with the consumer with the current consumer price index at

[1:21:59] 4.2%. A raise of 1.75%

[1:22:03] would be roughly two to three percent below the raise in the cost of living

[1:22:07] meaning a paycheck that currently has you counting pennies will not be enough

[1:22:11] to cover basic necessities in coming years.

[1:22:14] In our recent study unequal plains examining the economic gender gap in

[1:22:17] Nebraska the Women's Fund of Omaha found that women in Nebraska are 13% more

[1:22:22] likely than men to live at or below the poverty level.

[1:22:25] This combined with the motherhood penalty we observed illuminating a

[1:22:29] decrease in wages the more children a woman has while men's wages see an

[1:22:32] increase with the number of children they have, plus the data showing that

[1:22:36] women pay 19% percent Excuse me, 19% more on average in housing costs than

[1:22:41] men, you can see how arbitrarily paying those

[1:22:44] under the age of 20 a lower wage for equal work would unfairly penalize

[1:22:48] single mother homes with children who work. As stated previously, many of

[1:22:52] these homes need children to work to help pay their bills. Paying young

[1:22:56] people less for the same work is not only discriminatory, but it creates

[1:23:00] additional financial strain in homes that may already be struggling. Lastly,

[1:23:04] some of these families are the result of a mother

[1:23:06] » Mr. Speaker, I'm going to have to cut you off. I hate doing that to

[1:23:09] anybody, but just thank you for being here.

[1:23:12] » Thank you. >> And speakers, I'm always consistent on

[1:23:14] the 3-minute mark, so thanks for being here. Our next speaker is Erin

[1:23:18] Feisinger, followed by Tracy Kirby.

[1:23:26] » Great pronunciation of my last name, Councilmember Begley. Appreciate it.

[1:23:30] Council members, my name is Erin Feisinger, 2719 North 49th Avenue. I

[1:23:34] didn't get a chance to send in a letter, so I appreciate the opportunity to put

[1:23:37] my support on the record today. Uh here in support of agenda item 29.

[1:23:42] Thanks to Councilmember Begley for the pronunciation once again and for taking

[1:23:45] this up on behalf of the 70% of Omahans who voted to increase the minimum wage.

[1:23:51] I collected signatures for this back in 2022 all over the state, and then in a

[1:23:56] former life spent years talking to state senators about why they should not go

[1:24:00] against the will of the voters and restrict that annual increase which

[1:24:04] voters overwhelmingly supported. And over those conversations, I heard the

[1:24:08] gamut of arguments which basically boiled down to it is our job to

[1:24:12] interpret what the voters wanted and at the same time voters don't know what

[1:24:16] they're voting for. I would argue that all of the confusing

[1:24:20] language and ballot initiatives over the years. There is nothing more clear or

[1:24:25] understandable to people than the fact that their paychecks are no longer

[1:24:29] covering their costs. All of us understand that. I've talked

[1:24:33] to a lot of my neighbors about this and the consistent theme is that it is

[1:24:36] harder and harder to get ahead despite feeling like we are working harder than

[1:24:40] ever. The problem is wages and like multiple speakers have pointed out, 70%

[1:24:46] of Omaha voters including more voters in each of your districts than voted for

[1:24:51] each of you in your respective city council races understood that when they

[1:24:55] voted for the minimum wage increase. Voters are not stupid and I think all of

[1:24:59] you know that. I would also just draw attention to Omaha's poverty elimination

[1:25:04] plan signed by former Mayor Stothert which specifies amongst other solutions

[1:25:09] uplifting specifically mentions uplifting minimum wage increases as a

[1:25:13] solution to poverty. So we've already got this on the books that this is a

[1:25:17] solution we should try. I saw the Omaha Chamber sent in a letter

[1:25:21] of opposition expressing their support for increased wages but their concern

[1:25:25] over how this ordinance would be implemented and the confusion it could

[1:25:28] cause for regional businesses and I understand that might be a concern for

[1:25:31] this council as well. There's a lot of smart people at the

[1:25:34] chamber who have put out a lot of very smart studies about continued brain

[1:25:39] drain in Omaha and about the problems for businesses caused by our collective

[1:25:44] inability to afford the things that we need to live, work and play in this

[1:25:49] city. I have full faith that the business community here in Omaha will be

[1:25:53] able to figure this out because they have consistently asked us to trust

[1:25:57] their intelligence and foresight when it comes to taking care of Omaha working

[1:26:01] families and addressing their needs. The fact remains though that 70% of Omahan's

[1:26:06] did not vote for the chamber or the needs of the business community.

[1:26:10] They voted for their own futures, their own families and their continued ability

[1:26:14] to take care of themselves and their families with wages that would match

[1:26:18] their daily needs. I say we trust the people of Omaha, trust that they know

[1:26:21] their own lives and needs, and I would ask you to do the same by supporting

[1:26:24] this ordinance. Thanks for your time today, everyone.

[1:26:27] » Thank you. Next speaker is Tracy Kirby, followed by Louise Jimenez.

[1:26:35] Tracy Kirby? Tracy Kirby?

[1:26:40] We'll move on to the next speaker, Louise Jimenez. Is there any other

[1:26:43] proponents that want to speak that haven't spoken yet today? Raise your

[1:26:46] hand. Thank you.

[1:26:51] » Louise Jimenez, 2709 Dewey Avenue. Mr. President, good thing this is not

[1:26:57] your first ordinance, or the rest of the council might have knocked it down.

[1:27:02] I just want to make an observation. Having the Human Rights and Relations to

[1:27:08] lead a department to lead this effort is brilliant. Placing notices and informing

[1:27:13] employees of this ordinance mirrors how the federal government does it.

[1:27:18] And your city attorney might get some flak, but I'm

[1:27:21] not so cynical thinking that this council needs to question

[1:27:25] if Mr. Crusey has drafted a lawful ordinance.

[1:27:29] I live in Omaha,

[1:27:32] and uh I've spent the last several years

[1:27:36] working in civic engagement, community outreach, and local journalism. Through

[1:27:39] canvassing, neighborhood meetings, community events, and conversations with

[1:27:43] residents across South Omaha, North Omaha, and other parts of the city, I

[1:27:47] have had the opportunity to hear directly from working families about the

[1:27:50] challenges they face every day. What I have hear most often is people

[1:27:55] asking for stability. They talk about rising rent, increasing grocery costs,

[1:28:00] children care expenses, transportation costs, and health care bills that

[1:28:04] continue to climb faster than their paychecks.

[1:28:06] Many residents are working full-time, some working multiple jobs, yet still

[1:28:10] find themselves struggling to keep up with the cost of living in an Omaha.

