COLUSA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

Colusa County lies on the northern edge of California’s Great Central Valley, a region renowned for its beautiful landscape and the bounty of its fields.⁴⁶ This region produces over 25 percent of the nation’s table food, and Colusa County is the nation’s top rice producer. As an agricultural county, Colusa County is home to a large farmworker population and thus, reflects many of the trends and needs that are indigenous to rural areas and those populated by farmworkers.

In this small county of 17,596 people, 76 percent are white, 0.5 percent black, 2.1 percent American Indian, 2.2 percent Asian, and 33 percent Hispanic. While the poverty rate in Colusa County is only slightly higher than that of the state of California, 17 percent and 16.5 percent respectively according to 1990 Census data, the county falls behind the state in several other socioeconomic indicators. The median household income for Colusa county was 30 percent lower than the state median household income in 1990, at $24,912 for the county and $35,798 for the state. Per capita income for Colusa County, $12,402, was 76 percent of that for the state, $16,409.⁴⁷

In the summer of 1997, the California state legislature adopted a welfare reform plan, California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs). This program, which was implemented January 1, 1998, replaced GAIN (Greater Avenues for Independence, the state’s waiver program) and gave the individual counties the discretion to design programs that would fit the needs of their residents within the state program outline.

Colusa County is a study in contrasts. While the surrounding countryside is beautiful and lush, life in Colusa County can be difficult for many residents. In the midst of considerable wealth, there is a large and growing population of people in poverty. Beautiful mansions for the wealthy are bounded by ramshackle, makeshift farmworker housing. In a county marked by chronic unemployment and a growing rate of poverty, implementing welfare reform has been a challenging task.

Local Economy

Colusa County is predominantly a farming community; the majority of the land, 61 percent, is devoted to agriculture, and a large percentage of the county’s workforce is employed in this industry. In 1997, Colusa County had the highest proportion of employment in farming and agriculture in the region, 43 percent, and also one of the highest unemployment rates in the state (18 percent). Reliance on agriculture shapes the Colusa County economy.

As California has rebounded from a recession in the mid-1990s, many areas have benefitted with job growth and an expanded economy, including Colusa County. There was growth in the number of jobs in every industry in the county from 1990 to 1996, with the exception of construction and mining. From 1990 to 1995, there was 92 percent growth in manufacturing payrolls in the county.⁴⁸ This has not translated into very many jobs, however, given the low base number of manufacturers in the county and the number of jobs these firms offer. Manufacturing provided only 9.6 percent of county jobs, compared to agriculture’s 32 percent. Most Colusa County-based employers are small businesses; in 1994, 77 percent of all the employers in the county employed nine or fewer workers.⁴⁹

Despite the total growth in jobs in the county, unemployment is still high. The 1997 unemployment rate was 18.3 percent, down from 19.7 percent in 1995 and 20 percent in 1994. Colusa County has had the state’s second highest unemployment level for many years.⁵⁰ Part of this unemployment can be accounted for by the seasonal nature of the farming industry. Also, job growth in the county’s other job sectors has not been strong enough to absorb new job seekers.⁵¹

The dominance of the agriculture industry also impacts the earnings of county residents. In 1996, Colusa County’s per capita income of $21,727 was 80.5 percent of the state of California’s, ranking the county 28th out of 58 counties in terms of per capita income.⁵² As for personal income Colusa ranked 52nd out of 58, with a median household income of $28,030. Despite a growth in the total number of jobs from 1990 to 1996, there has not been a concomitant growth in total earnings in the county; total earnings in the county dropped by 7.3 percent in that same period. Changes in the farming sector accounted for a significant amount of this decrease. As the number of farming jobs increased by 18.9 percent, earnings from this industry actually decreased by 21 percent.⁵³

Given its large farmworker population (43 percent of the workforce), Colusa County is presented with a unique earnings and poverty dynamic. Because of the seasonal nature of the industry, an overwhelming percentage of the population is out of work for large parts of the year. Many residents must then find ways to supplement the meager wages they receive from farm work, and many still remain in poverty. According to the 1995-97 National Agriculture Workers Survey (NAWS), the average earnings of California farmworkers in 1990 was $7,320 per year, and three of five farmworker families had incomes well below the poverty level.⁵⁴ This level of poverty limits the housing alternatives available to this population and contributes to a reliance on public assistance as an additional source of income.

Despite recent declines in unemployment and a local economy which has been growing, a great number of Colusa County residents are still in poverty. With poverty rates that are generally higher than other Central Valley counties, Colusa County’s poverty rate has been on the rise in recent years⁵⁵. In 1990, 13 percent of the population lived in poverty. By 1995, this figure had increased to 17.3 percent. Almost half of the people living in poverty (1,308) are children under the age of 18.

In the midst of the extensive poverty in Colusa County, there is a small, but powerful, wealthy population. The proximity of very wealthy and very poor groups shapes social and economic interactions in the county and affects the dynamics of community life. Tensions between the two populations often run high. Officials from agencies that provide services to farmworkers report that there is a great deal of resentment between farmworkers and county landowners. According to one service provider, "The farmworkers feel as if the farmers don’t care about them. Attempting change through local politics is impossible. County government is dominated by the farmers and landowners."

Compounding these difficulties is the fact that for many farmworkers English is their second language. One in five Colusa County residents are foreign born.⁵⁶ Language barriers may pose additional challenges for welfare recipients in the context of the passage of the "English Only" proposition in California.⁵⁷ California residents without English skills are concerned that they may have increasing difficulty accessing much-needed resources in this environment.

Even among the non-farmworker residents there is a sense that the county does not adequately respond to the needs of low-income households. Residents point to the lack of public transportation and nonprofit organizations, as well as the paucity of government assisted housing and public facilities, such as parks and recreation areas, as evidence of the county’s disregard for its low-income residents. State and local welfare administrators communicated that many county residents believe that this neglect reflects the priorities of the county’s wealthy landowners.

