Housing for Families and Unaccompanied Migrant Farmworkers© Housing Assistance Council, August 1997 Permission is granted ONLY to nonprofit community-based organizations to reproduce and/or adapt this document, and only for their own use. CASE STUDIES: Part 3 The agricultural industry attracts 8,000 migrant farmworkers to Washington County each year, in addition to seasonal and year-round farmworkers; the number of farmworkers with their dependents climbs to more than 18,000 in the peak season.36 The vast majority of farmworkers in Washington County are Mexican-American, Mexican, and Guatemalan; a large portion immigrate from Oaxaca and Southern Mexico. According to verbal accounts from health care providers at the Virginia Garcia Health Clinic, migrant farmworkers in the area speak 11 other languages and dialects besides Spanish. Washington County's economy is heavily agricultural. The annual gross farm sales total nearly $500 million.37 Labor intensive crops account for 75 percent of the annual gross farm sales. Farmworkers work in the county's nurseries, canneries and fields. The primary labor intensive crops are strawberries, red raspberries, black raspberries, Evergreen and Marion blackberries, boysenberries, blueberries, grapes, cucumbers, potatoes, and Christmas trees. In Washington County the crop season lasts from four to six months. However, increasing numbers of farmworkers are staying longer periods because they have been able to piece together different seasonal jobs into a longer employment period. For example, one worker traced his employment pattern from February to November. He first works in a nursery. He then moves to work in the fields picking strawberries. When the strawberry season is over he works in a cannery for a short time. Then he goes back to the fields to pick grapes. Finally, he works with Christmas trees until the beginning of November and then returns home. His work year lasts approximately ten months. This increase in the work period is attributed to the booming grape and Christmas tree industry. The housing needs of the farmworkers in Washington County are indeed serious. A great number of farmworkers live in unsanitary, unsafe, and overcrowded conditions, whether in labor camps or in private units. However, the most visible problems occur in farm labor camps. Some of the most common code violations found in camps include lack of hot and cold water, lack of clean water, sewage disposal problems, unsafe or faulty electrical wiring, and severe overcrowding.38 Affordability is an enormous problem. The annual income of a year-round farmworker family is $10,50--about one fourth of the county's median household income. The average gross rent in the county is $624 for a two-bedroom apartment.39 The average farmworker family would have to contribute more than 70 percent of its income towards rent, far more than the federal guideline of 30 percent. Some farmworkers take this option, but often are unable to move into privately owned units because of other major obstacles. Migrant families cannot afford to raise the deposit required by landlords, which is usually equal to the first month's rent. Another obstacle is that landlords require a lease. Obviously, migrant farmworkers are not in a position to sign 12-month leases. The local response to the housing crisis of farmworkers has not been overwhelmingly positive. The Washington County Department of Housing Services which administers HOME, CDBG and other funds has awarded some money to the Housing Development Corporation of Washington County to help defray the cost of hiring an executive director. It has also specifically recognized the housing needs of farmworkers in the Housing and Community Development Plan which lays out the county's plan of action until the year 2000.40 However, the County of Washington’s share of allocated funds are clearly not enough to meet the housing and community needs of all the groups that it must serve. The county's 1995 entitlement grants totaled $3,986,000. The estimated dollars to address housing and community development needs for Washington County total $882,686,000.41 Of six nonprofit housing developers in the county, only one attempts to meet the specific housing needs of farmworkers. The Housing Development Corporation of Washington County (HDC) is a 13-year-old nonprofit organization that develops, manages and owns farmworker housing in Washington County. In cooperation with CASA of Oregon, a regional technical assistance provider, HDC has developed 91 units of affordable housing. However, only 24 of those are earmarked for migrant farmworkers. At one point the board was split over the mission of the organization. The dilemma was whether to provide only migrant farmworker housing or to serve all farmworkers. The board decided to serve all farmworkers since no organization really meets the needs of any type of farmworker in Washington County. HDC decided to offer a range of services including a homeownership program for those who qualify. Remarkably, for twelve and a half years, HDC operated without paid staff. The work was performed by the volunteer board. However, the board decided that to pursue housing development more aggressively, staff was needed. Six months after HDC hired its first executive director, the move had already proved beneficial. The executive director served