[1:28:14] This ordinance asks an important question. Should Omaha have have the

[1:28:18] ability to respond to Omaha's economic realities? To be sure, people are not

[1:28:23] asking for special treatment. They're asking for a fair opportunity to support

[1:28:27] themselves and their families. As a home rule charter city, Omaha has the

[1:28:32] authority to consider solutions tailored to local conditions and have uh

[1:28:38] So, you can give this thoughtful consideration.

[1:28:42] Uh I worked as a young person. I paid for my first cell phone, uh new clothes,

[1:28:48] and eventually got my uh vehicle. So, I I understand what young

[1:28:54] people are saying. Uh

[1:28:56] today many families feel the cost of living continues uh to rise while the

[1:29:01] benefits of economic growth are increasingly concentrated elsewhere.

[1:29:05] Recent analysts found that 41 energy billionaires increased their wealth by

[1:29:10] 23.5 billion during the conflict with Iran, even as higher energy costs ripple

[1:29:15] through the economy. Research on long-term inequality suggests that tens

[1:29:20] of trillions of dollars in income that once would have flowed to working and

[1:29:24] middle-class Americans have instead accrued to those at the very top of the

[1:29:28] economic ladder. That's happened last four decades. So, at its core, this

[1:29:33] proposal is about how Omaha chooses to balance economic growth, local control,

[1:29:37] and the economic well-being of >> its residents. Thank you for your time.

[1:29:42] » Thank you. Are there any other proponents here on item number 28 that

[1:29:47] wish to speak? Seeing none, are there any opponents?

[1:29:53] Oops.

[1:29:55] Sorry, we had a couple more speakers here before [clears throat] we go to

[1:29:59] opponent. >> see the audience on the

[1:30:01] » Larry, I have the floor if I I haven't called you up yet.

[1:30:04] » not just asked for an opponent. >> Give me a moment. The

[1:30:07] » What are these These are our opponents.

[1:30:09] » Okay. >> 1 2

[1:30:11] 3 >> Okay.

[1:30:19] Okay, so who should I call the others? Okay, the next speaker is Andrew

[1:30:23] Sullivan.

[1:30:31] » Thank you, Council President, Council members. My name is Andrew Sullivan,

[1:30:35] 17748 Western Avenue, and I'm opposed to this ordinance because I think

[1:30:40] overall you'll find in this with dealing with fiat currencies and digital economy

[1:30:46] on here, we would be better off getting rid of

[1:30:50] minimum wage. But, that's not for discussion.

[1:30:54] This ordinance is about what state legislature did and why.

[1:30:58] The reason we have a difference in income for the minimum wage for you

[1:31:05] young people is cuz they don't have enough experience, and they need to gain

[1:31:08] it. Now, if you think I'm heartless,

[1:31:12] I when I started working, minimum wage was $3.80.

[1:31:19] And there was plenty of jobs on. Theaters would hire because

[1:31:24] grocery stores, you would just go in there, be a stock boy, work 10 10 hours

[1:31:29] a week, and that's it. You know, there was plenty of them.

[1:31:32] But, what we started to do in the 6th late '60s is the federal

[1:31:37] government greatly expanded the ability of minimum wage laws.

[1:31:43] And then next decade, we were suffering double-digit inflation.

[1:31:48] Because the price of the currency didn't match

[1:31:52] the value of what was being done. Today,

[1:31:58] the state legislature is stuck with a problem.

[1:32:02] How do you get people to hire youth?

[1:32:06] When Nebraska raised its minimum wage to $9,

[1:32:11] suddenly a bunch of grocery stores closed.

[1:32:15] Not immediately, not right away,

[1:32:18] they waited till they figured out, well, what how do I come deal with these extra

[1:32:22] costs? And then they started consolidating.

[1:32:26] At the same time, since people kept complaining,

[1:32:31] they brought in self-checkout stands.

[1:32:36] And because

[1:32:38] 14-year-old, 15-year-old, 16-year-old, 18-year-old can't check out alcohol,

[1:32:44] they got rid of the teenagers.

[1:32:47] The same thing happened in the movie theaters. Anyone 12 and up could work in

[1:32:51] a movie theater. It wasn't that difficult. Tear your ticket, give it to

[1:32:54] them, send make certain they get seated, clean up the aisle afterwards, and just

[1:32:58] sit there and talk to your friends. Those jobs are gone.

[1:33:02] Go look at this this theater over here. I mean, it might be busy on Friday and

[1:33:06] Saturday night, but for the most part, oh, they you got before you buy a

[1:33:10] ticket, you got to go right up to the food stand now

[1:33:13] and ask, "Do you want fries with that?"

[1:33:18] That's what's happened. We've deprived a generation of ability

[1:33:22] to work, deprived of working.

[1:33:26] And that's why I think you should get out of this

[1:33:28] um minimum wage ordinance. It's not going to do what you think it's going to

[1:33:32] do. It will just discriminate against the youth that you wanted to get hired

[1:33:35] in the first place. >> you for being here. Next speaker

[1:33:39] is Donny R. Johnson.

[1:33:43] Followed by Chrissy Armend

[1:33:47] Diaz. Armendariz, Armend >> Armendariz.

[1:33:49] » Armendariz, thank you. I was going to get there.

[1:33:54] » Uh good afternoon. I'm on City Council, Donny R. Johnson and Johnson and Johnson

[1:33:57] Question Foundation. Uh 4928 North 52nd Street

[1:34:02] and North Omaha Concerned Citizens Foundation.

[1:34:04] You know, I I I think everyone like for the young folks to

[1:34:08] have money. And if you go back to the '60s and the '70s,

[1:34:12] uh

[1:34:15] we had jobs through the city. And

[1:34:19] I don't know if these young folks have seen all the Burger Kings and uh Wendys

[1:34:23] and McDonald's shutting down. So, it They're looking at it wages not

[1:34:27] going to fix the problem. The problem's on the other side.

[1:34:31] And you look to the '70s, people was making like the gentleman

[1:34:34] gentleman was saying, "$3 an hour, you could pay for a house making $3 an

[1:34:38] hour." But you make $15 an hour, you can't pay for anything.

[1:34:41] So, the problem's not there. It's more like the Boston Tea Party. People were

[1:34:45] just got upset. So, where's the problem really at? The

[1:34:49] price index is on the other side, not the wages. You can get all the wages in

[1:34:52] the world, but then we don't have Sears and Roebucks anymore. We don't have

[1:34:55] Kmart. We saw all these businesses closing. And the number one problem is

[1:34:59] wages. And I told the Navy guys, "If you send

[1:35:03] me to Europe instead of Washington D.C. with Mr. Harding, I'll find out where

[1:35:07] Jimmy Hoffa is at." They say he's up in New York.

[1:35:09] » we need to we need to stay on topic. Thank you.

[1:35:12] Next speaker, I apologize, it's Senator Christy

[1:35:15] Armendariz.

