Salem councilors pause living-wage ordinance, ask for departmental cost data

Councilors in Salem opened a committee hearing on March 26 to review an ordinance sponsored by Councilor Davis that would phase in a higher ‘‘living wage' for city employees. Davis told the committee the proposal, developed with the North Shore Labor Council, would delay implementation until fiscal 2028 and then increase affected employees' pay by $1 an hour annually until it reaches a formula-based level that currently equates to about $18.75 an hour.

Department heads described operational and budgetary complexities that would affect how the policy could be implemented. Harbormaster Bill McHugh said his department relies heavily on seasonal, part-time and retired workers and cautioned that steady wage mandates could make it harder to hire younger or inexperienced seasonal staff and could push some positions toward full-time costs. "We glean our part-time help for skilled positions from other agencies," McHugh said, noting that many of his workers are not supporting families and that hiring decisions are sensitive to wage levels.

Lisa Cammarano, the city's human-resources director, told councilors that raising part-time wages can ripple through payroll; she urged caution because incremental increases for seasonal employees can push up compensation for long-time full-time and union-represented roles and add recurring costs to future budgets. Cammarano offered to work with finance to provide department-level estimates and other data the council requested.

Councilors pressed for current, department-level numbers showing how many employees would be affected and how much the ordinance would increase departmental and citywide personnel costs. Council President Merkel and others said the council must respect the mayor's central role in creating the budget and instructed staff to involve the mayor's office in follow-up work.

After discussion, Councilor Smith moved that the committee leave the ordinance in committee to allow staff to assemble updated payroll, age and position data and for the mayor's office to weigh in. The committee carried that motion. No formal adoption or schedule for a vote was set; committee members said they expect further hearings with updated fiscal estimates before any ordinance would be advanced.

The committee report later relayed the same recommendation to the full council: more data is needed before moving forward. The council emphasized it supports the goal of higher pay but wants a clearer picture of budget impacts and legal or grant-related constraints before changing compensation by ordinance.