Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 21

From: Denis Drew <ddrew2u@sbcglobal.

Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 11:06 AM
To: Cook, Brigitte
Subject:"DISCOUNT" effect stabilizes minimum wage employment

On the bottom end of the wage scale we may find a "DISCOUNT wage
effect": wherein weak bargaining power leaves wages below -- in the
American labor market probably far below -- what consumers would have
been willing to pay: meaning that todays consumers are getting a probably
hugely serious -- bargain.

On the other end of the wage scale we may find examples of a "PREMIUM
wage effect": where consumers are pressured by market conditions to pay
much more than the seller would have been willing to accept had there been
sufficient competition or whatever: meaning consumers are getting a --
possibly hugely serious -- skinning.

If a deeply discounted minimum wage is raised to a still deeply discounted
level -- in Obama's case ...

... nearly a dollar below LBJ's 1968 minimum wage ...
... almost double the per capita income later (!) ...
... (dragged out over three years; agh!!!) ...

... I think consumers are much more likely to drop some spending on premium
wage products (where they are still being skinned) to continue purchasing
DISCOUNTED wage products which are still very much comparative

All these fancy words mean that we do not buy more ice cream cones and
jeans just because the minimum wage is too low neither are we likely to buy
less of same should the wage go up within reason: we are likely to spend less
at Nordstroms so we can maintain our level at Target.

Even if today's $7.25 federal minimum were doubled to $15, consumers still
end up paying only as much as they would probably have been willing to pay
all along leaving minimum wage products still a COMPARATIVE bargain
against PREMIUM wage made products.

Never forget seems de rigueur for all to forget that labor costs represent
only a small fraction of ultimate price tag as low as 7% with Wal-Mart even
if sales drop a bit, poverty incomes can soar everybody seems to serially
forget this.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
When I was a gypsy cab driver in the Bronx, back in the late 1970s, the citys
yellow cabs raised their meters and we raised ours in step. Most drivers
agreed this did not hurt business. I also heard from veteran drivers that the
previous meter raise did cost business (I was new having finally gotten my
drivers license at age 32).

In any market, selling anything, you never know for sure what the customer
will pay until you test. Does this chart below look like the federal minimum
wage has been much tested OVER MULTIPLE GENERATIONS!!!?

Dbl-index is for inflation and per capita income.

yr..per capitarealnominaldbl-index%-of

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I almost forgot: ... :-) ...
There is a growing consensus is that the economy may be permanently
slowing down (economists dub this "secular stagnation" as opposed to
cyclical). Progressives see DEMAND -- and therefore EMPLOYMENT --
stalled because of too much income squeezed out of the pockets of
Americans who spend a lot more than save ...

... meaning that raising the minimum wage doubling it if we want any
noticeable effect on the economy or poverty; not, not quite catching up with
1968 -- should be a sure fire way to bring down unemployment.

Denis Drew

From: Denis Drew <ddrew2u@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 11:25 AM
To: Cook, Brigitte
Subject:Double the minmum wage -- and raise demand -- smoke and mirrors or
eighth-grade math?

Progressive economists should readily admit -- shout, scream --
that a moderate federal wage increase, typically 10% cited in
conservative studies, should indeed have little or no effect on
poverty rates. Why would an extra 1/4 of one percent of GDP
added to low wage pay checks be expected to clear a broad
swath through poverty? That is what a $1 an hour increase in
the federal minimum wage equates to -- about $40 billion out of
a $16 trillion economy. (E.I.T.C. shifts $55 billion.)
A $15 an hour minimum wage OTH would send about 3.5% of
GDP the way of 45% of American workers -- about $560 billion
(much of it to bottom 20 percentile incomes who today take only
2% of overall income).
* * * * * *
Could raising the wages of 45% of the workforce actually raise
demand for the goods and services they produce? Sounds
sensible at some level; raising wages so much ought to add
demand somewhere but, is it all smoke and
mirrors? Before the 45% -- who would get a wage hike to $15
an hour -- can raise demand anywhere, they would need to get
the extra cash from somewhere else meaning the
55%. (Bottom 45 percentile incomes not wages currently
take 10% of overall income so, at no time are we talking
giant chunks of the economy here.)
The 45% can get higher pay even as "numerical" (to coin a
phrase?) demand for their output declines due to higher prices --
as long as labor gets an bigger enough slice of the new price
tags. This can be compared to a leveraged buyout or buying
stocks on margin.
Products produced by low-wage labor tend to be staples whose
demand tends to be inelastic. Demand for food is inelastic
maybe even fast food. If the price of your Saturday family jaunt
to McDonald's rises from $24 to $30, are you really going to eat
at home (the kiddies haven't forgotten the fundamental theorem
of economics: money grows on trees :-])? And fast food should
be the most worrisome example: lowest wages to start with;
even so, highest labor costs, 25%.
Wal-Mart is the lowest price raising example (surprise) with 7%
labor costs. Jump Wal-Mart pay 50% and its prices go up all of
If low wage labor costs average 15% across the board and go up
50%, overall prices increase only 7.5% -- and that is for low
wage made products only; nobody's car note, mortgage payment
or health premium is affected. If demand drops just enough for
price increases to maintain the same gross receipts
(conservative, even without inelasticity), low wage income
should improve appreciably.
Allow me to cite: from a 1/ll/14, NYT article "The Vicious
Circle of Income Inequality" by Professor Robert H. Frank of
higher incomes of top earners have been shifting consumer
demand in favor of goods whose value stems from the talents of
other top earners. as the rich get richer, the talented people
they patronize get richer, too. Their spending, in turn, increases
the incomes of other elite practitioners, and so on.
The same species of wheels-within-wheels multiplier ought to
work the at both ends of the income spectrum -- and likely in the
middle. A minimum wage raise to $15 an hour is not going to
send most low-wage earners in pursuit of upper end autos, extra
bedrooms or gold seal medical plans. Wal-Mart and Mickey D's
should do just fine, OTH which in turn should keep Wal-Mart
and Mickey D's doing even better.
* * * * * *
Did I forget to mention ? The poverty line that a
"moderate" minimum wage could not help anybody cross -
- $20,000 for a family of three is only about half as high
a hurdle as a realistically worked out minimum needs line
should be. .
A practical line would be more like $40,000 a
year. Todays official federal formula is an early 1960s
creation: multiplying the price of an emergency diet by
three (dried beans only, please; no expensive canned)
no current basket of goods. For a reasonable basket of
goods consult page, 44, of the, 2001 (2008), MS
Foundation book Raise the Floor.
So, a so-called "moderate" increase in the minimum wage
will not even clear a half-height hurdle.
Final thought: Why does everyone obsess so over the
"hazards" of raising one price in our economy -- low wage
labor's. Nobody shudders when the Teamster Union
raises its price. It is not like the price of low wage labor
has been habitually tested against market willingness to
pay and been barely holding its own. It is more -- it is
exactly -- like the price of low wage labor has sunk further
and further below market willingness -- precisely for lack of
testing -- as the ability to pay has grown and grown -- for
almost half a century now. To see, click my everything-
adjusted-for-everything minimum wage history chart.