as an advocate and liaison to government agencies, foundations, and the public. After six months, HDC had received funding for the executive director's position for the next three years and for an outreach worker. At the time this research was conducted, HDC was in the pre-planning stages of its next project. It intended to acquire Campo Azul, a farm labor camp with some of the worst conditions in Washington County. If HDC is successful in acquiring the site and securing funds from Rural Development, it will provide 60 units of housing for migrant farmworkers. However, the complete development process could range from three to seven years or more. Even if HDC is successful in acquiring and renovating this camp, the lack of farmworker housing in Washington County will still be overwhelming. According to a housing needs assessment conducted by HDC, only 610 units of on-farm housing provided by the growers exist. An additional 1,825 units must be provided to house migrant and seasonal farmworkers. Year-round and local seasonal workers need another 1,114 units. The total shortfall is 2,684 units of farmworker housing in Washington County. In Washington County farmworkers cannot expect to have their needs met by subsidized housing. In 1993, there were 3,132 families on the Housing Authority's waiting list. This translates to a waiting period ranging from two to four years. Migrant farmworkers are especially not well served by public housing and Section 8 programs, since their stay in one place is temporary. Almost all of the housing units provided by HDC have been developed using Rural Development Section 514/516 funds. The housing is clean, affordable, and safe. Unfortunately, it is insufficient to meet the farmworker housing demand. As mentioned earlier, of the 91 units owned and managed by HDC, only 24 are earmarked for migrant farmworkers. A useful instrument for nonprofit organizations developing farmworker housing is CASA of Oregon. CASA of Oregon is a nonprofit organization specializing in farmworker housing. This organization provides general technical assistance and in-depth development assistance to community development corporations, growers and public agencies; provides information on innovative building techniques as well as state housing resources; does home ownership counseling; and owns, manages and coordinates social services for several properties.42 According to HDC staff, CASA of Oregon has been essential in providing technical assistance for the farmworker housing it has developed. One unique aspect of developing farm labor housing in Oregon is the existence of a housing tax credit for farm labor housing. The Oregon Farmworker Housing State Income Tax Credit was developed in 1989 for the purpose of increasing farmworker housing development. According to CASA of Oregon staff, it has had a great impact. Reportedly, the most attractive feature of the program is that it is simple to use. Until the end of 1995, the sponsor of a tax credit project could claim up to 50 percent of the cost of construction or rehabilitation on the state income tax form simply by checking the appropriate box, keeping bureaucracy to a minimum. In 1995, however, the legislature passed a bill that reduces the available tax credit from 50 to 30 percent. It also establishes an application process to apply for the tax credit; applications will be considered on a first-come, first-served basis until the annual limit of $3.3 million is depleted. Grower-Provided Farm Labor Camps The county has 31 recognized farm labor camps that must be registered with the state of Oregon's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OR-OSHA). Of these 31 camps, HAC staff visited six. To gain access to the camps, HAC staff enlisted the assistance of outreach workers from the Centro Cultural of Washington County, a nonprofit organization which promotes understanding of the farmworker population and provides social services. The outreach worker was asked to take HAC staff to camps ranging from "excellent" to "bad" conditions. In response to this request, he stated that no excellent grower-provided farm labor camps existed in Washington County. Table 4 highlights the conditions of the six camps visited and provides information on the farmworkers there. Homebases are as distant as Mexico and even Guatemala. One farmworker based in California was originally from Oaxaca, Mexico. The average age was about 35 years. Traveling times varied from three to 38 months and expected absences from homebases ranged from three to 48 months. Some farmworkers had already worked at one other job by the end of July. In Washington County, as mentioned earlier, affordability is a major crisis. However, three of the six grower-provided labor camps visited provide housing completely free of charge. Although this housing is free of charge, often farmworkers pay a high price by living in housing conditions rivaling those of underdeveloped countries. In Washington County those who can move into a farm labor camp consider themselves very fortunate. The following sections will describe three camps and the housing conditions for families and unaccompanied workers at each of these locations (for more details see Table 4). Camp K houses unaccompanied workers in very tiny one-room units. The outside appearance of this camp seemed acceptable; however, the