Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Funding Prevailing Wage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Newark wins state and UD funding; prevailing‑wage changes could raise local project costs
Summary
City lobbyist and staff reported new state and University of Delaware funding for Newark projects but warned a broadened prevailing‑wage interpretation could increase municipal construction costs and reduce the number of projects the city can afford.
City lobbyist James D’Shane and Newark city officials reported on July 21 that the recent Delaware legislative session delivered several wins for Newark — including roughly $600,000 from the University of Delaware to support Main Street safety updates and about $750,000 in community relief funds — while also noting newly enforced prevailing‑wage rules could substantially increase local project costs.
“UD tax bill had passed … $600,000 that came through the University of Delaware to help offset the cost of doing Main Street safety updates,” lobbyist James D’Shane told council, and he thanked local legislators who supported the city’s requests. He said, overall, the general assembly and university‑linked items together bring “roughly $4,000,000” to Newark in a range of state and university investments when combined with prior allocations.
But D’Shane and City Manager Coleman warned that a Department of Labor interpretation expanding prevailing‑wage coverage on municipal projects could raise costs sharply. D’Shane summarized the change as removing earlier exceptions and said municipal projects will generally be subject to prevailing‑wage rules; Coleman added more detail about thresholds and cost impacts.
Under existing state practice, Coleman said, prevailing wage requirements differed for new construction (a project cost threshold previously at $500,000) and for alterations (a lower threshold). He told council the Department of Labor’s revised interpretation treats some projects previously considered new construction as alterations — which invokes a much lower threshold (he said the alteration threshold now effectively applies in many cases), and that prevailing wage rates in New Castle County are considerably higher than in other markets. Coleman warned that prevailing‑wage projects can carry an approximate 30% cost premium and that survey and rate‑setting practices may be driving rates higher than local market labor costs.
Council members asked for clarification about which projects will be affected and the thresholds that trigger prevailing wage. Coleman said the city’s solicitor had sought an attorney general opinion after DOL changed its practice; the attorney general’s response effectively upheld DOL’s interpretation.
Council members and staff agreed the city will need to reassess project budgets and priorities for capital work, and to engage their legislative delegation and the League of Local Governments to seek clarifications or technical changes to the prevailing‑wage application.
Ending: City staff said they will follow up with detailed cost‑impact analyses and continue outreach with the delegation on the prevailing‑wage matter as the city develops its fall budget and capital priorities.