Denis Drew

From: McElhaney, Lynette
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2014 3:24 PM
To: Cook, Brigitte (BCook@oaklandnet.com)
Subject:FW: BBBON General Assembly is Thurs., Feb. 13

Councilmember Lynette Gibson McElhaney
Representing the Heart & Soul of the City
Oakland District 3 |1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 2nd Floor | Oakland, CA 94612
Phone: (510) 238-7003 Fax: (510) 238-6910

Sign up for our message board at: D3 West & North Oakland Yahoo Group, D3 East of 980 Yahoo Group,
Connect with us: Twitter: @LynetteGM Facebook/Lynette2012

From: Marilyn Bechtel Becchetti [mailto:mbec@mindspring.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 3:09 PM
To: steve@urbanspace.biz; jmembrey8@gmail.com; chiquita949@hotmail.com;
sammywillis24@yahoo.com; cynthiajuswanna@gmail.com; fwbroadway@yahoo.com;
sammcneal@gmail.com; Ssuafaiwojrc@gmail.com; jguywojrc@gmail.com; shanmhirsch@yahoo.com;
floydhuenoakland@gmail.com; coracatangay@yahoo.com; svswval@aol.com; montgomery953@att.net;
jamesevann@aol.com; rehher123@gmail.com; alex@millercole.com; lloydlava@gmail.com;
dmuhammad@gmail.com; saturo100@gmail.com; mercedesmsr@att.net; irisjc@att.net;
mmontague@epmi-co.com; beactive13@hotmail.com; rlewis6845@yahoo.com;
waterfrontworker@comcast.net; fawatson@live.com; brucds@pacbell.net; donna.murphy30@yahoo.com;
desnyderus@yahoo.com; joseduarte1965@hotmail.com; susanflakus@hotmail.com; naomi@17th.com;
danielmason327@comcast.net; belcherjudy@aol.com; jakienelson@juno.com;
josecartagena@comcast.net; rodney.brooks@acgov.org; mina.sanchez@acgov.org; Cook, Brigitte;
kcarson@acgov.org; McElhaney, Lynette
Subject: BBBON General Assembly is Thurs., Feb. 13

Hi, all - the BBBON General Assembly is this Thurs., Feb. 13. See details below. Hope you can be there!
Februrary Combined GA and Steering Commitee Meeting Thursday Frebruary 13 ILWU Local 6 Hegenberger at Pardee
Doors open at 5:30 for a community p

Web Version


Februrary Combined GA and Steering
Commitee Meeting
Thursday Frebruary 13
ILWU Local 6
Hegenberger at Pardee
Doors open at 5:30 for a community pot luck. Meeting convenes at 6:30.

The next meeting will focus on a review of our recent efforts and a re-evaluation of the
governance of our organization in light of the upcoming city and school board
elections. This meeting will combine the monthly general assembly with a steering
committee meeting. All are welcome to participate.

I. Approval of agenda and minutes
* Approval of the BBBON Logo
* Jan 9 Forum on Sexually Exploited Minors / Follow-up, next steps
* Jan 15 Foothill Square Job Fair / Follow-up, next steps
* Jan 20 D7 Cleanup at 88th/G St / Follow-up, next steps
* BBBON Election Endorsement plans
* Request for endorsement of Oakland Minimum Wage Increase (Lift Up Oakland)
* Plans for future combined Steering Committee / GA meetings
IV. Committee Reports
V. Announcements
If you have problems receiving or viewing this email, report the problem to tech@bbbon.net
2014 Block by Block Organizing Network | 2624 Fruitvale Ave, Oakland, CA 94601


Powered by Mad Mimi

From: Marilyn Bechtel Becchetti [mailto:mbec@mindspring.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 10:30 AM
To: steve@urbanspace.biz; jmembrey8@gmail.com; chiquita949@hotmail.com;
sammywillis24@yahoo.com; cynthiajuswanna@gmail.com; fwbroadway@yahoo.com;
sammcneal@gmail.com; Ssuafaiwojrc@gmail.com; jguywojrc@gmail.com; ellenwpark123@aol.com;
Badelle, Brett; shanmhirsch@yahoo.com; floydhuenoakland@gmail.com; coracatangay@yahoo.com;
svswval@aol.com; montgomery953@att.net; jamesevann@aol.com; rehher123@gmail.com;
alex@millercole.com; lloydlava@gmail.com; dmuhammad@gmail.com; saturo100@gmail.com;
mercedesmsr@att.net; irisjc@att.net; mmontague@epmi-co.com; beactive13@hotmail.com;
rlewis6845@yahoo.com; waterfrontworker@comcast.net; fawatson@live.com; brucds@pacbell.net;
donna.murphy30@yahoo.com; desnyderus@yahoo.com; joseduarte1965@hotmail.com;
susanflakus@hotmail.com; naomi@17th.com; danielmason327@comcast.net; belcherjudy@aol.com;
jakienelson@juno.com; josecartagena@comcast.net; rodney.brooks@acgov.org;
mina.sanchez@acgov.org; Cook, Brigitte; kcarson@acgov.org; McElhaney, Lynette
Subject: Fw: BBBON March 13th GA: Mayoral endorsement and minimum wage initiative forum