[1:35:27] » Good afternoon, Council President and City Council. Uh thank you for having

[1:35:30] me. I'm Christy Armendariz. My address is 16212 West Maple Road.

[1:35:35] I am a current state senator. I am the vice chair of appropriations for the

[1:35:39] state of Maras- of Nebraska. And I thought it fair to come and put my

[1:35:45] testimony on the record of why I voted the way I did on uh LB 258.

[1:35:53] We did we've talked a lot about the minimum wage.

[1:35:58] But if a minimum wage worker receives a mandated increase in his or her wage

[1:36:03] without additional contribution, the ripple effect will keep that individual

[1:36:08] at the exact same place within their buying power

[1:36:11] that they were before. When a when the minimum wage goes up, a

[1:36:16] business, in order to stay flat in their company's profit margin,

[1:36:20] can reduce its workforce in the hopes of still maintaining the same output or

[1:36:25] which we often see in entry-level work, the business owner can replace those

[1:36:30] positions with technology. We need to be cognizant of grocery

[1:36:34] stores and restaurants where the profit margins are are extremely tight and

[1:36:38] volatile. Those industries in particular would

[1:36:42] have a very difficult time staying open and using workers as opposed to

[1:36:46] technology. We have seen closures and technology

[1:36:50] replace workers for several years now. If companies need to maintain its level

[1:36:56] of employees and it forces the to in a are forced to pay higher wages at the

[1:37:01] entry-level, more than likely they will need to

[1:37:04] increase wages within the whole organization. So it won't be just

[1:37:08] minimum wage. All the other workers will be expected to be bumped up to keep that

[1:37:13] delta the same they always were. So we raise minimum wage as governments,

[1:37:18] all wages go up. That's fine and ideal as long as we're

[1:37:23] in a closed system. But if you have businesses that can outsource, and we've

[1:37:27] seen it going on for decades now, to other countries, especially at customer

[1:37:33] service type jobs, they do. So we will lose those jobs, which are

[1:37:37] entry-level jobs, and we need to be cognizant of that. I just want to make

[1:37:42] one last point that in that ordinance in in the state legislature's bill

[1:37:49] and the on the record

[1:37:53] city, county, state, schools are all exempt from the mandated minimum wage.

[1:37:59] So, if you work for any of those entities or organizations, none of them

[1:38:03] are are applicable in the mandated minimum wage or any of the CPI

[1:38:08] escalators that are involved in that bill.

[1:38:12] Thank you. >> Thank you, Senator. Are there any other

[1:38:15] opponents here?

[1:38:33] » Larry Store, 5015 Lafayette Avenue, Omaha, 68132.

[1:38:39] I am opposed to this for very many reasons, so please call me back up later

[1:38:43] for clarification, not expansion. But, what we have done here this this

[1:38:49] afternoon is a severe breakage of the rule.

[1:38:52] This is an agenda item, yes. But, always in the past should have

[1:38:57] stayed on the topic of that agenda. What is on that piece of paper in front

[1:39:02] » Larry, this is about the minimum wage, not about other issues. You can talk

[1:39:05] about the minimum wage ordinance or you're going to be called out of order.

[1:39:08] » Let me have my freedom to speak. >> Your freedom is on item 29 for the

[1:39:13] minimum wage. >> 29.

[1:39:16] Will you please be quiet for a change? >> Have him removed. Larry, you can't

[1:39:20] respect the body. >> meeting.

[1:39:21] » You are removed. Please cut the mic. You're removed, Larry. Thank you.

[1:39:26] Are there You're removed. You are removed. Are there any other opponents

[1:39:31] I want to thank everybody that's here today for being respectful of everyone

[1:39:37] that is here in attendance and also that is listening on the Zoom.

[1:39:42] We try to run a civil meeting, 3 minutes for everybody to speak. So, thank you

[1:39:48] everybody that's done that here today. Are there any other opponents here on

[1:39:53] item number 29? Seeing none,

[1:39:58] the public hearing is closed. And I we have some lights on,

[1:40:02] but I I like to make a couple remarks since I brought this ordinance before

[1:40:06] us, and I'll gladly get to my colleagues.

[1:40:09] I want to thank a lot of the young people that took the time to come out

[1:40:12] here today and to share your stories.

[1:40:16] Because I I had a lot of things that I wanted to cover in my remarks, but it's

[1:40:21] incredible. It is a grandfather of a 1-year-old, and my kids are in their 20s

[1:40:27] and 30-ish, means I'm getting a little old.

[1:40:29] I It always it it gives me great hope in our youth

[1:40:34] to use their voices, and that's what you did here today.

[1:40:38] So, instead of covering a lot of things that you all did,

[1:40:42] I want to just tell a brief story about myself as a 14-year-old kid

[1:40:47] in 1983. I worked in the Creighton University dish room,

[1:40:52] and my older brothers were 15 and 16, and they worked in that dish room as

[1:40:57] well, along with other kids

[1:41:00] from Cathedral where I grew up, and also North Omaha that was nearby.

[1:41:04] And if you can place a dish room, you got two people scraping the plates,

[1:41:09] got the trays, the cups, the silverware. You got them scraping that, and then

[1:41:14] behind that person, you had somebody loading the dishwasher.

[1:41:18] And on the other other end of the conveyor belt was the unloader of the

[1:41:22] dishwasher. And then the other guy or gal was doing

[1:41:26] the silverware, so you got five people right there.

[1:41:30] And then you got a sixth person that's hustling when the dishes are done, and

[1:41:35] you got to run back to the two food lines to take plates, trays, silverware,

[1:41:40] cups, everything

[1:41:42] to keep the well-oiled machine going. And as a 14-year-old sitting there,

[1:41:48] I work my tail off just like my older brothers did

[1:41:52] or just like the other kids in that dish room that were 17, 18, 19 years old.

[1:41:58] In 1983 or 2026,

[1:42:02] if it's $3.35 an hour back then or 15 bucks an hour now,

[1:42:08] you should not devalue the work of a 14-year-old. I'll never forget that.

[1:42:12] That's besides mowing lawns, that's one of the first jobs that I had. And it

[1:42:17] taught me responsibility, but it also helped me understand

[1:42:21] that my dad was a mailman, my mom was a teacher, three brothers.

[1:42:26] We weren't rich with money, but we were rich with a great family.

[1:42:31] Some of the kids that worked in that dish room were from single-family homes

[1:42:35] that took the bus down to Creighton. Sometimes my dad, if he was picking me

[1:42:40] up for my brothers before we drove, he would give those kids a ride to save

[1:42:44] them a little money on the fare for the bus

[1:42:47] because they had no way to get back and forth to work.