inside of the units was extremely dark, dirty, and dilapidated. These units lack kitchens, bathrooms, electricity and water. Four men sleep in one room. When asked about the overcrowding in the room, one man responded that indeed it was overcrowded, but that he was lucky to share this housing with only three other people. He described one instance where 11 people shared a one-room trailer. He told HAC staff researchers that the last person to come in for the night would usually have to sleep by the door steps because the trailer was so crowded. This unaccompanied worker said that he would definitely bring his family if better housing were available. He stated, however, that it was extremely hard to "make it" here in the U.S. for a man traveling on his own, and that it would be even more difficult with a family. Another unaccompanied man in this camp stated his preference for mixed housing. He thought that in mixed housing there was a more defined sense of community and respect. However, he said he really did not have a choice about where to live because the housing at Camp K is provided free of charge and that opportunity is too good to forego. Camp L was the best camp observed in Washington County. However, the conditions were not excellent. The apartments consist of two bedrooms, a bathroom, a kitchen, and a small dining area. A farmworker at this location informed HAC staff that it was easy for her family to find housing because her father knew the crewleader; therefore, the family has guaranteed housing every year. This unit was also occupied by six related individuals. The fact that only one family lived in a unit was an unusual occurrence in all the camps visited by HAC staff. Usually units were occupied by more than one family. Camp M houses both families and unaccompanied workers. It is among the worst housing observed throughout the course of this research. It consists of unattractive dilapidated small wooden cabins lacking kitchens, bathrooms, water, and electricity. The units lack windows and are very dark inside. The common area bathrooms reek. No laundry facilities exist in the premises. According to two residents, the water is not suitable for drinking. One farmworker said that he had to start buying water for cooking and drinking after he saw chunks of dirt coming out of the faucet and after his young daughter became ill. The units are overcrowded. Families and groups of between four and eight live in one room without partitions. Sixty units house more than 300 persons. Families living at the camp stated the rent is $200 per cabin. Centro Cultural outreach workers and HDC stated that persons have stayed during the winter facing severe climate conditions without heat. Countless abandoned vehicles, where more farmworkers live, add to the unattractive and desolate appearance of the camp. One migrant family stated that they only stayed there because other housing was unavailable. This was the most affordable housing they could find. The head of household also stated that he felt uncomfortable living next to unaccompanied workers because he disliked to expose his family to their behavior. He refused to expand on this statement. The housing conditions of farmworkers in grower-provided housing ranged from terrible to passing. The worst conditions were those of the men living in single camps and those found at Camp M. Overcrowding was a major problem in all the camps. For this small sample of camps, the average number of persons was 4.5 per room. When asked how they felt in overcrowded situations, the farmworkers' logical answers were "uncomfortable," "unable to do as you please," "not able to relax after a hard day's work." Nonprofit Farm Labor Housing As mentioned above, the only nonprofit developer attempting to meet the housing needs of farmworkers in Washington County is the Housing Development Corporation. In Washington County, nonprofits must face the same obstacles as other nonprofits in the rest of the country. However, Washington County developers face two specific constraints. The first one is finding the land. Agriculture is such an important industry in the county that much of the land where the workers live and work is zoned exclusively for farm use. Use of the land for purposes other than agriculture is strictly restricted. As a result, finding an appropriate site can be an arduous process. The second constraint in Washington County is the rapidly increasing price of land. Washington County is one of the fastest growing counties in the region. With its growing population, the price of the land, according to HDC board members, has tripled in four years. Conclusions In Washington County 1,825 units are needed to meet the housing needs of migrant and seasonal farmworkers. No further data is available determining the specific number of units needed for families and unaccompanied migrant farmworkers respectively. The research indicates that both families and unaccompanied workers suffer from the lack of affordable housing. It appears that housing conditions in grower-provided housing for unaccompanied workers are worse than those for families, except in Camp M. In the camps visited by HAC staff, unaccompanied men were more likely to be housed in units without indoor kitchen and bathroom facilities. Table 4: Samples of Grower-Provider Housing in Washington County, Oregon
|