Hello, all -
BBBON's March General Assembly will be held Thurs., March 13 at the North Oakland Senior Center.
Please see details, below.
Take care, Marilyn
-----Forwarded Message-----
From: Block by Block Organizing Network
Sent: Mar 5, 2014 10:32 PM
To: Marilyn Bechtel-Becchetti
Subject: BBBON March 13th GA: Mayoral endorsement and minimum wage initiative forum

Mayoral Endorsement and Oakland Minimum Wage Increase Forum Thursday, March 13th North Oakland Senior Center
5714 Martin Luther King Jr. Way (secu

Mayoral Endorsement and Oakland Minimum
Wage Increase Forum
Thursday, March 13th
North Oakland Senior Center
5714 Martin Luther King Jr. Way
(secure parking in rear)
5:30 pm: Pot Luck and social hour (please bring your tasty bites)
Steering Committee meets until 7 pm (members are welcome to join the conversation)
7 pm General Assembly
Endorsement of a Mayoral Candidate
A proposal to endorse Mayor Quan will be presented.
Only those who are members in good standing will be able to vote.
Those who have been members, but who have not paid their 2014 dues will become in
good standing once their dues are paid at the door.
Those who wish to become new members prior to the meeting are welcome to fill out a
membership form by Sunday, March 9th by following this link: Membership form
[NOTE: You may have to download the form in order to use the online fill-in and
submission features.] Those who have submitted forms by March 9th will become
members in good standing when they pay their dues at the door. Annual dues are $25
($1 for students).
The Lift Up Oakland Initiative
There will be a panel discussion concerning the Increasing the Minimum Wage in
Oakland ballot initiative.
Panelists will include representatives from the Lift Up Oakland campaign and
representatives from Oakland small business who will express their positions both pro
and con.

2014 Block by Block Organizing Network | 2624 Fruitvale Ave, Oakland, CA 94601

From: Bedford, Sara
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 6:15 PM
To: Clemons, Estelle; 'Andrea Ford'; 'Angelica Gums'; 'Chirs Miley'; Cook, Brigitte; 'David Muellenhoff';
Gallo, Noel; 'Gladys Green'; 'Jacquee Castain'; 'Janet Rice'; 'John Butchart'; McElhaney, Lynette; 'Michelle
Duong-Thi'; 'Monique Rivera'; 'Nate Miley'; Ordaz, Karely; 'Patrick Forte'; Quan, Jean; Reid, Larry;
'Richard Valle'; 'Sandra Johnson'; 'Sean Sullivan'; 'Stanley Richardson'; 'Susan Hayes-Smith'; 'Thereda
Cc: Amaro, Barbara; Ongoco, Kristian; Garcia, Cecilia
Subject: RE: California Minimum Wage Raised to $10

About time! Hurray!!!

From: Clemons, Estelle
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 5:09 PM
To: Andrea Ford; Angelica Gums; Chirs Miley; Cook, Brigitte; David Muellenhoff; Gallo, Noel; Gladys
Green; Jacquee Castain; Janet Rice; John Butchart; McElhaney, Lynette; Michelle Duong-Thi; Monique
Rivera; Nate Miley; Ordaz, Karely; Patrick Forte; Quan, Jean; Reid, Larry; Richard Valle; Sandra Johnson;
Sean Sullivan; Stanley Richardson; Susan Hayes-Smith; Thereda Anderson
Cc: Amaro, Barbara; Ongoco, Kristian; Garcia, Cecilia; Bedford, Sara
Subject: California Minimum Wage Raised to $10

Governor Brown signs Minimum Wage Bill

Here's an excerpt from the Governor's press release:

OAKLAND - Acting to help California's working families, Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. today
signed AB 10 by Assemblymember Luis Alejo (D-Salinas), which will raise the minimum wage in
California from $8.00 per hour to $10.00 per hour.

"It's a special day to stand with workers who are laboring for all of us and laboring at a very low
wage. Turning that wage into a $10 an hour wage is a wonderful thing," said Governor Brown
prior to signing AB 10 in Los Angeles. "It's my goal and it's my moral responsibility to do what I
can to make our society more harmonious, to make our social fabric tighter and closer and to
work toward a solidarity that every day appears to become more distant."
AB 10 will raise California's minimum wage in two one-dollar increments, from $8 per hour today
to $9 per hour, effective July 1, 2014 and from $9 per hour to $10 per hour, effective January 1,

Estelle Clemons
Alameda County - Oakland Community Action Partnership
150 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Ste. 4340, Oakland, CA 94612
Phone: 510-238-3597 Fax: 510-238-2367

"Helping People...Changing Lives"

From: Jack Gerard, API [mailto:Jack_Gerard_API@mail.vresp.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2014 7:44 AM
To: McElhaney, Lynette
Subject: Energy Solutions for the Economy

Click to view this email in a browser

February 5, 2014

The Truth on Oil and Natural Gas 'Subsidies'The oil and natural gas industry contributes an average $85 million a day in
revenue to the federal government. Learn how the presidents misguided proposal to deny the industrys ability to use
common cost-recovery mechanisms could jeopardize production and jobs. Follow our Blog to stay up-to-date To stay
up-to-date on the latest energy-related news, there is no better place to check than the Energy Tomorrow Blog.

Energy Solutions for the Economy

Dear Lynette,

In his State of the Union address, President Obama prominently spotlighted the benefits of Americas energy revolution,
noting that one of the biggest factors in bringing more jobs back is our commitment to American energy and pointing
out that America is closer to energy independence than we have been in decades.

