It was a bad idea in 1997, and it's a bad idea now.

Twelve years ago then-Councilman Gene Ricciardi proposed having the city set a wage floor for employees of city contractors and recipients of grants, loans or subsidies from city taxpayers. The plan, which was not adopted, would have forced those employers to pay their nonconstruction workers $7.71 an hour or more, compared to the federal minimum wage at the time of $5.15.

City and county officials made another unsuccessful run at the idea in 2001.

Everyone wants higher wages, but should the city be in the business of dictating how much is paid? Even by companies that received public subsidies?

While the employees would benefit in the short run, there's a good chance that by setting its own wage floor or "prevailing wage," as advocates call it, the city would end up shooing development projects -- and their jobs -- to the suburbs.

This is a case in which Pittsburgh's compact geography would work against it. For example, why would a developer build a hotel in the East End, when putting it a mile or so away in Wilkinsburg would let it pay market-based wages rather than the higher rates imposed by the city? Which developer would build an office on the North Side with wage-and-benefits strings attached, when the same project in Ross would let the owner pay a standard, instead of artificial, wage?

While it makes sense to raise periodically the federal and minimum wages, a place the size of Pittsburgh takes a chance in setting its own pay floor. For a city that needs development and city residents who need employment, this bill could be a wage booster but a job loser.

Cartoonist Rob Rogers does "Rob's Rough," an early look at his work and his creative process, exclusively at PG+, a members-only web site of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Our introduction to PG+ gives you all the details.