EVERETT — Mayor Cassie Franklin last week vetoed the council's mandate that the city use a Project Labor Agreement, which involves negotiating wages and safety standards with labor organizations ahead of going to bid, for all projects estimated to run above $5 million. A split 4-3 council majority
greenlit the ordinance last week.
Franklin emphasized she supports project labor agreements for they ensure fair pay and uphold the health and welfare of workers, but making a mandate carries impacts that raise concerns.
Among the six reasons for her veto, Franklin wrote that the ordinance is "irresponsible to go into effect without understanding its impact to the city budget."
It also may not be in the public's best interest to strip the ability to use project labor agreements case-by-case, Franklin wrote in her veto.
"I'm deeply concerned that the current ordinance has not been vetted enough by our legal experts and our staff," Franklin told the council, adding that "Staff shared significant reservations about this policy as it's currently written, and I take their concerns very seriously."
Franklin told the council that even though she is vetoing this, she is not giving a flat "no" to talking further about using project labor agreements.
The four council members who wanted to push ahead were ordinance initiator Liz Vogeli, plus Mary Fosse, Paula Rhyne and Don Schwab. The three wanting to pause were Ben Zarlingo, Brenda Stonecipher and Judy Tuohy. They wanted to hold off to be sure the city is ready.
Vogeli and Fosse developed the ordinance after collaborating with union and labor council representatives for the past year.
By how the ordinance is written, the city itself would have been establishing wage and safety packages as a step before taking big projects to bid. The pre-bid parameters would have a universal effect on all employees working the project which contractors would need to abide by.
A union-only workforce is not an automatic condition in these, the Tribune was told.
Vogeli said by email she wasn't surprised by Franklin's veto, but "I am strong in my conviction that thorough work and research were accomplished, the timeline and carveouts gave staff leeway, and if signed by the Mayor, new sections/amendments could have been added in a timely fashion. She chose a different route."
A prior council action requires the consideration of using a project labor agreement on projects above $5 million, essentially to debate its pros and cons of using one.
Those who voted yes looked at the silver lining.
In 2019, the City Council already approved a resolution to consider project labor agreements on all projects valued at above $5 million.
Vogeli said this cracks open the ability to create a template to have at-the-ready.
The city doesn’t have one, and city attorneys said they’d have to hire outside legal experts to craft one tailored to Everett’s needs.
Fosse, in an interview, said the city’s template could already have been readied after that 2019 resolution passed.
Members of the group that worked on the ordinance say that while the resolution asks to consider a project labor agreement, the city hasn’t chosen to utilize any so far.
Fosse said the reason a mandate was put forward is to give the resolution “teeth” to ensure project labor agreements are put into use.
“It’s frustrating, this would have been a very good policy for our city,” Fosse said.
Rhyne said in a statement that "though I am disappointed in the Mayor’s decision, I respect her decision and appreciate that she has provided a path forward towards legislation that builds upon previous efforts. Everett’s foundation is as a working-class union-friendly city and I am supportive of any efforts to protect workers through fair pay and safe working conditions."
Group members said Franklin was given invitations to the stakeholder meetings. Fosse said the group tried addressing concerns at the city administration level by making amendments to the ordinance before the final push.
Supporters say outlining the ground rules ahead of a project prevents strikes and ensures laborers are classified correctly as employees with paid benefits. Opponents say the added layer of monitoring the contractor that they are complying
with the agreement and involving union labor increases costs for contractors that increase overall project costs.
Studies the city quoted state project costs would increase by around 12% if project labor agreements are in place. Supporters inspected the sources and said they are biased against the labor industry.
Fosse said a project labor agreement’s impact is the opposite, because it cuts the risks of labor strikes and avoids project delays.
“I have faith that workers rights will prevail and that PLAs are, in fact, in the public interest,” Vogeli wrote.
Only Washington state cities larger than Everett, such as Seattle, and agencies such as Sound Transit require project labor agreements.
City spokeswoman Simone Tarver said Franklin was not available for interview about the veto.