With the right policy choices, the U.S. oil and natural gas industry can play a leading role in addressing the most pressing
priorities on the presidents 2014 agenda. Job creation: The industry added 600,000 jobs between 2009 and 2011 for a
total of 9.8 million jobs supported. Congress and the White House can support more job growth through the following
* Increase access to domestic oil and natural gas resources, particularly offshore = 1.1 million new jobs within 10
* Expand exports of domestic liquefied natural gas (LNG) = Up to 452,000 jobs between 2016 and 2035
* Support shale energy developed through hydraulic fracturing = 3.9 million jobs by 2025, including 500,000
manufacturing jobs

Income inequality: While the president urges businesses to raise employee salaries, the oil and natural gas industry is a
reliable creator of well-paying jobs:
* The average oil and natural gas sector wage is about $12,000 above the national average
* The average job in the industrys upstream (pre-refining) segment pays roughly seven times the federal
minimum wage
* Jobs directly related to refining have an average annual income of more than $111,500

Infrastructure development: The oil and natural gas sector has invested over $2 trillion in U.S. capital projects since 2000
to advance all forms of energy, including alternatives. Removing obstacles to energy infrastructure projects can grow the
economy without spending a dime of taxpayer money:
* Approve the Keystone XL pipeline = 42,000 jobs supported during the construction phase, plus 500,000 overall
U.S. jobs and $775 billion in GDP growth from increased development of Canadian oil sands
* Update the energy transportation network to accommodate increased production = 1.15 million jobs, $27.5
billion in government revenue, and $120 billion in economic growth on an average annual basis over the next 11 years,
according to a new study from HIS Starting with approving the Keystone XL pipeline, which passed its fifth
environmental review last week, President Obama can begin turning these potential jobs into reality right away.


Jack Gerard
President and CEO

From: U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders [mailto:bounce@bounce.myngp.com] On Behalf Of U.S.
Senator Bernie Sanders
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 8:09 AM
To: McElhaney, Lynette
Subject: NO to the Koch brothers, NO to oligarchy

Councilmember Lynett,

Thank you so much for the support that, over the years, you have given me. As Vermont's senator and the longest
serving Independent in American congressional history I am helping to lead the fight in Congress to protect the
middle class and working families of our country against the greed and recklessness of Big Money interests. In that
struggle you have been with me step by step, battle after battle - and I appreciate all that you have done.

In the midst of the most severe economic and political crisis in the modern history of our country, I am once again
writing to ask for your political and financial support.

The unprecedented struggle that we're engaged in now against the Billionaire Class is not just about preserving
Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, or whether we create the millions of jobs our economy desperately
needs. It's not merely about whether we raise the minimum wage, make college affordable, protect women's rights
or take the bold initiatives we need to reverse climate change and save our planet. It's not just about creating a
health care system which guarantees health care to all as a right, or addressing the abysmally high rate of
childhood poverty.


I know that some of you think I am exaggerating when I say that. I'm not.

In my view, there are now three major political forces in this country. The Democratic Party, the
Republican Party and the Koch brothers led Billionaire Party. As a result of the disastrous Citizens United
Supreme Court ruling which regards corporations as people and allows the super-rich to spend as much
as they want on elections, the Billionaire Party (aligned with the Republicans) is now the major political
force in the country.

Please support our efforts today to counter the unlimited resources of the Koch brothers and their right-
wing allies.

The Koch brothers, worth $80 billion dollars, are the second wealthiest family in America. Working with other
billionaires like Sheldon Adelson, the Kochs are prepared to spend an UNLIMITED sum of money to create an
America shaped by their right-wing views. And I mean UNLIMITED. Last year, according to Forbes Magazine, the
Koch brothers fortune INCREASED by $12 billion dollars, while the fortune of Sheldon Adelson INCREASED by
$11 billion. In one year! In other words, a handful of self-serving right-wing multi-billionaires have the
capability of spending more money on the political process than everyone else combined (the Obama
campaign spent one billion in 2012) and they will still be far better off financially than the preceding year.

It is also important to understand the nature of their spending. While they are obviously putting huge sums of
money into elections (much of it hidden from public scrutiny), political consultants and lobbyists, their influence
goes far beyond political campaigns or congressional policy. Incredibly, and not widely known, is the reality that
they have created or supported organizations active in almost every area of public life -- the law, education, health
care, economics, academia, the environment and climate change, state legislative initiatives, media and veterans
needs. In other words, they are spending billions not only to win elections and legislative victories today, but to
aggressively shape public consciousness to bring about the extreme right-wing society they wish to see. It is also
likely that, in years to come, they will move to influence public opinion through direct media ownership. Last year,
for example, the Koch brothers gave serious thought to buying the Chicago Tribune Media Company.

What is it that the Koch Brothers and these other billionaires want? What are their goals?

Short term, they want to repeal or eviscerate every major piece of legislation passed in the last 80 years which
protects the interests of working families, the elderly, the children, the sick and the poor. This means, among other
programs, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, public education, the right of workers to organize, worker safety,
unemployment benefits, nutrition programs and the United States Postal Service. Incredibly, they not only oppose
raising the minimum wage, they want to abolish the CONCEPT of the minimum wage so that employers can hire
workers for $3 an hour. They also want to dismantle virtually all agencies of government which work to protect the
environment and clean air, clean water and safe food. Needless to say, they also believe in a regressive tax
system in which the wealthy and large corporations pay even less than they pay today.

Long term, their economic goal is to create a right-wing extremist "free" economy in which working people
have virtually no rights or protections. It is not only ideology that motivates them. They want to make sure that
more and more of our nation's wealth will come to rest in the hands of the richest 1/10th of 1% of Americans. They
want to make certain that they keep their billions and increase those billions, so that the rich not only stay rich but
become even richer. They want a radical redistribution of wealth away from the middle class, the elderly,
children and working families -- and into the financial holdings of the Billionaire Class.

We must not let that happen! Please contribute today to ensure we have the resources to counter the
Billionaire Class and their radical agenda.

Politically, they want an electoral system in which the super-rich buy elections while, at the same time, fewer low-
income and working people are able to vote. For the Billionaire Class, "democracy" is simply an extension of their
economic power. Today, they own much of the economy. Now, they want to own the government. Clearly, part of
their insidious agenda is to make it harder for low-income and working families to vote and participate in the political
process through the establishment of restrictive voting regulations.

That is their agenda and, if the truth be told, they are making huge gains. Ideas that used to be thought crazy are
now echoed daily by senators, members of Congress and governors all across the country.

Given the current reality, how do we fight back effectively? How do we create the kind of politics that we need so
that government is responsive to all the people, and not just the top 1%?

How do we combat the enormous level of political discouragement and alienation that tens of millions of Americans
now feel? How do we get the millions of low-income and working people who no longer vote to stand up for their

How do we disseminate information and ideas which deal with the real issues facing the collapsing middle class,
rather than depend upon the insipid corporate media which looks at politics as another version of a reality game
show like American Idol?

Fighting back effectively -- educating and organizing -- is not easy, but the economic, political and
environmental crises we face are so huge that, from a moral perspective, we cannot turn our backs on
them. This struggle is not just for us. It is for our kids and grandchildren. It is for the survival of the

Clearly, if we are going to be successful, we need a vision that speaks to the needs and the hopes of the vast
majority of the American people. We need to change the political dynamics of the nation and develop mechanisms
for grass-roots citizen involvement. We can no longer allow the billionaires and their think tanks or the corporate
media to set the agenda. We need to educate, organize and mobilize the working families of our country to stand
up for their rights. Here are some of the issues that have to be discussed:

WEALTH AND INCOME INEQUALITY: A nation will not survive morally or economically when so few have so
much, while so many have so little. As millions of Americans struggle to survive economically, the wealthiest people
are doing phenomenally well and corporate profits are at an all-time high. Meanwhile, we have the highest rate of
childhood poverty in the industrialized world, and more people living in poverty than ever before.

Today, the United States has more income and wealth inequality than any other major country on earth. It is simply
not acceptable that the top 1% owns 38% of the financial wealth of the nation, while the bottom 60% owns all of
2.3%. It is not acceptable that one family, the Waltons, own more wealth than the bottom 40% of all
Americans. Economic growth means little when, in recent years, 95% of all new income goes to the top 1%. We
need to establish a progressive tax system which asks the wealthy to start paying their fair share of taxes, and
which ends the outrageous loopholes that enable one out of four corporations to pay nothing in federal income

JOBS: Real unemployment today (counting those who are under-employed or who have given up looking for work)
is not 6.8%, it is almost 13%. Youth unemployment is 20%, and most of the new jobs being created are part-time
and low-wage. We need to make significant investments in our crumbling infrastructure, in energy efficiency and
sustainable energy, in early childhood education and in affordable housing. When we do that, we not only improve
the quality of life in our country, we also create millions of decent-paying new jobs. We also need a trade policy
which creates jobs in this country, not China.

WAGES: Median family income has fallen by $5,000 since 1999. We need to raise the minimum wage to a living
wage. We should pass legislation, which will soon be voted on in Congress, to increase the federal minimum wage
from $7.25 an hour to $10.10 an hour, but that is not enough: we must raise that minimum wage even higher in the
coming years. We also need to expand our efforts at worker-ownership. Employees will not be sending their jobs to
China or Vietnam when they own the places in which they work.

EDUCATION: From child care and pre-school education, to elementary school, high school and college, we need
major reform. There was a time, not so many years ago, when the United States was the best educated nation on
earth. Not today. Now, we lag far behind many other countries in areas ranging from quality child care to the
percentage of our people graduating college. Every person in this country is entitled to high quality education,
regardless of income. In a highly competitive global economy, it is insane that we are wasting the intellectual
capabilities of millions of our people.

CLIMATE CHANGE: The debate is over. The scientific community has been very clear: Global warming is real, it
is caused by human activity, it is already causing massive problems and, if we don't significantly reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, the planet we leave to our kids and grandchildren will be less and less habitable. The
United States must lead the world in undertaking a massive effort to transform our energy system by moving away
from fossil fuels to energy efficiency and sustainable energy. When we do that, we not only begin the process of
reversing climate change, but we create millions of new jobs.

RETIREMENT SECURITY: At a time when only one in five workers in the private sector have a defined benefit
pension plan; half of Americans have less than $10,000 in savings; and two-thirds of seniors rely on Social Security
for more than half of their income, we must protect and expand Social Security so that every American can retire
with dignity. An immediate first step is lifting the cap on taxable income, now at $117,000 that goes into the Social
Security Trust Fund. If we take that modest step, we can assure the viability of Social Security for many decades to
come and increase the benefits paid by the most successful social program in American history.

WALL STREET: During the financial crisis, huge Wall Street banks received more than $700 billion in financial aid
from the Treasury Department and more than $16 trillion from the Federal Reserve because they were "too big to
fail." Yet today, the largest banks in this country are much bigger than they were before taxpayers bailed them out.
The top six banks today have over $9 trillion in assets, equivalent to 58% of the GDP of the United States. Further,
they write half of the mortgages and two-thirds of the credit cards. From both a "too big to fail perspective" as well
as the problems associated with Wall Street's dangerous economic power, it's time to break up these behemoths.
The financial industry must serve and invest in our economy. It cannot simply be an island unto itself, generating
huge profits through speculation and fraudulent financial transactions.

And it's imperative that our judicial system vigorously pursue the crooks on Wall Street who have engaged in illegal

CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM: We are not living in a real democracy when large corporations and a handful of
billionaire families can spend unlimited sums of money to elect or defeat candidates. We must pass a constitutional
amendment to overturn the disastrous Citizens United Supreme Court decision. Further, we must move this
country to public funding of elections. Candidates should be elected based on their ideas, not their personal wealth
or their ability to raise huge sums of money.

CIVIL LIBERTIES: Frankly, the National Security Agency (NSA) and other intelligence agencies are out of control.
We cannot talk about America as a "free country" when the government is collecting information on virtually every
phone call we make, when it is intercepting our emails and monitoring the websites we visit. Clearly, we need to
protect this nation from terrorism, but we must do it in a way that does not undermine our constitutional rights.

WAR AND PEACE: With a large deficit and enormous unmet needs, it is absurd that the United States continues to
spend almost as much on defense as the rest of the world combined. The U.S. must be a leader in the world in
nuclear disarmament and efforts toward peace, not in the sale of weapons of destruction.

SOCIAL JUSTICE: While we have made progress in recent years in combatting discrimination and expanding the
rights of minorities, women and gays, these advances are under constant attack from the right-wing. If the United
States is to become the non-discriminatory society we want it to be, we must fight to protect the rights of all
Americans. We must also pass strong and fair immigration legislation.