[1:42:53] It's a fairness issue, and when you want to race things to the bottom,

[1:42:58] I'll never forget that as a 14-year-old kid

[1:43:01] hustling and learning teamwork and camaraderie,

[1:43:04] if you're scraping a plate or doing dishes

[1:43:07] or silverware, it's the same work, and we all you

[1:43:11] didn't get a side of it. It's whoever got to wear first. And if you need to

[1:43:14] get the real guy that's fast loading in the unloader, you figure that out, and

[1:43:19] and you really learn teamwork in that. So,

[1:43:22] that's why I brought this ordinance, and a lot of the the people that spoke today

[1:43:26] talked about the 70.2% of Omaha voters, not Douglas County,

[1:43:32] Omaha, they said yes to this in 2022.

[1:43:38] And you think of what kids pay for today or what I paid for back then, I helped

[1:43:42] pay for some of my tuition at Cathedral High School.

[1:43:46] I could go to a movie. I helped pay a little bit of my car

[1:43:49] insurance like was mentioned here today. Those are things that help working class

[1:43:54] or working poor families that are struggling today more than ever

[1:44:00] in an economy there's affordability crisis is going on, especially

[1:44:06] you can certainly say here in Omaha, people are feeling the pinch.

[1:44:10] So, as we went through, and I'll get to my

[1:44:13] colleagues weighing in, in each district, it was district one

[1:44:18] was 75% of the voters said yes to this. District two was 86%.

[1:44:24] My district, district three was 89%. District four, 74%.

[1:44:30] District five, 63%. District six, 63%.

[1:44:35] District seven, 67. You want to talk about a landslide or a

[1:44:40] mandate, those numbers to me really reflect the will and the mandate

[1:44:46] of the voters when they pass this in 2022, it was passed statewide,

[1:44:51] but in Douglas County and specifically the city of Omaha,

[1:44:55] the numbers speak to themselves. So, I'm not about

[1:44:59] pay cuts or a race to the bottom for young workers because again, I never

[1:45:03] forgot being a 14-year-old kid in that dish room, and I loved that job. It was

[1:45:08] great. It was one of the best experiences ever, but we worked hard.

[1:45:12] And I don't want to tell a kid that's 20 in 2026

[1:45:17] or beyond that, "Hey, I did that job, but your value is less than mine." I

[1:45:23] don't ever forget where I came from. So, that's why I'm obviously going to be

[1:45:27] supportive of this and I appreciate the law department working on it.

[1:45:31] They got it before us here today. So, I'm going to yield my time to Councilman

[1:45:36] Festers and you're recognized. >> Thanks, Mr. President, and thanks for

[1:45:40] those remarks and for sharing that perspective and for introducing this

[1:45:44] measure today. I support a living wage for all workers,

[1:45:47] so I will also be supporting this ordinance.

[1:45:50] And I also want to thank all the testifiers that we heard today,

[1:45:53] especially the young people who did such a nice job.

[1:45:56] I love seeing that engagement on all issues.

[1:45:59] I also want to recognize City Councilman James Michael Bowers who's here from

[1:46:03] Lincoln. He introduced a similar measure that did

[1:46:05] pass in the city of Lincoln. So, I appreciate you coming all the way to

[1:46:08] Omaha today for this for this public hearing.

[1:46:12] Um $15 and a cost of living cost of living

[1:46:16] adjustment in 2027, I think is reasonable.

[1:46:19] And as has been noted, um was approved by voters over 70% in the

[1:46:25] city of Omaha. So, I do believe it's a love of the

[1:46:28] voters issue, also. Um

[1:46:32] I also believe it's consistent with the mayor's poverty elimination plan.

[1:46:36] Um in fact, this would be the first measure if we adopt it, that would be

[1:46:39] substantive in nature, um related to that plan that this body approved over a

[1:46:44] year ago now. Um the last thing I'll offer today, this

[1:46:48] is not the vote today, um

[1:46:51] but we discussed this morning pre-council that with the holidays

[1:46:54] coming up, there are several weeks where the council's not meeting or when the

[1:46:58] council members are traveling. Um so, I know there's additional lights

[1:47:01] here today, but I would offer a motion that would set then this vote for July

[1:47:05] 14th, which I think does satisfy those issues.

[1:47:10] Thank you, Mr. President. >> Thank you. We had a motion and a second

[1:47:12] for to lay over the vote on this item 29 to

[1:47:16] July 14th. We have more lights, Councilman Council

[1:47:21] member Goodwin, you're recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. President. And thank you

[1:47:26] for bringing this issue um before us today. You know, when you

[1:47:30] first called me, it had me reminiscing about my first job.

[1:47:36] And it was detasseling corn. So, it was actually below the minimum wage because

[1:47:41] that's the law, you know, agricultural jobs you can be paid a little less.

[1:47:45] But, I was excited to do that work. Uh because I wanted to

[1:47:50] buy my own school clothes that year um as a 14-year-old.

[1:47:55] Um and so, I went I got up at 5:00 in the morning and got on a bus and drove

[1:48:00] out to cornfields, Iowa, Nebraska. And um by the end of the summer, I was the

[1:48:05] foreman because everybody else had quit. So.

[1:48:09] » [laughter] >> Uh but then I I got a job uh at

[1:48:13] McDonald's because I was trying to alleviate the

[1:48:17] stress of my mom uh because she was a single mother.

[1:48:21] And it helped pay for bus fare. It helped pay for my um

[1:48:27] ACT exams. And it was a it was a type of financial independence

[1:48:33] uh as um a teenager uh in high school. Um

[1:48:39] all the testimonies today again, I connect with so many of the proponents.

[1:48:45] Um even the comment around the Baja burrito. Uh they did not have a Baja

[1:48:49] burrito in the 1990s, but uh after school, I'd catch a ride with my friend.

[1:48:56] We'd go to Taco Bell for the burritos were 69 cents. The taco pizzas I think

[1:49:01] were just a little more. And then we'd head uh head to telemarketing.

[1:49:05] Because I realized that after working about 6 months at uh McDonald's for

[1:49:10] $3.25, that the telemarketers were paying $6.50 an hour. And that That a

[1:49:15] huge increase. Again, I was in high school. What am I really trying to

[1:49:19] frame? That there are youth, kids, teenagers who are thinking about

[1:49:24] economics in the way that sometimes adults are.

[1:49:27] And that's actually not a bad thing. Because it's really preparing them for

[1:49:32] uh the real world or as my kids like to say adulting.

[1:49:37] Um I also think it's important that we do respect the will of the people.

[1:49:42] Uh people don't have faith in our democratic process right now. So many

[1:49:48] people when you ask them if they're registered to vote, if they plan to vote

[1:49:50] in the next election, the first thing they tell you is my vote doesn't count.

