Anthony Cannella cannot be serious in supporting Senate Bill 7. There are two big reasons that this is a travesty: Why should the state have any say in what a local entity using funds generated locally can do with the money? If Cannella is truly serious about prevailing wages, then why don't he and other valley politicians work for the establishment of a valley or inland prevailing wage?
Homes in Dublin, which is one of the less expensive Bay Area cities, cost $600,000 for a 3/2 home compared to $150,000 for the same home in Modesto. All other costs, transportation, nannies, food, entertainment, etc. are also more expensive. Why should our prevailing wage reflect their costs?
One writer said that labor is only 22 percent of the public works projects, but building senior or low cost housing with prevailing wages runs the project up by 40 percent as it is much more labor intensive. Three private entities built great low-income projects in Riverbank, while our public entity couldn't justify the costs with Bay Area prevailing wages. I have no problem with prevailing wages, but they should reflect more realistic costs instead of Bay Area economics.