Brothers and sisters: We are at a pivotal moment in American history and success is by no means
guaranteed. The challenge is simple. Can we rally the American people around a progressive agenda which
represents the needs of the vast majority of our people? Or, will the Billionaire Class, with their unlimited
resources, succeed in imposing their extreme right-wing ideology on the nation?

Please work with me so that, together, we can build a strong grass-roots movement.

Please help me elect progressive candidates at the local, state and national level.

Please contribute to Friends of Bernie Sanders.


Senator Bernie Sanders

From: Gerard, Jennie
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 12:18 PM
To: DL - City Council
Subject: FW: President Obama's State of the Union Address Summary

Jennie Gerard, Chief of Staff
Oakland City Council President Patricia Kernighan
District 2 Councilmember
510.238.7023 (direct)
510.238.7002 (District Office)

In the office Monday - Thursday

From: Niccolo De Luca [mailto:ndeluca@townsendpa.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 11:32 AM
To: Quan, Jean; Everhart, Maisha; Kernighan, Pat; Gerard, Jennie; Lin, Sarah D2; Santana, Deanna;
Blackwell, Fred; Orologas, Alexandra; Hom, Donna
Cc: Bryan Lanza; Cindy Boyd
Subject: President Obama's State of the Union Address Summary

Team Oakland,

As you know, last night President Obama gave his State of the Union address and focused largely on middle class
economic concerns. He also announced his intent to take action through executive order as needed to accomplish his
priorities that focus on American families. One of these executive orders was announced earlier in the day and will raise
minimum wage for federal contract workers to $10.10 per hour. Another is to bring high-speed Internet access to 99
percent of schools within five year.

The President touched on job creation and fairness, modernization of critical infrastructure and schools, Medicare
reform, education enhancements that keep America competitive, immigration reform, trade agreements that would
boost the economy, and gun laws to reduce violence.

The president announced the launch of three new manufacturing hubs, where businesses will partner with the
Department of Defense and Energy. The newest, in Raleigh, NC, was announced on January 15th, work continues on
selecting additional hubs. He encouraged the passage of a Paycheck Protection Act to guarantee equal pay for equal
work, and he proposed that the federal minimum wage be raised to $9.00 per hour from the current $7.25. As noted
above, the president plans to increase minimum wage for workers on new federal contracts to $10.10 per hour by 2015.
Niccolo De Luca
Director of Northern California
Townsend Public Affairs, Inc.
300 Frank Ogawa Plaza, Suite 204, Oakland, CA 94610
O: 510-835-9050 M: 510-681-7306

From: Steven Pitts <spitts1@berkeley.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 10:31 AM
To: McElhaney, Lynette; Brian K Woodson; Cook, Brigitte; Farmer, Casey
Cc: Ellouise Patton; Ellouise Patton
Subject:Re: Information Supporting the Increase in Minimum Wage

LynetteHey! Hope you are well. I am dashing out the door, but I thought I would send you (and everyone)
the link to a new report. Today, the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment (IRLE; the Labor Center
is one center within IRLE) released a working paper, Local Minimum Wage Laws: Impacts on Workers,
Families, and Businesses.

Here is the link to the paper: http://irle.berkeley.edu/workingpapers/104-14.pdf. I think you and your staff
will find the paper interesting.
o Page 12 begins a section on the Demographics of affected workers
o Page 21 begins a subsection entitled Impact on which workers are hired
o Page 33 contains Figure 2 which illustrates the higher labor standards in SF did not change
the trajectory of restaurant employment compared to the trajectories of other Bay Area
By no means, does it address all of the concerns you raised in this e-mail, but I knew you wanted to stay
current on the research.

More later.


From: "McElhaney, Lynette" <lmcelhaney@oaklandnet.com>
Date: Wednesday, April 9, 2014 at 7:43 AM
To: Brian K Woodson <servantwoodson@workingeastbay.org>, "Cook, Brigitte"
<BCook@oaklandnet.com>, "Farmer, Casey" <CFarmer@oaklandnet.com>
Cc: Ellouise Patton <epatton@ufcw5.org>, Ellouise Patton <ellouisepatton@yahoo.com>, Steven Pitts
Subject: RE: Information Supporting the Increase in Minimum Wage


Thank you. I'll begin reviewing this information over the next few days. As I shared, I believe there is clear and
convincing evidence how raising the minimum wage globally produces positive impacts in our society. And, it is
wonderful to see fast food workers and others begin to organize. The negative and destructive antics of the
anarchists in Oakland notwithstanding, Occupy has helped shift the conversation on inequality for this generation.

What I have not seen is clear and convincing evidence that piecemeal city-by-city policies have the same effect or
impact. For example, did raising the min wage in San Francisco create better opportunities for workers in the
region? Certainly, SFs early mandates on healthcare and sick leave didn't shift anything for East Bay
workers. Unlike Oakland, SF is a virtual island - a large land base with limited transportation options for
mobility. This keeps its economy localized.

Currently Oakland is an economic doughnut hole in the East Bay with many of the prosperity waves passing us by
over numerous decades. It has long been known to "miss" the season of opportunity. Even now, construction
starts, retail, hotel, tech and office trail other Bay cities despite our geographic, weather and transportation
advantages. So, I am very much interested in understanding how this proposal would help encourage economic
growth or not further suppress economic opportunities.

The other question is how does this impact - if at all - the most difficult to employ residents of Oakland, especially
those in my District. What, if anything, is the correlation between education levels and job offers as wages
rise? Are employers more likely to hire more educated displaced workers as opposed to low-education entry level
workers? If there is displacement of some employer's (eg Pican), is there ample availability of new employers to
replace them or would Oakland be subject to more empty buildings?

I appreciate the opportunity to meet with you and Ellouise and look forward to our next conversation.

