Salem committee hears officials and residents on living-wage proposal; measure kept in committee

SALEM, Mass. — The City Council’s Ordinances, Licenses and Legal Affairs committee opened a review on March 26 of a proposed living-wage ordinance, hearing testimony from department heads who warned of budget and hiring trade-offs and from residents who urged higher pay for seasonal and part-time workers.

Councillor Davis, who introduced the ordinance, framed it as a response to a “cost of living crisis” affecting housing, food, gas and child care, and said the proposal was developed with the Northshore Labor Council. He described a phased approach that would delay implementation until fiscal year 2028 and increase affected employees by about $1 an hour per year until a formula-derived target (roughly $18.75/hour under current inputs) was reached.

The meeting centered on two competing concerns: the city’s ability to absorb recurring payroll costs and the effect of higher starting wages on opportunities for seasonal hires. Harbormaster Bill McHugh told councillors that most of his workforce is seasonal or part-time — often high-school students or retirees brought in as a kind of “farm league” for maritime and law-enforcement careers — and warned that higher unskilled starting wages could make him “less apt to take a chance on training someone” who lacks necessary skills or certification. He noted harbormaster certification is governed in the Commonwealth under Chapter 102.

Lisa Cammarata, Salem’s human-resources director, said the city should be “mindful” of wage compression and budget effects: raising pay for part-time and seasonal employees could push up pay scales for long-tenured full-time staff and interact with union and grant-funded positions. “It has the potential to add… an exponentially higher number to the budget every year,” she said, and asked for time to work with finance to produce department-level cost estimates.

Tara Mansfield of the library described the library’s pages program: eight page positions, seven held by high-school students, working eight hours or less per week, with about 38.5 total part-time weekly hours across the program. She said many pages have been with the library for much of their high-school careers and start near $15/hour.

Several councillors stressed process and authority questions. Some members said an ordinance may not be the best governance tool because the mayor controls the budget under Massachusetts law; others pressed for updated data on how many employees would be affected and which roles are grant-funded or part of larger bargaining units. Councillor Smith argued that labeling the measure a “living wage” understates how much income a family needs and urged current, accurate payroll data and mayoral involvement before any ordinance is advanced.

Members of the public who spoke during the five-minute public-comment window urged action. Josiah Guthrie said $18.75 equates to about $39,000 a year and described household strain; Chad Carbone, a former seasonal worker and union representative, called the proposal a “minimal ask” that would give more value to seasonal labor; Michelle Bettencourt, a realtor and city-board member, distributed housing-affordability figures showing required incomes well above municipal wages.

After discussion, Councillor Smith moved that the proposal remain in committee for further study; Councillor Lapin seconded the motion. The chair recorded “I see four hands plus my own,” and the motion carried. No ordinance vote was taken. The committee asked HR and the finance director to return with a breakdown of estimated costs by department, the number of impacted employees, and whether affected roles are grant-funded or otherwise constrained.

The committee’s next steps are to review the requested data and to hear from the mayor’s office and additional department heads; no timeline for a subsequent vote was set at the meeting.