|
Increasing
the Harvest for
Farmworker Housing
by
Lena Robinson, Community Affairs Specialist, Federal Reserve Bank of
San Francisco
Agriculture is a significant economic engine for
the West, representing a total of almost $40 billion dollars in gross
state product for the nine states that comprise the Federal Reserve Bank
of San Francisco’s 12th District (see graph 1). The diversity of
agricultural products found in the west is also a phenomenon producing
the greatest variety of fruits, vegetable, flora and aquaculture in the
United States. In fact this region can claim recognition as the exclusive
domestic producer of several crops such as kiwi fruit in California,
red raspberries in Washington and of course macadamia nuts in Hawaii.
Such diverse and abundant output not only
yields a significant income, but requires a huge labor pool to get
the produce from the fields to
the markets. Many crops are still quite labor-intensive for both cultivation
and harvest, with harvest in particular being most demanding because
it must be done within a limited time period. According to data collected
by USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service, most farms
consist of ten or more laborers working fewer than 150 days per year.
For 2002, USDA puts the number of farm workers of all types (i.e. year-round,
seasonal and migrant)
in the 12th District at over one million—34
percent of farm workers nationwide.
The National Agricultural Workers Survey (NAWS)
conducted in 1997-98 by the Department of Labor calculates 56 percent
of farm workers as migrants
(i.e. traveling between regions and states to secure work) while 44 percent
reside in their communities year-round. The
seasonal and large-scale nature of farming causes the population of farm
workers to balloon for
a brief period, resulting in a short-term housing crisis for often unprepared
communities. A three-year survey of housing availability and conditions
for migrant and seasonal farm workers conducted by the Housing Assistance
Council found that 52 percent of the housing intended for single-family
occupancy was overcrowded.
Aside from the challenge of providing housing
for this transient population, the limited housing available for permanent
farm workers in predominately
agricultural communities is often overpriced or substandard. This same
survey found 32 percent of farmworker housing units in the four western
states surveyed (CA, ID, OR, WA) could be considered either “moderately” or “severely
substandard” with such conditions as sagging roofs, broken windows
and rodent infestation. The majority of these units had children present.
Barriers and Solutions
In some communities, farm workers are simply one segment of the low-income
population that is seeking decent housing within their means. In other
communities, farming is the primary—if not the only—industry,
with its own set of requirements that further complicate the effort
to provide housing for this segment. According to the NAWS study, chronic
underemployment and stagnating wages among farm workers puts this population
at a disadvantage over other low-wage workers. This article looks at
some of the ways that the challenges of both seasonal and permanent
housing are being addressed in California, Washington and Oregon--states
with the highest number of farm workers, largest number of farms and
highest percent of migrant labor in the west (see Graph
2). It is also
interesting to note that the poverty rate in counties listed as top
producers of agricultural revenue often exceeds the state average.
The combination of all these factors seems to underscore the problems
of density and affordability that show up consistently in the effort
to house farm workers.
 |
Click here for
larger image of Farm Statistics
for the 12th District of the Federal Reserve
|
Financing
Figuring out how to finance projects targeted at a population that earns
roughly 48 percent of wages paid to production workers in the non-farm
sector is a significant challenge. The
reality of almost every farmworker housing project is the complexity
of financing that involves a web
of partners and various layers of subsidies. Federal and state government
assistance is available through several programs including USDA 502
self help, USDA 514 loan and 516 farm worker housing grants, Low
Income Housing Tax Credits, CDBG grants, HUD Rural Housing and Economic
Development and state housing trust funds.
The Rural Community Assistance Corporation (RCAC)-sponsored Casa
Del Sol project illustrates many of the resources and partners
needed to take a development from concept to fruition. It also includes
a component of philanthropic financing, which is recognized as an essential
element
in subsidizing housing for temporary and low-wage workers.
CASA DEL SOL (Woodland, CA) |
SOURCES |
AMOUNT |
| City of Woodland (CDBG 108 loan) |
|
| CA Dept of Housing and Community Development |
$1.5 million Joe Serna grant
$1.5 million Mobilehome Park Resident Ownership Program |
| Rural Community Assistance Corporation |
$1.2 million AWHHP grant funded by the California Endowment |
| Red Capital Mortgage |
Construction loan and 40-year first mortgage |
| Bank of America |
Construction financing |
| Federal Home Loan Bank SF |
$660,000 AHP grant |
| Housing and Urban Development |
FHA 207(m) credit enhancement |
Beyond financing, there are three common barriers
to developing affordable housing in farming communities: unincorporation,
zoning and limited space.
