Living Wage Advocates Livid Over Kingsbridge Deal [UPDATED]

Bronx Borough President Ruben Diaz Jr.

The mayor and the Bronx borough president buried the hatchet over the Kingsbridge Armory, and some living wage proponents are less than thrilled.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg will announce at his State of the City address today that the city will put out new request for proposal for the long-stalled Kingsbridge Armory development in the Bronx.

The announcement stems from an agreement between Bloomberg and Bronx Borough President Ruben Diaz, Jr., who were on the opposite sides of the fight over the Armory in 2009. Diaz, with heavy backing from the retail workers union and members of the City Council, demanded that retail jobs at the site pay a so-called living wage – at least $10 an hour.

But some supporters of the living wage bill, which would apply to development projects with upwards of $1 million in city subsidies, were furious with Diaz’s decision to strike a deal with Bloomberg.

The agreement Diaz and Bloomberg does not stipulate that a new developer picked for the Kingsbridge site must guarantee that a living wage be paid to retail workers – it only stipulates than any developer who  agrees to the provision receive a “preference.” That’s the exact same deal that the city’s Economic Development put forth in 2006 for the Kingsbridge RFP.  No developer agreed to the wage standard that then, resulting in the EDC going with the Related Companies – the deal that Diaz scuttled.

Two high-level sources involved with the Living Wage Coalition questioned why Diaz would not demand a living wage at Kingsbridge – the very place where the movement for the bill started – even as pressure builds on Council Speaker Christine Quinn to bring the bill to the floor for a vote.

Some observers believe Diaz’s political prospects have been damaged by the still-vacant status of the Armory in the years since he helped kill the original deal.

“The Living Wage Coalition doesn’t need Diaz,” one of the sources added. “He’s not in the City Council and has no bearing on the decision made about the living wage legislation. He has no vote. The coalition wants to pass the bill and not get caught up in debates over individual projects.”

A spokesman for Diaz defended the borough president’s decision to separate the issue of redeveloping the Armory from the living wage legislation, which faces an uncertain future.

“There’s a legislative solution to this, and all along, we said that we weren’t doing this piecemeal,” said Diaz spokesman John DeSio. “Whoever’s saying this would be better of lobbying Christine Quinn to bring the bill to the floor or lining up more sponsors, rather than sniping at their allies.”

A city request for proposal released earlier this year for the Willets Point development in Queens did not include a “preference” of a living wage provision – even though labor leaders who initially agreed to support the development in 2008 thought living wage retail jobs would be part of the agreement.

The move by the Economic Development Corps was seen as a reaction to the failure of the Kingsbridge Armory development and strained relations between City Hall and the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store workers union, the main proponents for the living wage bill.

But a City Hall source said Diaz and Bloomberg came to an agreement on the living wage “preference” after several developers in recent months expressed unsolicited interest in investing in the site.

 UPDATE:

Apparently, the sources I spoke to within the Living Wage Coalition don’t speak for RWDSU President Stuart Appelbaum, whose union essentially run and funds the coalition. I got this e-mail from Appelbaum this morning: