default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
Logout|My Dashboard

Lodi City Council moves forward with drafting a local hiring ordinance

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:00 am | Updated: 6:02 am, Thu Jan 20, 2011.

The Lodi City Council voiced support for drafting a local hiring ordinance that would require city contractors to make an effort to hire local workers.

Councilwoman JoAnne Mounce originally suggested the idea to promote hiring locally.

“As council members, we all know when you hire local and they live in the city where they work, their tax dollars stay here,” she said.

Under the ordinance, contractors would have to make their best effort to hire locally, but the ordinance would not work like a quota, City Attorney Steve Schwabauer said.

Construction companies would need to try a variety of ways to find qualified local workers for projects, like advertising at a local builders exchange, union halls or in the local newspaper or holding a hiring fair in a city building, he said.

But a contractor would still be allowed to do the job if they did not reach the recommended percentage and turned in documents showing that they tried, Schwabauer said.

When most people think of local ordinance, he said they envision a contractor being required to hire a certain percentage of their workforce locally.

But those types of ordinances have faced several legal challenges from people who say it violates the U.S. Constitution or the California Constitution’s right to work and travel. An ordinance with a quota could also violate the Public Contracts Code, which requires cities to hire the lowest bidders for Public Works contracts.

Other ordinances requiring contractors to make a good faith effort do not have the same legal hurdles and have been used by Stockton and San Joaquin County.

But other cities like Galt have rejected any type of local hiring ordinance. The Galt City Council rejected an idea in December 2009, and then rejected it again in March 2010 when local resident Gene Davenport requested the council put the ordinance on the ballot.

Making sure the city would not have legal problems from an ordinance was one of Councilman Larry Hansen’s main concerns.

“I just think we’ve got to tread very careful. “If we do come up with something, we do not want to open Pandora’s box for potential lawsuits,” he said.

He also had concerns that companies might not bid on projects because of the added cost to hire locally.

“When you are spending the public dollar, you need to be as economical as you can with awarding bids on projects,” he said.

When drafting the ordinance, Schwabauer plans to meet with local contractors to get a sense of how an ordinance could affect their business.

“I need to get a feel (for) whether people would really balk at bidding if they had to do the extra paperwork to meet the local hiring ordinance,” he said.

He also wants to get an idea of what should be defined as “local,” because some crafts might not have enough qualified workers in Lodi. Mounce recommended Schwabauer consider including all of San Joaquin County.

Local contractor Bill Meehleis said he opposes an ordinance, and said city staff will have more work too.

“The paperwork for the city staff is going to overwhelm you just to keep track of it,” he said.

Some businesses have concerns about these types of ordinances because they have been crafted poorly or misused in the past, said Nicole Goehring, government affairs director for Associated Builders and Contractors.

She said her nonprofit organization, representing general and sub contractors is not opposed to the concept of local hire, but they have concerns.

“We are concerned with smaller contractors with the paperwork that might be required. It might discourage bidders,” she said.

She also stressed that the ordinance needs to be inclusive for both union and non-union contractors.

Mounce recommended the city find a way to reduce the paperwork and work with contractors in drafting the ordinance.

“We want to see our brothers and sisters and parents and family working in town if possible. ... It’s part of our responsibility as community leaders,” she said.

Contact reporter Maggie Creamer at maggiec@lodi news.com or read her blog at www.lodinews.com/blogs/city_buzz.

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don't pretend you're someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don't insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.

Welcome to the discussion.


  • roy bitz posted at 9:15 pm on Thu, Jan 20, 2011.

    roy bitz Posts: 489

    Lodi's "bridge to nowhere" will be built. It will cost city dwellers TENS OF MILLIONS over the next forty years----needlessly.
    Some local contractors and their employees will benefit.
    Some out of town contractors and their employees will benefit.
    The city will hire more employees---we will pay their salaries, benefits,and pensions.
    Lodi rate payers will pay but the will not benefit from this bridge to nowhere.

  • Kevin Paglia posted at 2:54 pm on Thu, Jan 20, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 1880

    This would be a simple equation.

    Number of local contract jobs covered by ordanance divided by the number of local companies that could do the job = number of people this ordanance would put out of a job. But Mounce would still get paid so I guess the math is okay for her.

  • roy bitz posted at 1:05 pm on Thu, Jan 20, 2011.

    roy bitz Posts: 489

    Good common sense comments and questions Charles.
    I believe this is an issue now because construction of Lodi's "treat and drink" water treatment plant will soon begin. This is a huge and extremely expensive project.
    I call this plant Lodi's "bridge to nowhere" because it was approved on the basis we need to reduce demand on the area's ground water over draft.
    Area ground water is over drafted by 200,000 acre feet annually.
    The city of Lodi uses about 15,000 afa of ground water.
    This plant will treat 6,000 afa of river water. That is just 3% of the 200,000 afa over draft-- a drop in the bucket. However, it will cost rate payers nearly 200 million dollars over the forty year life of the water contract.
    Will the city or the Sentinel print a list of all costs associated with the planning, constructing, financing, operating and maintaining this project for forty years?
    I hope so!

  • Charles Nelson posted at 10:41 am on Thu, Jan 20, 2011.

    Charles Nelson Posts: 257

    This entire concept strikes me as such a bad idea, I can't believe anyone who's given it a moment of reasonable thought could agree with it. The only thing it would virtually guarantee is that you would pay more, and get less. What if all neighboring cities passed a similar ordinance? Would Lodi construction businesses be for the ordinance if they were to be shut out from getting similar contracts in Galt, Stockton, Elk Grove, or Sacramento? What if you happen to be a Lodi contractor, but some your long time employees happen to live elsewhere. Would you have to lay them off in order to hire other workers who live within the required boundaries? People who have never worked for you before, and you are clueless to their necessary skill sets? Would you have to provide proff of residency for everyone who works for you? Because, frankly, I've seen many job sites where I doubt all the employees could even provide proof of citizenship. This is a, plain and simple, stupid idea. I can't believe anyone with even the slightest ability to reason would be for it.



Popular Stories


Should graduations return to the Grape Bowl?

Lodi Unified leaders are moving Lodi and Tokay high school graduations from the Grape Bowl to the Spanos Center at UOP in Stockton. They cite limited seating, costs and unpredictable weather at the Grape Bowl. But others say graduations at the Grape Bowl are an important Lodi tradition, and one reason many supported renovating the stadium. What do you think?

Total Votes: 24


Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists