After months of parking reforms discussions, the Ann Arbor City Council last night passed in a 6-4 vote a resolution to delay the implementation of these programs until the proposed budget for the 2002 fiscal year is discussed.

The reforms, which were proposed by former councilman Chris Kolb in November, included a "freedom from fine" for those who hadn"t received a ticket in six months. The amnesty program the ability to avoid a fine if a ticket is paid in two weeks will be reviewed throughout the year. The council will also allow for additional proposals.

Due to budget constraints and the recent budget cuts in all city programs for the 2001 fiscal year, the council said the city could not afford to lose the money.

Council members said they expected to lose up to a projected $1 million in parking revenue if the changes were implemented.

Also passed in a 8-2 vote last night was the long-awaited living wage, which stipulates a minimum pay for those who work on city contracts. After being passed by council last year by a 6-5 majority, it was vetoed by former Mayor Ingrid Sheldon. The new ordinance requires a $8.70 pay for workers receiving health insurance or $10.20 for others.

Councilwoman Jean Carlberg (D-Ward III) said the new living wage is a vital to the city.

"It is necessary in a city with a cost of living as high as Ann Arbor," Carlberg said. "We have an essential responsibility to pay employees above the poverty line. It enhances employees lives by having sufficient funds to meet their basic needs."

Carlberg said the proposal would lead to less turnover in jobs, so that employers would use less resources in repeated training programs.

The proposal allows non-profit agencies that have contracts with the city to either submit a proposal to exemplify exemplify them from the living wage or ask for a three-year implementation plan.

The proposal also states that the wage must rise every year with the poverty level, a projected rise of 2.6 percent per year.

"There will be a yearly increase if wages raise according to the federal definition of poverty," Carlberg said.

Joseph Upton (R-Ward II), who voted against the proposal, said it may not be a solution to the city"s poverty problems.

"The local government is not an effective government body to develop macroeconomic policy," Upton said. "If we are trying to address poverty, this may not be an effective tool."

Upton said that increased expenditures for employers, especially small businesses, may have a hard time meeting their payroll, leading to cutbacks.

"Small businesses won"t be able to contend with the increased expenditures," Upton said. "It may harm the city"s competition for contracts."

The proposal may also put added constraints on the budget that the city is trying to cut, Upton said.

"It"s going to run counter to our efforts to cut the budget," Upton said. "We may have a greater problem down the road we don"t know what the economy will be in three years."

Larry Purdy, who spoke against the living wage at last night"s meeting said the proposal would be ineffective at its goals.

"All we have to do is mandate the living wage and everyone in need is out of poverty. Employers make more by having productivity increase right along with happiness the only thing missing is the reindeer," Purdy said sarcastically.

He added that he fears increased expenditures will result in higher taxes for members of the community.

Charles Grose, a member of the Washtenaw Coalition for a Living Wage, said that the city"s workers should be making enough to support themselves.

"We are simply using tax money to pay people enough to live," he said.

To become law, the proposal needs to pass through a second reading in March.

Until then the city council will have an opportunity to modify the proposal.