A study of how a living wage ordinance has affected workers and businesses in Los Angeles gave a boost to proponents of Santa Fe's living wage law recently.

In broad terms, the study of 320 workers and 82 businesses affected by Los Angeles' ordinance (which is more restrictive than Santa Fe's) found that the law increased pay for workers in about 10,000 jobs and improved health coverage for approximately 2,000.

Most of the workers affected were poor or low-income and had been working for almost 20 years on average. Businesses largely adjusted to the higher wage requirement without having to lay off workers or eliminate jobs -- the study found that employment reductions amounted to only 1 percent of all affected jobs.

Businesses also benefited because they had lower employee turnover, resulting in savings on training.

With Santa Fe's living wage ordinance still the subject of a court battle, proponents were rightly excited about the study, since it seemed to show that hiking the minimum wage above the federally mandated and long out-of-date $5.15 might not have the dire economic consequences opponents are claiming.

For their part, however, opponents note one hugely important distinction between the situation in Los Angeles and circumstances here in Santa Fe: The L.A. law applies only to city contractors -- mainly airport workers and concessionaires -- and thus involves only a tiny portion of a regional economy that is one of the largest in the nation.

The New Mexico Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments about the legality of Santa Fe's living wage ordinance later this month.

It's likely to be many months before the court rules on the case, and many more before an all-but-certain appeal to the state Supreme Court finally resolves the issue.

In that lengthy interim, the ordinance will likely remain in force. That means that by the end of the year, there should be plenty of economic data on record for a study of our own.

Wisely, the city already commissioned a comprehensive baseline study of wages and related issues before the living wage law took effect.

We'd urge them to follow up with the second study at year's end. Only such a follow-up can provide meaningful answers to questions about the effects the ordinance has had on the city's businesses and its workforce.