Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-08-01 - AGENDA REPORTS - DAY LABORERS (2)M CITY OF SANTA CLARITA I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M T0:Ane unc FROM: crmpfo�slst�ant��_ DATE: August 1, 1990 SUBJECT: Progress Report on Day Laborers BACKGROUND In October of 1989, City Council requested City Staff to research the day laborer situation. Emphasis was placed on understanding the problem and finding a community solution. During the winter months the problem lessened. With the return of spring, problems associated with increasing number of day workers, littering, loitering, blocking of entry ways of businesses and traffic safety become a growing concern to the citizens, merchants and contractors of Santa Clarita. City staff has been working to address the problem. City staff has talked with day workers, met with residents, has participated in a merchants meeting and has convened a volunteer ad-hoc committee to provide input, do research and compile a progress report to City Council. The report provides different programs cities have implemented for day laborers, provides several perspectives to a complex social, economic and international issue, outlines many options to address the problem and provides a recommendation for consideration. RECOMMENDATION City staff recommends City Council implement the following: a) Provide sheriff foot patrol for the East Newhall during the peak hours of 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m., 2 times per week. b) Implement a pilot Telephone Hiring Exchange for Day Laborers. c) Implement the City's Community Development Bock Grant Program with a pro -active code enforcement effort in the East Newhall area. d) Direct staff to develop a City ordinance prohibiting street vending. Agenda Item: PROGRESS REPORT TO SANTA CLARITA CITY COUNCIL ON DAY LABORERS I. INTRODUCTION Santa Clarita, like many other communities in Los Angeles County and throughout Southern California, is experiencing an increasing influx of day laborers into the City. The congregation of these day laborers along retail and industrial areas is a problem of -growing concern and negative impact on residential and commercial areas of the community. For Santa Clarita, day laborers gather at street corners in commercial areas and neighborhoods (Sand Canyon and San Fernando Rd.) adjacent to streets with a high traffic volume.. Negative impacts experienced in these areas resulting from the presence of day laborers include littering problems, loitering, blocking of entry ways for businesses, and traffic safety. Although, it is not unlawful to solicit work, the conditions associated with the congregation of large numbers of men prompt citizen, merchant, contractor concern and complaints. The groups of day laborers consist of documented and undocumented workers, with all ages represented. A large number of day laborers live in East Newhall community in overcrowded housing. Day.laborers provide workers in those jobs which are typically, filled by the casual labor force. These jobs are usually low -skill, labor-intensive, and low-paying, requiring hard work and long hours. . Currently, neither federal nor state levels of government are addressing the problem. Santa Clarita joins other cities in assessing the problem, developing an action plan and providing a local solution. A volunteer ad-hoc committee has worked closely with City staff to prepare this comprehensive progress report and accompanying options. II. LOCAL SOLUTIONS The ad-hoc committee researched different programs cities have implemented for day laborers. The following is a list of their programs: A. City funded and managed day laborer program Harbor City Pilot Project Day Laborer Program (213) 485-8428 1 Date opened: October 1989 Hours of operation: Mon. - Sat.. 6 to 11 a.m. Purpose: One of seven special projects adopted by City Council resolution. Program provides an alternative safe location from which day laborers may solicit temporary employment. In July,' the City -of Los Angeles opend their second site in North Hollywood. Cost: Harbor City pilot project costs approximately $3,300 per month ($39,600 annual) for program operations, rental of modular trailer, salaries of two part-time coordinators at $8.00 per hour and other amenities -for workers. Legal Position: Liability issues faced by City surrounding contractor and employee, relationships are a consideration; however, the City's program is not considered a hiring or employment agency. According to the City of Los Angeles City Attorney's office, the City does not employ day laborers, but simply provides a safe location for workers. -A work agreement is a mutual negotiation between contractor and worker. Program Success: The program involves volunteer participation from both contractors and workers. It has been successful in alleviating some of the problems which arise when large groups of laborers congregate in .a . commercial or residential zone. However, not all workers participate in program. B. City contracts with non-profit agency to manage day laborer program City of Brea Day Laborer Job Center Judy Campos, City of Brea (714) 990-7776 Purpose: opened April 1990 Hours of Operation: Mon. - Sat., 6 a.m. to 12 -p.m. City of Brea City Council voted to establish job center. The City entered into an agreement with the Gary Center to provide outreach services, site staffing and supervision and other referral services. The City provided an appropriate site, specified support and financial assistance. The job center provides contractors both information regarding federal regulations regarding immigration. It does not place strict registration rules on contractors. It serves the documented as well as the undocumented worker. Cost: The City contracts with general fund monies. The year for the leasing of and other equipment. the Gary Center for $42,000 per year from City pays an additional cost of $3,000 per a modular unit on City property, utilities 9 Legal Position: Is based on similar premise as the City of Los Angeles. Program Success: The program is well attended by both .workers and contractors. Residents very supportive. Ministerial association involved. C. City as Facilitator -- No Direct Funding City of Glendale Rick Reyes Day Laborer Program 4322 San Fernando Road (818) 956-4844 Purpose: Opened: September 1988; closed at present. The Council voted to facilitate and coordinate community resources to establish a day laborer site. Through community participation, the site was established at the Catholic Youth Organization (CYO). The City did not directly fund the project, but has provided staff support and police assistance. Initially, the business community donated funds to offset operating program costs. CYO pays the salaries of two coordinators at $7.00 per hour. The program is no longer in operation. The successful program could not handle the large influx of day workers from nearby cities. The City is once again addressing the problem by looking for an alternative location. Legal Position: The City of Glendale's approach to this local issue stresses coordination of community resources to solve a local problem. The City has not been contacted by the Immigration Naturalization Service (INS) about their involvement and support of the program. The City's concern on liability ramifications are a significant consideration, however, their association with the project is dependent on alleviating the local concerns resulting from large numbers of men congregating on city streets and corners. D. Telephone Hiring Exchange City of Dana Point (714) 248-9890 The City of Dana Point has imposed an ordinance prohibiting day laborers and others from using public thoroughfares to solicit jobs from motorists and forbids employers from using automobiles to hire workers from streetsides. The ordinance has been challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). It is under study by the ACLU for possible constitutional rights violations of free speech and the right of assembly. To complement this action, the City has also opened a Telephone Hiring Exchange. 3 The Telephone Hiring Exchange was seen as a viable alternative to a creation of hiring halls and hiring lots which do not deter day laborers from gathering along streets or lead to higher job placement. The City also lacks sites for this purpose. The telephone hotline allows employers to list jobs with telephone operators, who then relay the information to callers. Employers would be responsible for determining whether. the workers are in the United States legally. The Telephone Hiring.Exchange is operated by two volunteers, who take calls from potential employees and from men and women• seeking dayworker jobs. The hotline operates Sunday to Friday from 5 to 7 p.m. Start up costs of program were $2,000 with City Council to allocate additional funding. E. City adopts Ordinance, relating to Solicitation of Employment, Business or Contribution from Streets and Highways and Funds Job Center for Legal Laborers. City of Costa Mesa Richard Brunette (714) 754-5300 Date opened: October 1988 4 hours of operation: Mon. - Sat. 6 a.m. to 12 p.m. The City of Costa Mesa was probably one of the first to address the problem locally. In October 1988, the City Council approved the setting up of a job center for documented day laborers only. In addition, the City Council also passed an Ordinance No. 89-24 prohibiting the solicitation of work by day workers and making it unlawful for any person to hire day workers from street corners. The ordinance was challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on the basis that the ordinance provisions violated the rights of free speech of day laborers. In July 1990, two of the three provisions prohibiting solicitation from streets were declared constitutional. The other provision, will be appealed by the City. The ordinance is enforced by City Police.. To date, there have been 211 arrests and 209 prosecutions. This case although helpful in providing insight, is a recent case, not yet published. The job center is a program of the City's Community Development Department. It serves 80-100 day laborers a day and places 20-30 daily. The City effort has decreased the day laborers in some areas, however, some still remain on city