Unincorporated rural areas frequently lack the infrastructure to support
any type of housing development. The additional cost of installing
basic water, sewage and energy infrastructure makes the price for even
the
most modest housing project prohibitive—particularly if the units
are targeted at a seasonal population. In many states, special permission
must be obtained to build housing on land zoned for agricultural use.
In other states, the proximity of agriculture to cities or tight restrictions
on growth limits the land available for new housing. How different
states and jurisdictions cope with addressing these barriers not only
determines
whether housing is available, but can serve as an example for others
to follow.
CALIFORNIA
Limited space and astronomical costs for both construction and land are
the top barriers to providing adequate housing for farm workers in
California. And yet one of the most innovative solutions for farmworker
housing comes from a location that embodies every obstacle associated
with affordable housing: the Napa Valley.
Since 1992, Napa County has collected nearly
$11 million dollars by taxing residential and commercial construction
for a trust fund that
finances the construction and preservation of housing for low-income
Napa County residents. This relatively compact geography with expensive
real estate and very low vacancy rates is overwhelmed every year with
numerous grape harvesters. However, with the cooperation of perhaps the
most critical stakeholders--the growers and wineries--local zoning laws
were altered to allow housing on agricultural lands, motivating several
growers to not only donate land but also construct both temporary and
permanent facilities. The annual cost to operate this temporary housing –which
has added 300 beds-- is subsidized with the support of annual fundraisers
and donations from a local trade association—the Napa Vintners
Association.
In the San Joaquin valley, a longer growing
season, extensive variety and, large crop volumes, and agricultural
processing jobs support year round
employment reducing excessive seasonal swelling common to other regions.
In this eight-county area that spans the center of California, the need
for housing is for permanent units that can be afforded by larger families.
Self-Help Enterprises (SHE), a nonprofit housing developer serving this
expansive region, has responded to this need with a focus on self-help
homeownership units, rehabilitation and infrastructure development. With
generous donor support and sweat equity from families—most farmworker
families-- SHE produced over 100 new homes in 2003 alone.
Throughout California, the boundary between urban
and rural is frequently seamless with many farms in the backyard of cities
or on the boundary
of expensive suburbs. With this kind of close proximity comes NIMBY backlash.
In Oxnard, California, a coastal city in Ventura county, House Farm Workers!
is heading off NIMBYism through community building. House Farm Workers!,
a project of the Ventura County Ag Futures Alliance Farm Worker Housing
Task Force, proposes to increase the supply of farmworker housing through
community education, dialogue and advocacy. Education is conducted through
the use of specially created videos and speaker bureaus to inform the
public about the farm worker housing crisis and its effect on the local
agricultural economy. The
county wide task force and local action groups are focused on addressing
resistance by homeowners to the building of
higher density and low-income housing, a lack of sites, and a lack of
political will to support farmworker housing construction. The project
overcomes these obstacles by empowering farm worker families to become
strong, vocal advocates for proposed farm worker housing projects in
their communities. The groups also foster relationships with elected
officials through private meetings and at council meetings.
OREGON
In Oregon, strict zoning laws and smart growth policies intended to preserve
open space and agricultural land impedes the capacity for developing
farm worker housing near or on farms. And yet in 1989, the Oregon legislature
passed a state tax credit to encourage more housing for farm workers.
The tax credit can be used by developers to build new housing or rehabilitate
existing housing, much of which are farm labor camps that are several
decades old. Despite the tax credit, which was increased in 2001 to
allow deduction of 50 percent of the eligible costs incurred, the number
of units available to house farm workers in Oregon is decreasing. However,
the possibility of transferring 100 percent (effective 1/05) of the
credit to a donor and the increase in funds allocated—currently
$7.25 million—makes the tax credit not only an incentive for donors
but a promising tool for farm worker housing. (Note: Oregon lenders
qualify for a different state tax credit for loans made to construct
or rehabilitate farm worker housing).
Nonprofit organizations acting as housing
developers such as Community
and Shelter Assistance Corporation (CASA) of Oregon and
Housing Development Corporation
of Northwest Oregon
are finding success in their efforts to provide housing in-town for year-round
farm workers. And while community-based housing –as opposed to
on-farm—offers many advantages such as access to services, stability
and reduced dependence on the employer, the higher cost of housing production
in urban and suburban areas limits the amount of housing stock that can
be built and absorbs a larger portion of the limited income farm workers
earn. It
also increases the competition among low-wage workers for a shrinking
supply of affordable housing.
To address the need for seasonal housing that is needed by migrant or
temporary crop harvesters, Peter Hainley, executive director of CASA,
believes that the answer may be to stimulate the economy of rural areas
to employ more residents and support additional housing. Integral to
this strategy is increased funding for rural nonprofits that are involved
with providing a range of services in these communities including job
development, asset building, self-help housing and health programs.
| Recruiting contributors for this fund is a priority for CASA as
the funding directly stimulates new construction by increasing the
capacity of local nonprofit project sponsors. |
Towards this goal, CASA became certified as a Community Development
Financial Institution (CDFI) in 2000 in order to facilitate the development
of housing and other essential community facilities (e.g. community centers,
medical facilities and Head Start buildings) in underserved rural areas.
One of the primary activities of the CDFI is to finance predevelopment
activities such as market analysis, environmental studies and land acquisition.
CASA also provides critical construction financing to keep the project
on target in anticipation of funding from multiple sources. Recruiting
contributors for this fund is a priority for CASA as the funding directly
stimulates new construction by increasing the capacity of local nonprofit
project sponsors.
Catholic Charities is one such project sponsor that CASA has assisted.
The project, Sandy Vista, is located in the small suburban town of Sandy
and near the largest nursery producing area in the state. The land was
acquired from a private owner on the contingency that it would be annexed
into the town in order to avoid potential NIMBY issues that could result
from a public hearing. The annexation also conveyed an infrastructure
benefit to the town because of the new sewer system that was completed
for the project. Phase one of the 54-unit housing development and community
complex that will house both migrant and year-round farm workers was
just completed. The first phase includes the 30 units to be occupied
by migrant farm workers and their families that move from farm to farm
following various seasonal crop harvests. This kind of housing can be
especially difficult for workers to find because of the short-term nature
of residency. The second phase of 24 units for year-round farm workers
and their families is currently under construction.
In particular, there appears to be more on-farm
housing per capita in Washington than in any other state discussed in
this article. A number
of Oregon farms have labor camps, but many of these are operating without
certification due to rigorous health and safety standards imposed by
the state and the cost of complying with these standards. The
success of using farm land for housing in Washington is based on the
strong coordination
of government, private and nonprofit stakeholders such as the state-funded
One Stop Development Center, the
Washington Growers League, the Office of Rural and Farmworker Housing
(ORFH), community-based
developers and of course the farmers themselves.
In the realm of temporary housing, perhaps nothing
reflects innovation and partnership more than the Rent-a-Tent program.
(In California, rather
than tents, Yurts serve as temporary housing for seasonal workers in
the Napa Valley.) Although controversial among several affordable housing
advocates as a long-term solution, the success of this practical experiment
is a compelling strategy worth highlighting. The Rent-a-Tent program
started in 2000 with a demonstration grant from HUD. What began with
a few tents has grown into 193 tents on 13 cherry farms across eastern
Washington. Each tent can house six persons during the six-week cherry
harvest season. Prior to the tents, many of the cherry harvesters simply
camped wherever they could in their own tents. Currently, the Department
of Community, Trade and Economic Development (WTED) purchases the tents
with state funds and rents them for $75 per week to eligible growers
who have developed the necessary infrastructure to support housing. At
an initial cost of $3,100 and expected utility of seven years, the tents
appear to represent a viable solution. Pat Arnold, newly appointed housing
program manager at the Washington Growers League, reports that she will
continue to seek efficiencies for the Rent-A-Tent program in the areas
of labor and storage and looks forward to identifying other equally innovative
partnerships that benefit the farmers and laborers.
Farmers can access state-funded technical
assistance to develop infrastructure that meets state and county regulatory
guidelines. Creative Housing
Solutions,
INC., which provides this assistance on
behalf of the state’s One Stop Development Center, also serves
as a liaison between the farmers and various government departments that
determine the regulations. Their role as liaison has helped to build
trust with the farmers and reduce some of the regulatory red tape for
the shared goal of increasing farmworker housing. Although many farmers
charge the workers a nominal fee to cover utilities such as water and
electricity, the cost of financing the infrastructure is still often
prohibitive. Dixie Tracht, executive director of Creative Housing Solutions,
sees this as an important area that bank and/or nonprofit lenders can
fill through low-interest loans.