[1:49:55] And so I think that when you have a a measure like this that

[1:49:59] overwhelmingly was decided by the people in a bipartisan way that that

[1:50:06] we have to look at that and hold it up and reinforce

[1:50:12] to the citizens that their vote matters. And so I will be supporting this

[1:50:17] measure. Uh but I also want to focus on wage inequality and equality, which this

[1:50:23] measure actually does. Sometimes I feel like just because of my

[1:50:27] life experience that I I sit on every spectrum of the of the

[1:50:33] situation, if you will. And I can remember a job

[1:50:37] uh I was in my late 20s and um I was actually having to use another

[1:50:44] printer in that office and I came upon a memo and it was my um

[1:50:49] supervisor at the time and she was talking to HR because she said,

[1:50:55] "Lavonya is the only black person working here and she's being paid less.

[1:51:00] I'm concerned." So I had this memo that was stating

[1:51:04] that I was literally being paid less as the only African-American female and

[1:51:10] yet it wasn't because of necessarily credentialing or experience. These

[1:51:15] things really happen. Now, that was 30 years ago, but I think that we have to

[1:51:20] keep moving forward in equality and in in wage equality and not moving

[1:51:24] backward. I also think that as I was reading the

[1:51:29] the the statute, that it seemed very difficult.

[1:51:36] The wage um the minimum wage is simply that. It's a minimum wage. And when you

[1:51:40] start nuancing it over age and nuancing over training, it's just not really how

[1:51:46] we currently do it. So, it brings in a com- complexity that's not necessary.

[1:51:52] And so, um I will be supporting this amendment. I do appreciate the young

[1:51:57] people who have um

[1:51:59] come out to um s- express their vo- uh voices um

[1:52:04] and keep being engaged. Your voice matters. Uh and when you're old enough,

[1:52:09] your vote matters. And um thank you again, uh Council Member Begley, for

[1:52:13] bringing this up for for our vote, which will be next week

[1:52:18] or in several weeks. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member Rowe. You're

[1:52:23] recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Begley. Um

[1:52:26] I appreciate the comment from Mr. King that uh

[1:52:30] the the constituents that are emailing me about this ordinance right now, it's

[1:52:34] about 50/50. I'm getting >> Good one, please confirm.

[1:52:37] » Yeah, so I am I I'll verify that that's true. The the communication that I'm

[1:52:42] getting, it's about 50/50.

[1:52:45] Um you know, in the last couple of weeks,

[1:52:49] even in the months, I've been concerned about how the City Council, the

[1:52:55] relationship that the City Council has with the state of Nebraska.

[1:52:59] And I think we all know that the City Council does serve at the pleasure of

[1:53:03] the state. And so, I do have a concern. I'm

[1:53:06] conflicted because I do recognize the the big numbers of people that signed

[1:53:12] the petition and and that voted. And so I I get that. But I also

[1:53:17] recognize that the state legislature took this up as a as a bill and passed a

[1:53:23] bill that um we're going to be in conflict with in my

[1:53:27] opinion. It It appears to me we'll be in conflict with the state again. And I

[1:53:32] mean I've not talked to the Attorney General. I don't know what his

[1:53:35] intentions would be. I think he might have had some communication with the

[1:53:39] Lincoln City Council. I'm not sure of that, but I do have some concern when

[1:53:44] when we go into conflict with um

[1:53:48] with the state of Nebraska. I I'm reading through the ordinance. I've been

[1:53:52] reading through the ordinance. Tonight I have I am not ready to say yes or no.

[1:53:57] I've I'm I'm going to still do some study over the next month and next 3

[1:54:01] weeks and try to understand the the consequences of going one way or the

[1:54:07] other. But I would like to ask some questions of uh Kaylen.

[1:54:13] If you would come up, Kaylen is our HRNR director and

[1:54:17] and this ordinance will be uh placed upon her department uh for

[1:54:23] for management. And I I want to start off with there's there as as Senator

[1:54:28] Armendariz said, there are some exceptions. I want to read off some of

[1:54:32] the exceptions to this uh to this ordinance.

[1:54:35] So it'd be any individual that's employed in agriculture.

[1:54:40] Any individual employed as a babysitter or in or about a private home.

[1:54:47] Any individual employed in a bonafide executive, administrative, or

[1:54:50] professional capacity or as a superintendent or supervisor.

[1:54:56] Any individual employed by the United States or by the state or any political

[1:55:00] subdivision thereof as Christie mentioned including any individual

[1:55:05] incarcerated in any correctional facility.

[1:55:09] Any individual engaged in the activities of an educational, charitable,

[1:55:13] religious, or nonprofit organization when the employer employee relationship

[1:55:17] does not in fact exist or when the services rendered to such organization

[1:55:22] are on a voluntary basis. Here's one, apprentices and learners

[1:55:28] otherwise provided by law. A veterans in training under supervision

[1:55:32] of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs.

[1:55:35] A child of in the employment of his or her parent or a parent in the employment

[1:55:40] of his or her child. Or any person who directly or indirectly

[1:55:44] is receiving any form of federal, state, county, or local aid or welfare.

[1:55:49] And who is physically or mentally disabled and employed in a program of

[1:55:53] rehabilitation. Who shall receive a wage at a level

[1:55:56] consistent with his or her health, efficiency, and general well-being.

[1:56:00] So those are the exceptions to the to the ordinance the way I

[1:56:04] understand it. Would Would you say that that's correct Caitlin?

[1:56:08] » Correct. Those are the exceptions to the definition of who would be considered an

[1:56:11] employee who would have a right to the minimum wage under this ordinance.

[1:56:14] » Okay. So I I would I would say that they would not be held

[1:56:20] um to the standards for the for the minimum wage at this at this ordinance

[1:56:24] is talking about. Is that right? >> The An employer would not be required to

[1:56:28] pay the minimum wage outlined in this ordinance to those people listed in

[1:56:31] those exceptions. >> Okay. Great.

[1:56:33] Uh there's a couple of questions I have on um on some just some of the logistics

[1:56:38] on how will you be able to manage it? So the one is the the worker that earns

[1:56:43] tips. So on how does How is that going to be

[1:56:47] handled? Is that they're going to be paid $2.13 or a minimum of $2.13 an hour

[1:56:53] plus their tips? And how does that How will that work?

[1:56:58] » Caitlin Deheilia, director of the Human Rights and Relations Department. Excuse

[1:57:01] me for that, but I work at 1819 Farnam, Suite 502.

[1:57:06] The calculations [snorts]

[1:57:08] for tipped workers would account for that $2.13

[1:57:11] per hour plus the gratuities. And if those two combined didn't get to the

[1:57:17] minimum wage rate, either $15 this year or the

[1:57:22] rate adjusted based on the consumer price index in subsequent years,

[1:57:26] then that's where there would be a violation potentially. So, they have a

[1:57:29] right to that same rate. It's just that it can be that 213 plus tips.