streets. F. Day Laborers Site - Informal Supervision City of Laguna Beach Date Opened: December 1988 Janne Moore Police Dept./Community Services Officer (714) 497-3311 V The City of Laguna Beach Day Laborer program is a voluntary complaiance program. The program is overseen and monitored by the City's Police Department. The program sets aside an unsupervised hiring area for day laborers to gather and solicit work. The City paid $9,000 for site improvements, driveway, turn outs for cars and portable toilets and benches. The site is sucessful and serves 100 men daily with about 12 per day finding jobs. There is no ordered system. Day laborers cooperate and gather at site. Other gathering places have been designated no parking and no stopping areas. Although the program approach varies depending on the City, all programs focus and address the day laborer situation. III. ALTERNATIVE SITES In close proximity to the area where the day laborers' congregate are a few vacant properties which may be considered for a possible relocation area. Day laborer sites in cities are set up in a similar manner. They are located in open places such as parks, vacant lots, converted gas stations. The site includes a modular building for office space and other amenities for the workers. These include telephones, trash receptacles and portable toilets, as well as benches, chairs, shade, morning coffee, donuts and drinking water. It is known that a new site needs to be established at most 1/4 mile from the original location to be successful. Most sites set up by other cities have found at least a 50Z hiring rate for total men participating; however, participation of contractor and worker is completely voluntary. In most cases, an alternative gathering area almost completely alleviates the local situation; however, some workers will continue to reside at the same location. The feasibility of a site in C-3 and M-1 properties is possible and acceptable. The A-1-10,000 property is not acceptable. The processing time for a plot plan review and building permits would be approximately two (2) months. City staff has not contacted owners to ascertain interest nor explore site acquisition costs and feasibility. Another possible location to consider is Los Angeles County, William S. Hart Park. Although the park is in close proximity, a favorable advantage of an alternative location, there are .several considerations such as present level of park activity and safety concerns which will require further study. Below are vacant parcels and their corresponding owners. In attachment, Figure 1, please find an area map of locations along San Fernando Road. Parcel Address Owner 1. 2833-014-036 23870 San Fernando Road Newhall Nine LTD P. 0. Box 7000-916 C-3 Zone (Next to Caltrans yard Redondo Beach, CA and car wash. Property has MWD easement through it and. S.C. Gas Pipeline ease- ment borders property.) 61 2. 2833-014-31 C-3 Zone 3. 2833-014-27 C-3 Zone 4. M-1 Zone 5. A-1-10,000 Zone 6. M-1 Zone IV. Merchants Meeting 23800 San Fernando Road (Next to Shady Mobile Home Park.) 23756 San Fernando Road (3.14 acres next to Road Anawalt Lumber 22427 Market Street S.P.R.R., area along railroad tracks (39.240 sq. feet) Arthur Grayson 23649 San Fernando Rd. Newhall, CA 91321 Masters College 21726 W. Placerita Cyn. Jim/Gary Anawalt (818) 899-2575 (818) 769-4421 (not Acceptable) S.P.R.R., north of Lyons Avenue The City of Santa Clarita participated in a merchants meeting held in East Newhall on Day Laborers. The merchants met to discuss the urgent problems associated with day laborers. Merchants were very concerned about workers leaving litter, urinating in public alleyways, blocking entrances to businesses, and at time scaring away customers as they wait for contractors and other potential employers to offer them work. Suggested immediate solution revolved around four areas: 1) Moving day workers from the business area to another site, 2) Request to move catering trucks, cite trucks for illegal parking, 3) Pro -active code enforcement to ,address housing overcrowding conditions, and 4) Involvement of congressional representatives in the solution. V. Immigration Naturalization Service (INS) to the scene. This is always an alternative, however, as a local government, a City is not responsible for enforcing federal immigration laws. This alternative also raises unfavorable City image considerations. At present, INS is understaffed and for the most part have not raided day laborers site programs. Their response to calls from citizens seem to be of low priority. In a Los Angeles Times article dated March 4,. 1990, Ben Davidian, Western Regional Commissioner for the INS commented through spokesperson about City of Brea's program that the federal agency would like to see changes in the proposed Brea program, his agents would not raid the job center. In the same .article, Virginia Rice, an INS spokeswoman, said INS would prefer that Brea adopt a hiring haul similiar to the one in Costa Mesa. 2 VI. Licensed Contractors Perspective A licensed contractor who operates legally obeys federal immigration laws which prohibit employing. a person who does not posses a work permit, is economically affected by contractors who hire undocumented day laborers because they cannot compete with labor costs. A licensed union contractor who hires legal residents by law must pay workers compensation, payroll .taxes, medical insurance and other fringe benefits. In comparing labor costs, a union contractor can pay approximately $24.00 per hour for similiar work which would costs a contractors utilizing an undocumented worker only $5.00 per hour. Additionally, it is not uncommon for illegal contractors to not pay laborers for a days work. VII. CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES At present, day laborers predominantly congregate along the commercial areas of East Newhall. The business community as well as residents have expressed concerns and needs focusing at a strong code enforcement plan to assist in the revitalization of the East Newhall area. Conditions of housing overcrowding, sanitation, abandoned vehicles, as well as parking in alleyways, and illegal street vending exist. The City of Santa Clarita has prepared a conceptual framework a neighborhood revitalization program of the East Newhall community utilizing federal funds, the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). The program will include code enforcement and clean up strategies, and a housing rehabilitation component. An immediate concern for local merchants is the illegal parking of catering trucks on railroad street. Under current law, catering trucks should move 500 feet every 1/2 hour. The City does not have an ordinance that prohibits street vending. In the future, street vendors will be subject to the City's business.license ordinance. VIII. Los Angeles County Sheriff Position. The Santa Clarita Valley's Sheriff station has not taken any enforcement action against groups of day laborers since congregating on sidewalks and street corners does not constitute a violation. Assembly for the purpose of employment is a sensitive constitutional issue that police personnel have respected. Law enforcement activity is.limited to crimes occurring within these groups. Complaints from local merchants regarding day laborers drinking alcoholic beverages and urinating on public and private property also generate responses, but due to the mobility of the subjects and the crimes being misdemeanors not committed in the presence of police officers, no arrests have resulted. The Sheriff has responded recently to merchants' complaints of day laborers blocking driveways and doorways to businesses by directing area patrol cars to make periodic foot patrols. No violations were observed and no arrests made. Deputies have asked -for voluntary cooperation from day laborers to consider changing their location to Market and Railroad Streets, and they have complied; however, in the absence of deputies, the day laborers generally return to San Fernando Road. 7 Enforcement consideration options are limited; however, if the City chooses to pursue as a law enforcement matter, it would be a costly and labor intensive undertaking. In this case, enforcement would have to be aimed at individuals for (1) traffic violation by laborers and employers, (2) possible public nuisance violations (372 PC), and (3) state and federal violations by contractors and non -licensed employers. IV. Options for Consideration The work of the ad hoc day laborer committee provides a comprehensive look at the day laborer situation in the City of .Santa Clarita. The research conducted by the committee plus valuable input from its volunteer members,. city staff, merchants, and citizens provides a compilation of options for City Council. Included as attachment 11 is a summary which has been prepared to simplify the complexity .of this local problem. Options: 1) Alternative site for day workers. a) Completely City funded and administered. b) City funded, managed by non-profit agency. c) City as facilitator, supporter, and community agency provides location and administration, no direct City funding. d) Designation of an hiring area, informal supervision. 2) Telephone Hiring Exchange 3) Implementation of the City's Community Development Block Grant Program with a pro -active code enforcement effort in the East Newhall area. 4) Develop and adopt ordinance prohibiting street vending. 5) Involve congressional representatives in problem solving. 6) Adopt Ordinance prohibiting the solicitation of employment from streets and highways. 