[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.