Best, Lynette

Councilmember Lynette Gibson McElhaney
Representing the Heart & Soul of the Town
Oakland District 3 |1 Frank Ogawa Plaza, 2nd Floor | Oakland, CA 94612
P: (510) 238-7003 F: (510) 238-6910

For Scheduling: Contact Brigitte Cook (510) 238-7245 or BCook@Oaklandnet.com

From: Brian K Woodson <servantwoodson@workingeastbay.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 3:57 PM
To: McElhaney, Lynette; Cook, Brigitte
Cc: Ellouise Patton; Ellouise Patton; Steven Pitts
Subject:Information Supporting the Increase in Minimum Wage
Attachments: All Economics Is Local_NYT_0322014.pdf; LUO East Bay Express 2-17-
14.docx; LUO SJ Merc -1 year for SJ mw 3-14 .docx; LUO_Measure
Summary.docx; Key Minimum wage points (1).docx

Dear CM McElhaney

Thank you for taking the meeting with Ellouise and me last evening. I am writing as promised to give you the information
we promised.

Attached to this email please find articles from the New York Times, Eastbay Express and the San Jose Mercury News as
well as a summary of the measure. I shared some of the concerns your office articulated with Steven Pitts. His response
is copied here:

About the minimum wage stuff, a couple of things:
1. I have some rough data on the number of workers impacted in Alameda County
2. The Labor Center is working on sharper numbers on the impact on workers in Oakland. I dont know
when those numbers will be ready
3. But those data wont answer the implicit question of how will firms respond to a higher minimum wage.
4. At its core, that question is NOT a question of city versus city within a county. The question is: will employment
levels change in the aggregate as firms change their behavior due a difference in labor costs (holding constant labor
quality) across a political boundary.
5. There has been immense study on this question by economists in recent years and overall, the conclusion is
the job loss impact doesnt exist or is very minimal and any negative impact of this minimal job loss is offset by the
higher wages received by workers
6. It might be good to look at the recent book edited by staff at the Labor Center and the Institute for Research on
Labor and Employment, When Mandates Work. The books chapters examine the various efforts to raise labor
standards (minimum wages; sick days; health care benefits) in San Francisco. (Incidentally, there will be a book event at
UC Hastings College of Law this Thursday at 5:30PM.)
7. And once again, the fact that San Francisco is a city and a county does not invalidate its conclusions, because firms
could have relocated to South San Francisco, Daly City, Marin, or Oakland in response to higher labor standards.
8. On another important issue, how to improve the economic well-being of residents/workers of disproportionately
disadvantaged communities, I would say several things:
a. Many minimum wage workers reside in these neighborhoods and they (and their communities) would immediately
benefit from the higher minimum wage
b. Beyond these workers, it is important to understand that the minimum wage policy is one tool in the tool box that
must be used. Just as we dont build a whole house with only a hammer/hammer gun/screw driver, we cannot build the
house without the hammer/hammer gun/screw driver.
c. Under the banner of Economic Growth with Equity & Dignity, policies to raise labor standards (sick days;
minimum wages; project labor agreements; fair contracting) and provide workers a collective voice and dignity
(unionization; whistle-blower protection; anti-discrimination) are necessary complements to policies designed to
develop a skilled workforce (education; job training), ensure equitable access to available jobs (local hire), expand local
business opportunities (small business support programs; race-conscious policies in a non-209 world), and strengthen
Oakland comparative advantage (Port of Oakland expansion)
d. Too often, our fractured politics results in pitting these policies against one another instead of seeing them as
complementary. (The hammer is THE essential tool in building the houseNo, the saw is THE essential tool in building
the house!) *BTW: that is another reason for PLAs, so the hammer union doesnt start to fight the saw union or the
paint brush union has a dispute with the paint company and nothing gets built!]

In closing; we exist in a moment where there is a potential paradigm shift. The working class has begun to struggle on its
own behalf after about thirty-four years of retreating. This shift will naturally be difficult for some and resisted by most.
Change, though constant is always difficult but progressive change that benefits the poor and powerless at the cost of
existing exploitative power can become divisive. You are a champion of the people. This is a fight for the people.

Peace to You and Yours.
Principle Clergy Organizer

From: Denis Drew [mailto:ddrew2u@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 11:45 AM
To: Farmer, Casey
Subject: Obama's activism -- "Activism?"

Obama's My Brothers Keeper initiative = $350 million programmed = 1/3 of one billion dollars = 1/48,000 of our $16
trillion GDP.

I have critiqued the E.I.T.C. as transferring a mere $55 BILLION dollars = 1/3 of 1% of GDP = not exactly going to turn
the world upside down (per person output grows over 1% a year most years!).

A $15 an hour federal minimum wage would transfer $560 billion dollars (average $8000 a year raise X 70 million
employees $15 is about the 45 percentile wage, but, 5% would get a full 16000 increase) = still only 3.5% of our $16
trillion GDP, but everyone could be earning at least $30,000.

PS. Not to worry; 45% of our workforce is not going to be laid off over a 3.5% price increase. Consumers will still need
what these employees produce. Also, there are good arguments that this is not a zero-sum game; that a large minimum
wage should actually raise employment (in our demand starved economy) all around. See (my stuff, of course :-]):


Denis Drew

From: Jennifer Webber <webberj@nwlink.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 12:05 PM
To: Cook, Brigitte
Cc: McElhaney, Lynette
Subject:Re: Invitation from Lift Up Oakland! for April 26

Brigitte -
Thank you. We look forward to continuing our conversation with Councilmember McElhaney.

On Apr 23, 2014, at 11:05 AM, Cook, Brigitte wrote:

Hi Jennifer,

I left you a voicemail as well that Councilmember McElhaney has a prior commitment scheduled for this Saturday
morning and will not be able to attend the meeting. She did get an opportunity to meet with members of the coalition
and received an in depth briefing about the initiative.
Brigitte Cook, Community Liaison\Scheduler

From: Jennifer Webber [mailto:webberj@nwlink.com]
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2014 4:51 PM
To: Cook, Brigitte
Subject: Invitation from Lift Up Oakland! for April 26

Brigitte - Note and invitation below.
Thank you!

Councilmember McElhaney -
We realize you are meeting with representatives of our coalition, but wanted to extend this invitation given the
somewhat short notice. We do hope you consider attending.