7) Increase LAC Sheriff enforcement of violations under current municiple code. LAC Sheriff would provide foot patrol in area during peak hours of 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m., at least 2 times per week. 8) Do nothing. =3 rl9nre I Pos.lble Altemetive Site looetlms for My "borer, Aran! stv Mt Case Noe CUP 89-005 Plot Plan 89-191 OrP E9-021 (Nlllelde hotel most likely viii be Or"Med. It 1 Mr.. STDF.Ff e CnLTRNB YARD r� V u CM NASN ti o VACANT LOT Neielt Nlne LTD/Omer SHAmy R7131LE Nl WARR VACANT IOP O . Arthur Grayson/CAme[ VACANT far master's College/Amer GREW T1RT19 NURSERY VILLAGE M CFU FIAVI VAI.f11Clh VILLAM.. (lamaing) VACANT tOr PARR AID AIDE OM OU�M (moasltg) SIERRA VILLAGE (Rousing) GAS STATIC" VACANT IAT FOR SALE Attachment #1 DAY LABORER OPTIONS PROS AND CONS SUMMARY CITY FUNDEDANDMANAGED DAY LABORER PROGRAM Pros • Meets primary criteria objectives: Provides a safe, decent place for day workers to gather and solicit work. Relocates day laborers away from densely traveled main highway. Addresses merchants, citizens complaints, and concerns of littering, urinating in public alleyways, blocking store entrances and scaring customers. Successful in relocating workers to one site. • Organized and supervised program. Cons • Possible exposure if there is an agency relationship.with either the employer or employee and some injury or violation of the law arises out of employment. • Possible exposure could involve injuries occurring on the site. Claims to City for assumed duty of care on property. This type of claim City is exposed to when it operates property utilized by the public. • Program success is difficult to measure although a site alleviates the problem, day laborers outnumber employers at a minimum of 2 to 1. • Costly and City bears costs. If city property is used, costs run approximately $40,000 per year. • Site feasibility requires exploration. Costs of acquisition and improvements not known. • City can be perceived as condoning illegal hiring of undocumented workers by contractors who violate federal immigration and state labor laws. CITY CONTRACT WITH NON-PROFIT COMMUNITY AGENCY TO MANAGE DAY LABORER PROGRAM Pros • Potiential of liability exposure lessens. The City can avoid exposure to employer-employee liabilities because non-profit agency by an agreement can indemnify the City from claims of workers, employers or any other visitor onto the property. • Requirement of insurance would shield the City from exposure andlegalfees and costs. • Meets primary criteria objectives. Cons • Liability exposure could involve claims resulting from injuries occurring on the site. • Costly and City bears costs. If on city property, costs run approximately $45,000 per year. • Site feasibility requires exploration, costs of acquistion and improvements not known. • City can be perceived as condoning illegal hiring of undocumented workers by contractors who violate federal immigration and state labor laws. • Program success difficult to measure. CITY AS FACILITATOR - NO DIRECT FUNDING Pros • Each agency would indemnify the City from any claim. • Meets primary critera objectives • Community solution, funding resources are shared. • Can be an organized and supervised program, if coordinatorsare hired. Cons • Community interest in providing resources is uncertain. The City is viewed as the entity to solve problem and provide funding for project. • Liability exposure to City involving injuries relating to the program and committed on or near the property, if City is involved in the organization and staffing of site. TELEPHONE HIRING EXCHANGE Pros • No maintenance of site • Cost effective. Start-up costs are minimal if staffed by volunteers and coordinated in house or with part-time personnel. • Avoidance of agency liabilities and eliminates potential exposure for injuries on or near property. • Program alleviates problem. Cons • Addresses primary critera indirectly, City of Dana Point passed an ordinance prohibiting solicitation of work on City streets. DAY LABORER HIRING AREA Pros • It is succesful as an alternative location at Laguna Beach • Ordered system not part of program and employees may feel more at ease in using program. Cons • Site feasability and improvements costs unknown • Possible City exposure to liability resulting from injury if there is an agency relationship with either employer or employee and some injury or violation of the law arises. • Use of City staff and law enforcement to informally monitor program • Absence of a consistent supervision and ordered structure of program ORDINANCE - PROHIBITING THE SOLICITATION OF EMPLOYMENT Pros • May alleviate citizen and merchants concerns. • City is not perceived as possibly condoning the illegal hiring of day laborers by employers. Cons • Promotes a negative image -for the city. Undermines our humanistic approach as an organization to help individuals. • Ordinance has been challenged by civil rights organizations. • Costly to enforce - may require additional City contracted personnel to enforce law. • Ordinance rejected by City Council last year LAC SHERIFF FOOT PATROL Pros • Helps to alleviate merchant and citizen concerns • Sheriff can assist in providing educational materials to day workers • Assists in maintaining the problem in the interim while a long term solution is implemented Cons • It is not a long term solution, it does not address the primary criteria. Day laborers remain on commercial area. • Will decrease police service in the Valencia/Newhall during shift. IMMIGRATION - NATURALIZATION SERVICE TO THE SCENE Pros • May lessen the problem immediately, if raids are done daily • No cost to the City, however, involves cooperation of the INS Cons • Promotes a negative image for the city. Will be bad publicity for the City. • INS lacks the manpower to make consistent raids.