Santa Fe public works committee postpones living-wage ordinance to allow more business survey data

The Public Works and Utilities Committee of the City of Santa Fe voted to postpone consideration of a proposed amendment to the city's living-wage ordinance after committee members said they wanted more data from the business community before advancing the measure.

Councilor Lee Garcia, who pulled the item from the consent agenda, asked the committee to delay action so the city could receive and review a feasibility study and business survey being prepared by the Santa Fe Chamber of Commerce. “I would be in favor of holding this back just because we need to ensure that this work is done at the committee level,” Garcia said.

Rod Gould, senior adviser and public engagement coordinator, told the committee the city's online survey had 545 responses at the time of the meeting and was scheduled to remain open through Oct. 10. Gould also said the city had asked the chamber to distribute a survey but staff did not know when the chamber's results would be available.

Why it matters: The bill (identified in committee as bill number 25 20 25 21) proposes amending SFCC 19-87, section 28-1.5 (the living-wage ordinance) to increase the city's base minimum wage and change the annual wage-adjustment formula. If adopted, the ordinance's effective date as discussed in committee would not take effect until Jan. 1, 2027, meaning a short postponement of committee consideration would not delay that implementation date.

Discussion highlights: Committee members outlined several procedural and substantive reasons for delaying action. Supporters of postponement said the chamber's survey and additional committee review would ensure business perspectives were adequately considered; opponents said the governing-body schedule already provides committee reviews (Quality of Life, Finance, and the Economic Development Advisory Committee) and that delaying at this meeting could block the bill from appearing before EDAC as scheduled. Mayor Alan Weber and staff described outreach that had already been done, including community meetings and a public hearing.

Formal action and votes: Councilor Lee Garcia moved to postpone the item to the next Public Works and Utilities meeting; the motion passed on a roll-call vote with three yes votes and two no votes. Vote tally recorded in committee:

- Amanda Chavez (chair): yes
- Alma Castro (councilor): no
- Michael Garcia (councilor): yes
- Lee Garcia (councilor): yes
- Carol Romero Worth (councilor): no

Next steps: Staff offered to summarize the city survey responses for the committee and to provide reports to other committees (Quality of Life, Finance, EDAC) that will consider the measure before final governing-body action. Committee members requested that the expanded survey data and any chamber results be made available to all committee members before further committee deliberation.

What the committee did not decide: No amendment to the ordinance was adopted at the meeting; no final recommendation was forwarded to the governing body. The committee's postponement is procedural, not a change to the substance of the draft ordinance.