[1:57:34] » Okay. So, if they were to receive tips short

[1:57:38] if they if you took their $2.13 and they received $5 tips,

[1:57:43] then the the employer would make up the difference to 15. Is that how that would

[1:57:46] work? >> Correct.

[1:57:48] » Okay. So, how do they how do they manage that? How does because I I noticed that

[1:57:52] it's the the burden of proof on the payment is on the employer.

[1:57:58] So, how does the employer expected to manage How do they know

[1:58:02] you know, if I if I go to a um a restaurant and I

[1:58:06] put, you know, $15 cash on the table. How how do they know that that's

[1:58:11] part of that that waitress's or waiter's um

[1:58:14] wages? >> So, from my experience waiting tables,

[1:58:17] right? Part of my responsibility as a server was to report the tips I received

[1:58:21] in cash. And also part of the employer's responsibility was of course to report

[1:58:25] those tips that we received through credit cards. And so, together, the

[1:58:29] record keeping of the employer would contain those two

[1:58:33] amounts at the end of a shift, presumably. And that would be those

[1:58:36] would be the records that the employer would have to account for the tips.

[1:58:40] » Okay. So, it is it is accounted for. Can you talk about uh there was mention of

[1:58:45] the student learner. And how does that how how does that part

[1:58:50] of the program work? If you're a student learner

[1:58:53] of a bonafide vocational training program,

[1:58:56] you can earn less wages than the minimum wage.

[1:59:00] Is that Do I understand that correctly? >> Mr. Kusi, would you be able to speak to

[1:59:04] that at all?

[1:59:08] » Mac Kusi, excuse me, Mac [clears throat] Kusi from

[1:59:09] the law department. The

[1:59:12] the sections that you're referring to with these definitions and the list of

[1:59:15] the exceptions, those were pulled directly from the state statute that

[1:59:19] already exists and the legislature doesn't exactly define student learner.

[1:59:25] Um I know that doesn't completely answer your question, but that's a little bit I

[1:59:27] guess of of a prelude to it. With regard to how that that would work, your direct

[1:59:32] question is that this ordinance proposes that the burden of keeping track of the

[1:59:37] records for how they're paying people and how they're classified, including if

[1:59:41] there are any exceptions, um to the classification of the employees is going

[1:59:46] to be on the business owner, the employer, I guess, in order to make

[1:59:50] those distinctions and the records that they're going to be required to keep

[1:59:52] under this ordinance. >> Okay, how are we How are we going to

[1:59:56] know if they are a part of a bonafide vocational training program?

[2:00:01] » Part of what we'll do before rolling out the ordinance, if the ordinance is

[2:00:05] approved, is is defined further what these means, look into how how the state

[2:00:09] looks at these definitions and applies them just to have a good understanding

[2:00:13] of how we would apply those exceptions. >> Okay.

[2:00:18] Um Now, this one I I think you sent us some

[2:00:21] some information on a fiscal note, but I wanted to kind of talk through that,

[2:00:25] too, cuz can you Can it Can you explain what is this going to cost

[2:00:29] the city of Omaha to implement um this ordinance from your department's

[2:00:34] perspective? I mean, how many employees are you going to have to add? How many

[2:00:38] dollars are you going to have to spend to administer?

[2:00:41] » Sure, my plan would be to hire one human relation relations representative one to

[2:00:47] work on this ordinance and so that person would responsible be responsible

[2:00:50] initially for social socializing the ordinance and making

[2:00:54] sure that employers and employees are aware of their responsibilities and

[2:00:57] rights.

[2:01:00] I would hope to be able to hire that person by about September and so I

[2:01:04] anticipate this year we'd have about a third of that cost all all in with wages

[2:01:09] and benefits. I estimate that would be right around $36,000 for this year. And

[2:01:14] then for next year about $110,000 for that person. It might be that we

[2:01:18] anticipate the volumes aren't sufficient to support a full-time equivalent

[2:01:22] employee and so we might fill that role at a half-time employee. I haven't fully

[2:01:26] decided yet because we really have it it's early and we want to see see how

[2:01:30] things are looking before we formalize these decisions, but what I outlined

[2:01:34] here is what I anticipate the maximum cost being initially at least for the

[2:01:37] first year and a half. And then

[2:01:40] the remainder of the cost that I highlighted are to publicize the

[2:01:44] ordinance. So we have a responsibility under the ordinance to develop a poster

[2:01:48] and then make sure that it gets out to employers so that they know what they're

[2:01:51] expected to pay especially next year because it'll deviate from what's due in

[2:01:55] this at the state level. And we're going to take that responsibility seriously.

[2:01:58] We want to make sure that we're mailing it to the employers we can mail it to

[2:02:01] that we're getting out on social media with paid campaigns that we're getting

[2:02:05] out on TV and radio to educate employers about their responsibilities. In doing

[2:02:09] so also educating employees about their rights, but

[2:02:13] I I think of our responsibility is to make sure that nobody is taken by

[2:02:15] surprise by this ordinance and so that's what we would plan on doing for the the

[2:02:20] rest of this year. So that's about a $50,000 cost this year. For next year

[2:02:24] it's about $135,000. >> You know,

[2:02:28] the mayor is going to be presenting his budget for 27 in the next couple of

[2:02:32] weeks. Has has there been consideration that if

[2:02:35] this ordinance passed is there going to be dollars in the

[2:02:38] budget to cover that expense or is

[2:02:42] how is that How's you know, you had that conversation with the mayor?

[2:02:45] » I've informed Mayor Yuring and I spoke about it at my budget meeting last week

[2:02:49] letting them know that there would be we would need to staff and do some work to

[2:02:53] proactively educate the public about this ordinance which would have a cost.

[2:02:57] » Okay. Um

[2:03:00] And I had a question on the implementation as well. It says the

[2:03:03] director shall promulgate appropriate guidelines or rules to implement the

[2:03:08] provisions of this chapter. Such rules shall be reviewed by the city

[2:03:12] law department to ensure that they are in compliance with this chapter.

[2:03:16] Do we know what those rules are? >> We don't know what the rules will look

[2:03:20] like formally yet, but one of the things that I'm

[2:03:22] uh thinking about doing because it's a new requirement is

[2:03:27] uh taking a softer approach to enforcement initially. So this year,

[2:03:30] rather than filing charges right away against employers when we receive

[2:03:34] complaints, notifying employers of the of the issue and of the need to course

[2:03:39] correct and then giving them an opportunity to course correct prior to

[2:03:42] initiating an investigation. So uh I think, you know, the the rules

[2:03:47] could outline how that how those processes might look,

[2:03:50] how we might gather evidence, what happens after we find there's a

[2:03:55] violation and let's say an employer doesn't want to pay what's due to the

[2:03:57] employees. So we'll we'll define further the processes that we can't quite define

[2:04:02] through this ordinance. >> Okay.

[2:04:12] Okay.

[2:04:17] Uh can you talk about the penalties for violations? You mentioned the

[2:04:20] violations. What penalties will be [clears throat] put in

[2:04:24] place?

[2:04:28] » The penalties section is section 39-8 and it allows the director of the Human

[2:04:34] Rights and Relations Department to assess a $500 penalty payable to the

[2:04:37] city for each violation of the ordinance.

[2:04:43] And then and those those violations would be violations of the notice

[2:04:47] requirements, violations of the payment to the employees, and violations of

[2:04:52] [clears throat] the retaliation uh

[2:04:55] prohibition.

[2:04:58] So, that's that's it in sum. >> Okay. Okay.

[2:05:02] Okay.

[2:05:05] I don't think I have any other questions. Those were just some that I

[2:05:07] had kind of have been trying to make sure I had an understanding.

[2:05:12] And I I'm sure I'll have more questions on the

[2:05:15] 14th. So, thank you, Mr. President. >> Thank you, Council Member Melton. You're

[2:05:21] recognized. >> Thank you. Um

[2:05:24] I mean, I think the good news is I haven't been able to find anyone any

[2:05:27] employer that's paying less than $15 an hour. Um even Jimmy John's was paying

[2:05:33] like 1750. So, I I think the market has kind of

[2:05:37] determined what the pay rate should be. I mean, I just think that's

[2:05:41] that's good news um is that the employers are need need people,

[2:05:45] especially the the fast food restaurants, and they're they're paying

[2:05:48] they're paying the young people a higher wage than they're even required to pay.

[2:05:52] So, that's good news. Um so, and I was just curious um does anybody have those

[2:05:57] stats? Do we have any of the statistics about

[2:06:02] how many people this would affect? And and I didn't mean that if you can come

[2:06:06] down, you may or may not be able to answer, but I don't know who could

[2:06:09] answer this. We're passing this, and what I'm saying is

[2:06:13] I I you know, how many people is this necessarily going to affect? Do we know

[2:06:17] how many 14- and 15-year-olds are getting paid less than $15 an hour?

[2:06:23] » I don't know oh, 14- and 15-year-olds specifically, I don't know.

[2:06:26] » Cuz that's what we're I mean, that's what we're talk the 1350 an hour is just

[2:06:29] for the young people. >> Sure. I have the I pulled the 2024 ACS

[2:06:34] one-year estimate data for Omaha and it shows

[2:06:38] that 9.1% of people or 16,809 people were earning less than

[2:06:43] $24,990 $999 or $12 an hour in 2024 and the same

[2:06:50] data set has 10.4% of people just over 19,000 earning 25,000 to 34,999 which is

[2:06:58] up to 16 $12 to 1683 an hour. So I know that goes beyond the minimum wage, but

[2:07:03] just to highlight it's about 19% of people

[2:07:07] in Omaha that could potentially be be impacted by a minimum wage ordinance.

[2:07:13] According to the ACS one-year estimate data from 2024.

[2:07:17] » That's from 2024. I I was asking about the 1350 the like lower than if anybody

[2:07:23] has anything >> that data right now.

[2:07:26] » I have to call you back up and tell you what

[2:07:28] » from the Thank you. >> I'm going to call you back up if you

[2:07:30] have but only for the purpose if you have the answer to my question not for

[2:07:34] any other reason. And those are the laws. I'm not saying

[2:07:38] that cuz I don't want you to talk. I can only call you back up to address

[2:07:42] something that I'm asking. >> Yes, I wanted to share I'm not an expert

[2:07:47] on this but I'm pretty sure that >> Name and address.

[2:07:49] » Sorry. Gab Rima, I've had my address requirement waived.

[2:07:52] » Thank you. >> Um

[2:07:54] the bill that was passed this year in the

[2:07:57] legislature that created this lower youth minimum wage doesn't go into

[2:08:01] effect until July 1st. So no one has been affected affected by

[2:08:05] this yet. >> Okay. Well, that Thank you for answering

[2:08:09] that question. Okay.

[2:08:11] So it very well may be that no one lowers the pay it'll just be for

[2:08:15] future workers. I I don't know. I'm my biggest problem that I have with this

[2:08:19] is I don't I just don't know that Omaha has

[2:08:23] the authority to do this. Um I think that state law

[2:08:27] preempts the city from doing this, but um, I'll go into the legal arguments. I

[2:08:32] think I have a little more time to do my legal research before July 14th. Um,

[2:08:39] I have 14 and 15-year-olds I believe should be

[2:08:42] paid the same as what their counterparts are paid and

[2:08:46] like everyone else here, I mean, I got my start well, babysitting and

[2:08:50] volunteering, um, working at Little Caesars.

[2:08:54] Um, and doing those jobs of of serving pizza, working at McDonald's, doing the

[2:09:00] morning shift. So, um, I would I was also up and had to be at report to

[2:09:05] McDonald's by 5:00 a.m. Um, and walked down there cuz

[2:09:09] you know, I didn't have a car. Um, and so, I get it and I can't imagine I I

[2:09:15] think that 15-year-old doing the job next to the

[2:09:18] 17-year-old, you know, they should be getting paid for what they're doing.

[2:09:22] I would like to think that employers would actually do the right thing and do

[2:09:25] that or they're not going to be able to find the workers.

[2:09:28] Um, I'm not sure I'm not sure the reasons

[2:09:32] why the legislature decided to just make carve out an exception for

[2:09:37] 1350 for 14 and 15-year-olds. Um,

[2:09:42] but uh, Senator, maybe you and I can talk

[2:09:44] about that later since we have time before the before the vote. Um, but

[2:09:49] again, uh,

[2:09:51] I I'm not against having everybody paid

[2:09:53] $15 an hour if we're going to set a minimum wage. I I don't really think

[2:09:56] it's going to affect employers that much if they have to pay 14 and 15-year-olds.

[2:10:00] They probably just won't hire them. It is going to be the problem. 14 and

[2:10:04] 15-year-olds just may not get hired if they have to pay $15 an hour. Uh, but

[2:10:09] um, I I don't think that that

[2:10:13] this ordinance would change much for um, the employers and the cost. I guess my

[2:10:18] only problem is if you have a different increase in CPI for minimum wage, Again,

[2:10:23] that's where I think that the state law may preempt the city and we may not have

[2:10:28] that legal authority to do it. And I don't like to do things that I don't

[2:10:31] have the legal authority to do, even if I want to do it. I did take an oath of

[2:10:35] office that I will uphold the law. Um and so, again, I'll I'll take some

[2:10:40] time to do that legal research uh before the 14th and the vote. So, thank you.

[2:10:46] » Thank you. I I had a couple questions. I'll get to you Mr. Rowe if I can. Um

[2:10:52] Cailin, can I just get a follow-up? Maybe this is for you or Mr. Coozy.