Another strategy to close the gap on construction
costs, development fees and other expenses associated with housing development
for farm
workers and their families is a farmworker trust fund proposed by U.S.
Senator Patty Murray. Similar to the Napa, California model, the trust
fund will be a vehicle for private and philanthropic dollars to be amassed
on behalf of farmworker housing. According to Brien Thane of the Office
of Rural and Farmworker Housing, currently the
fiscal agent managing seed funds that Senator Murray secured to help
establish the trust fund, it would be used to expand the managerial capacity
of organizations involved with housing development and cover a number
of miscellaneous costs that can derail otherwise feasible projects.
Regional Solutions Beyond
Housing
The sheer number of farm workers in California,
Oregon and Washington, and the remarkable impact to these states’ gross state product
necessitated solutions. But what about other states that are not faced
with this same degree of population and land pressure. Do states with
fewer farm workers – especially migrants-- and a lower cost of
living cope better with housing these workers? For the community of
Wenden-Salome, Arizona, the answer appears to be no. The seasonal influx
of agricultural workers in this western valley region of Arizona actually
exacerbates an already economically and physically impaired community.
The Wenden-Salome Flood Recovery Commission, Inc. is taking up the
charge to improve the quality and availability of housing for the general
area, which is seen as a more holistic and sustainable approach than
merely providing housing for farm workers (see
Wenden-Salome).
 |
see larger
image of Agricultural Data
for Federal Reserve Bank of
San Francisco's District
|
This
parallels the approach of nonprofits in other geographies with a significant
reliance on seasonal farm workers or migrants, many of whom
ultimately end up settling in the community after the harvest is completed.
The Idaho Migrant Council, Centro de la
Familia de Utah, PPEP, Inc. of
Arizona and Mid-Peninsula Housing
Coalition of California are
going beyond just
housing to focus on solutions that empower the individual such as literacy
and ESL training, job skill development, health services and Head Start
programs. Rural Community Assistance Corporation, which assists rural
communities in 13 western states, also recognizes the importance of a
multi-pronged approach in serving agricultural workers. RCAC has worked
in affordable housing and environmental infrastructure for more than
25 years and in 1999 established the Agricultural Worker Health and Housing
program (AWHHP) with a $31 million award from The California Endowment.
Farm
workers are enormously important to the economy of the west. Of the nine
states that comprise the Fed’s 12th District, six depend
on temporary (i.e. migrant and seasonal) resources to meet the demands
of their agricultural output. The solutions and organizations highlighted
in story, demonstrate the importance of local leadership in resolving
a complex issue.
| ...the
solution that any location decides on will depend on factors and
resources unique to that community |
Whether trailer parks, tents, dormitories, sweat
equity homes or apartment units, the efforts to overcome multiple barriers
to
produce affordable
housing for farm workers are as varied as the crops grown. Where possible,
the approach that seems to show the most promise is rehabilitation
of existing housing such as trailer parks in California. Rehabilitation
reduces pre-development costs associated with new construction and
delays
that can come from permitting and zoning, in addition to eliminating
blight.
But, rehabilitation is not a universal solution.
As illustrated by the examples discussed, the solution that any location
decides on will depend
on factors and resources unique to that community. Hopefully these examples
will prompt new ideas for dealing with a problem that touches many segments
of society—decent and affordable housing – and motivate you
to seek out and support organizations that are successful in housing
farm workers.
| Food for Thought |
| In addition to being successful agents of community development,
these and other organizations focused on housing farm workers can
also serve as effective partners for reaching a significant unbanked
population. The opportunity appears to be ripe to provide financial
education and services for a population that relies on informal mechanisms
for cashing payroll checks and other financial transactions. At least
some of these farm workers remit money to relatives in other countries,
while others are looking to establish permanent roots through homeownership.
A close working relationship with organizations that are resolving
one of the most basic needs—housing—presents financial
institutions with myriad opportunities to strengthen rural economies
and serve an often overlooked demographic—farm workers. |
Read more……
David Sidley, Coachella Valley Mobile Home Parks Transformed, Rural
Voices,
Housing Assistance Council, Summer 2003: pp 21-22.
| |
|