Councilmember McElhaney -
Lift Up Oakland is a coalition of community members, workers, faith leaders, small business owners and students.
Together, we believe that we have to lift up our lowest paid workers to lift up our community. We are circulating an
initiative in Oakland to place a measure on the November 2014 ballot that:
Establishes a minimum wage of $12.25 an hour with annual cost of living increases
Sets a base of 5 or 9 paid sick days provided by the businesses, depending on their size
Requires that the service fees hospitality employers charge go to the workers who provide the services

Next Saturday, April 26, we are holding a volunteer mobilization to continue gathering signatures of Oakland voters for
our initiative. We invite you to join us and to sign our petition to place this measure on the ballot. We will gather at SEIU
1021s offices at 100 Oak Street at 9:30 AM to recognize and train volunteers before we go out into the community to
gather signatures. Please join us as we mark the halfway point of our signature gathering efforts. RSVP to
info@liftupoakland.org or by calling Jennifer Webber at 415-608-6223.

Thank you, and we look forward to seeing you next Saturday.
The Lift Up Oakland Coalition

From: Nikki Fortunato Bas <nikki@workingeastbay.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2014 9:42 AM
To: Brian K Woodson
Cc: Ellouise Patton; Cook, Brigitte; McElhaney, Lynette; Kristi Laughlin
Subject:Re: meeting request - Oakland minimum wage measure

Dear Brigitte,

We'd like to confirm Monday, April 7, 2014 5:00 6:00pm.

Thank you.


On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 6:52 AM, Brian K. Woodson <bkwoodsonsr@hotmail.com> wrote:
I am available Monday evening April 7. 5:00 - 6:00


From: epatton@ufcw5.org
To: BCook@oaklandnet.com; bkwoodsonsr@hotmail.com; nikki@workingeastbay.org;
CC: kristi@workingeastbay.org

Subject: RE: meeting request - Oakland minimum wage measure
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 00:27:06 -0700

I am available both dates and times.

Ellouise Patton
Special Projects
Regional Political and Community Coordinator
UFCW Local 5
Union Square Office
323 Geary Street, Suite 709
San Francisco, CA 94102
Office: (415) 693-0143
Cell: (415) 525-0959

From: Cook, Brigitte [mailto:BCook@oaklandnet.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:57 PM
To: Brian K. Woodson; Nikki Bas; McElhaney, Lynette
Cc: Ellouise Patton; Kristi Laughlin
Subject: RE: meeting request - Oakland minimum wage measure

Hello All,

Here are some available meeting dates. Please let me know if these work for you or if you would like to see other

Thursday, April 3, 2014 7:30 8:30pm
Monday, April 7, 2014 5:00 6:00pm

Brigitte Cook, Community Liaison

From: Brian K. Woodson [mailto:bkwoodsonsr@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:47 PM
To: Nikki Bas; McElhaney, Lynette
Cc: Cook, Brigitte; Ellouise Patton; Kristi Laughlin
Subject: RE: meeting request - Oakland minimum wage measure

Dear Councilmember McElhaney

I will certainly do all I can to accommodate your schedule. Please let us know as soon as you can.
Please note that the best address to reach me is now: servantwoodson@workingeastbay.org

I look forward to hearing from your office.


From: nikki@workingeastbay.org
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 16:12:18 -0700
Subject: Re: meeting request - Oakland minimum wage measure
To: lmcelhaney@oaklandnet.com
CC: BCook@oaklandnet.com; bkwoodsonsr@hotmail.com; epatton@ufcw5.org
Thank you, Lynette. We will certainly be flexible so that we can talk soon.


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:22 PM, McElhaney, Lynette <lmcelhaney@oaklandnet.com> wrote:

Its great to hear from you since Ive been seeking an audience to formally hear from the coalition since I first heard
about this last month. I hope that there is maximum flexibility in meeting times since my schedule gets booked up
several weeks in advance. Meeting prior to the 8th will most likely mean a weekend, early morning or late evening

Brigitte will follow up.

Best, Lynette

Councilmember Lynette Gibson McElhaney
Representing the Heart & Soul of the City
Oakland District 3 |1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 2nd Floor | Oakland, CA 94612
Phone: (510) 238-7003 Fax: (510) 238-6910

Sign up for our message board at: D3 West & North Oakland Yahoo Group, D3 East of 980 Yahoo Group,
Connect with us: Twitter: @LynetteGM Facebook/Lynette2012

From: Nikki Fortunato Bas [mailto:nikki@workingeastbay.org]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 12:22 PM
To: McElhaney, Lynette; Cook, Brigitte
Cc: Brian K. Woodson; Ellouise Patton
Subject: meeting request - Oakland minimum wage measure

Dear Councilmember McElhaney:

I am writing on behalf of the Lift Up Oakland coalition which is working to qualify and pass a ballot measure that would
increase the minimum wage in Oakland to $12.25 with cost of living increases and paid sick days.

Servant BK Woodson and Ellouise Patton from our coalition would like to brief you on this measure, answer your
questions and discuss the measure. If possible, we would prefer to meet with you prior to April 8th when CED will
review an information report on the impacts of raising the minimum wage.

Please let me know two times that you would be available to meet. Thank you.

Best regards,

Nikki Fortunato Bas
Executive Director, ext. 322

From: McElhaney, Lynette
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 12:07 AM
To: tom@cliffordmoss.com; Cook, Brigitte
Subject:RE: <<response requested>> Proposed attendees for meetings needed
in next few days


Time to book my one-on-one with you also. Very important that we adopt uniform speaking points, also could use your
help for meeting with Liftup Oakland coalition on minimum wage.

From my Android phone on T-Mobile. The first nationwide 4G network.

-------- Original message --------
From: tom@cliffordmoss.com
Date: 03/31/2014 11:00 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: "Cook, Brigitte" <BCook@oaklandnet.com>,"Cotton, Chantal"
Cc: "McElhaney, Lynette" <lmcelhaney@oaklandnet.com>
Subject: RE: <<response requested>> Proposed attendees for meetings needed in next few days

I will need to leave by 3:30 Friday, but KEEP it. This is a policy discussion I am not critical and this needs to move