[2:11:00] I think for Councilmember Rowe, you referenced

[2:11:04] the penalties for violations section 39-8 number one I

[2:11:10] or number one. So, can you read what one I says? So, there's a $500

[2:11:16] assessment for the violation by the employer. So, I

[2:11:22] And that was a good point that Councilmember Rowe made, but tell us can

[2:11:26] you read I to us what that says and what that means?

[2:11:30] » Cailin Dehelius, director of the Human Rights and Relations Department. Do you

[2:11:32] mean Do you mean A1, the director may waive?

[2:11:36] » Yes. >> Okay. So, 30 section 39-8 A1 reads, "The

[2:11:40] director may waive the total amount of penalties or reduce the penalty if the

[2:11:44] director determines the employer paid the full remedy due to the employee

[2:11:47] within 10 days of receiving the notice of violation of

[2:11:50] this chapter." >> So, if I read

[2:11:53] confirm, does that give you the flexibility to work with the employer if

[2:11:56] there was a violation and they paid it, you can waive the $500

[2:12:02] assess fee. Is it >> Absolutely. And typically, this this

[2:12:05] language would only apply if we got to a point where we were making a finding of

[2:12:09] violation at after an investigation happened. Often, there's a settlement

[2:12:13] opportunity very early on in the process where often penalties wouldn't even be

[2:12:17] necessarily part of that conversation. We'd really be prioritizing the wages to

[2:12:21] employees. >> Okay. Thanks and I have one more

[2:12:23] question just maybe for Mr. Cozzi, but don't go far.

[2:12:30] » Matt Cozzi, Law Department. >> Mr. Cozzi, the exemptions under

[2:12:35] it would be section, let's see, 39-2

[2:12:40] number three, all those from A to H and then

[2:12:46] 4 5 6 7, I guess. You see that section there?

[2:12:51] » Do you mean section 39-2 subsection E?

[2:12:55] Employee shall include any individual under the employ of an employer but does

[2:12:59] not include and there's a list of nine categories.

[2:13:01] » Correct. >> Okay, yes.

[2:13:02] » Do those are those different than what was under the current state law that was

[2:13:06] passed, those exemptions? >> They're not. They were taken from state

[2:13:10] statute which is Nebraska state statute 40 at 48-1202.

[2:13:17] » Okay. Thanks for clarifying that and Councilman Bro got me thinking about

[2:13:21] this. The other one he had mentioned I think was

[2:13:24] on tips. Does this ordinance change the record requirements on tips at all?

[2:13:31] » The record requirements? >> Yeah, for what when you get tips

[2:13:35] is what we have written in here, is that the same as the state law that it's not

[2:13:39] any different than what the state law, it mirrors the state law, correct?

[2:13:43] » It mirrors It mirrors section 48-1203 of the state statute.

[2:13:47] » Okay. All right, thanks for clarifying that. Councilman Bro, thanks for your

[2:13:50] patience. >> Sure, thank you.

[2:13:52] » So, I mean we are duplicating there's a there's some du- duplication

[2:13:57] going on between enforcement by the state and enforcement by the city of the

[2:14:01] same of the same thing.

[2:14:05] You could say that we're spending a dollar twice.

[2:14:09] Basically. >> Are you asking me?

[2:14:11] » No, I'm just making a statement. >> I'll comment on that. Okay. Um

[2:14:15] I did I wanted to speak to what um Council Member Milton I I did call

[2:14:21] um a local business in my district. It's

[2:14:24] he's a franchisee owner of a fast-food restaurant and I asked him, you know,

[2:14:28] what does this really make a difference? And he said,

[2:14:31] "Absolutely, it does make a difference." He said, "Don, the 14- and 15-year-olds

[2:14:35] that I hire" and he does hire 14- and 15-year-olds, but he said they

[2:14:39] can't do the job that the 16-year-old can do.

[2:14:43] He said, "There are limitations. I don't know if that's state law or what, but

[2:14:46] there's certain there are certain activities in the workplace that they

[2:14:50] cannot do. So, he uses the 14- and 15-year-olds to do the job where they're

[2:14:56] where they can appropriately do that work. And then when they become 16, then

[2:15:01] they can move up in the in the workforce and and do those jobs or 18 or whatever

[2:15:05] those minimum ages are." And he made the comment that that he

[2:15:10] does pay the 14- and 15-year-olds a little bit less because he said, "Quite

[2:15:14] honestly, they they really are just there to get work experience."

[2:15:18] And he goes, "I they don't really have a skill set yet to be able to to

[2:15:22] contribute like a 16-year-old or an older employee."

[2:15:26] That was his that was his take. I said, "Well, what happens when they turn 16?"

[2:15:31] He said, "I have to pay more than minimum wage when they hit 16 because

[2:15:35] now I have another level of competition. And for me to keep employees that work

[2:15:40] in my restaurant for me to keep them, I have to pay them more than the $15 an

[2:15:46] hour because if I don't, they're going to walk down the street and find a

[2:15:50] different job. So, there the market kind of helps dictate what's what's going to

[2:15:55] be an appropriate wage uh for skill set for certain uh skill set. So,

[2:16:01] I hope that kind of answers a little bit of the question and it I mean it it for

[2:16:05] him it was it's a real it's a real um

[2:16:09] thing that we're having a discussion about today.

[2:16:15] » Thank you. No further lights on this item.

[2:16:21] You had a mo- you had a motion and a second that was made to lay over the

[2:16:25] vote to July 14th, correct? >> Correct.

[2:16:27] » Okay. No further lights, roll call. >> Hug.

[2:16:30] » Yes. >> Melton.

[2:16:31] » Yes. >> Rowe.

[2:16:32] » Yes. >> Festersen.

[2:16:32] » Yes. >> Goodwin.

[2:16:33] » Yes. >> Harding.

[2:16:34] » Yes. >> Mr. President.

[2:16:35] » Aye. >> Motion passed 7 to 0. Non-action items,

[2:16:39] items 30 through 58 do not require public hearing or city council

[2:16:42] consideration at this meeting, but will be placed on a future agenda for public

[2:16:46] hearing and a vote. The reason for non-action is noted after the item on

[2:16:49] the agenda, as well as the date item is expected to appear on agenda for

[2:16:54] consideration.

[2:16:57] » Motion and a second to adjourn, roll call.

[2:16:59] » Hug. >> Yes.

[2:17:00] » Melton. Rowe. >> Yes.

[2:17:02] » Festersen. >> Yes.

[2:17:02] » Goodwin. >> Yes.

[2:17:03] » Harding. >> Yes.

[2:17:04] » Mr. President. >> Aye.

[2:17:06] » Motion passed 7 to 0. Meeting is adjourned at 3:56.

Omaha Nebraska City Council meeting June 16, 2026

Transcript