Staff at California’s Department of Housing and Community Development also noted a lack of social service and nonprofit housing organizations in Colusa County, and that the lack of social service providers affects the administration of social services in the county.

Housing Conditions and Programs

Lack of decent, affordable housing for low-income residents is a significant problem in Colusa County. Many of Colusa County’s seven thousand housing units are in need of structural maintenance. Over one quarter of the total housing units, 1,800, have at least one serious housing problem. This is more than double the state proportion of deteriorated units, 12 percent.⁵⁸ Unlike surrounding counties that have organizations to address these issues, there is a definite lack of housing assistance providers in Colusa County. The absence of housing assistance compounds the other housing concerns of this small county, given the growing number of people in poverty and the special needs of the farmworkers.

Reflecting the economic and employment status of its residents, the area’s housing stock is an odd patchwork of beautiful old farmhouses, lovingly restored and renovated by the county’s landowners, a few new single-family housing developments, and ramshackle trailers and shelters hastily constructed for the county’s farmworker population. Given the population growth that has been occurring in the state over the last few years, the state Department of Housing and Community Development estimates that Colusa County will need an additional 1,875 affordable housing units by the year 2003.⁵⁹

There has been some significant housing development in Colusa County over the last eight years. In 1990, there were 6,295 housing units in the county. By 1998 there were 7,042, an increase of over 10 percent. Most of the housing development that accounts for this increase occurred in the private development of single-family units. The majority of all housing units in the county, 64 percent, are owner-occupied, and 36 percent are renter-occupied. This is a higher rate of homeownership than the state of California as a whole, where 56 percent of housing units are owner-occupied. Local housing administrators find that the predominance of mobile homes and low housing values account for these high rates of ownership.

Mobile homes represent a large but declining percentage of housing units in Colusa County; in 1990 there were 811 mobile homes, 13 percent of the total housing units; by 1998 the number and proportion had declined to 787, or 11 percent. The median housing value in the county is $68,900, which is much lower than housing values in the surrounding counties.⁶⁰ However, purchasing a home is difficult, if not impossible, for many Colusa County families, especially for farmworker families. One county administrator estimated that nearly 80 percent of the farmworker population lives below the federal poverty guideline of $13,650 for a family of three. In a county where the median home price is close to $70,000, it seemed highly unlikely to the administrator that even a small number of farmworker families would be able to move out of cramped rental units or substandard farmworker shelters and into their own homes.

As in most rural areas, there are few multifamily units in Colusa County; in 1990 there were 692 multifamily rental units. By 1998, some development had occurred and there are now 921 multifamily rental units. The median contract rent in Colusa County was $272, and more than two-thirds of the available rental housing, for those units charging cash rent, had a contract rent below $399.⁶¹ While rents in the county are among the lowest in the region, affording these units is still a problem for residents, given the low wages of many workers.

Housing affordability is of great concern for both renters and owners in Colusa County. Almost one in five homeowners are cost burdened, paying more than 30 percent of their income for housing, and more than a quarter, 26 percent, of renters are similarly burdened. Housing assistance to aid these families is limited. While there is a housing authority in the county, residents seeking assistance from this office are often instructed to contact the state Department of Housing and Community Development in Sacramento. It is very possible that requests for assistance are misplaced or those requesting aid become frustrated because of the distance between Colusa County and the state capital.⁶²

Housing for the farmworker population presents an additional problem. Older motels can be found in every small town in Colusa County and often serve as shelter for farmworkers and their families. These rundown motels are one of the few shelter options for migrant workers, who often are forced to sleep as many as ten in a room during the picking season. There is one public housing facility, which also serves as a shelter for farmworkers, in the entire county. Clean, safe, and equipped with a preschool and daycare center, it is one of Colusa County’s few affordable housing success stories. The waiting list often extends beyond the picking season, however, and many families are then forced to find space in motel rooms or board with family and friends until space is available. This need to "double up" contributes to the problem of overcrowding, which is prevalent in this county.⁶³ Overall, there are 731 overcrowded units in Colusa County, 13 percent of the county’s occupied housing units. Rental units tend to be somewhat more overcrowded than owner-occupied units, with an average of 3.0 persons per unit compared to 2.7 persons per unit.

Some federal programs have been used to mitigate housing problems within the county. There are three HUD Section 8 projects which provide 102 subsidized rental units in Colusa County. Almost 260 units in six projects have been constructed using RHS Section 515 funding. The county has not, however, made use of any other federally funded or state-supported development programs in recent years. Local administrators point to the lack of nonprofit agencies within the county as the main reason for this lack of development. State administrators indicated that local organizations could serve as agents of change for county residents.

TANF and Other Poverty Programs

Welfare reform has been a difficult undertaking in California. With almost 1 million families on public assistance in 1995, the state has one of the largest welfare populations in the nation. Thus, ending welfare as an entitlement and moving families from welfare to work requires a major philosophical and economic shift for hundreds of thousands of people. With its considerable and enduring unemployment problem, Colusa County is in the difficult position of having to place former recipients into jobs that are simply nonexistent.

Under CalWORKs, each county is required to submit a County Plan to the state Department of Social Services which details how the county will provide necessary training and support services, partner with the local private sector, and identify the range of welfare-to-work services that the county will offer.⁶⁴ Although counties have to conform to general program guidelines established by the state, they are given wide latitude in developing their own welfare programs and choosing strategies to implement their initiatives.

As of July, 1999, single-parent CalWORKs recipients in Colusa County are required to work 32 hours per week in order to receive any benefits, and at least one unemployed parent in two- parent households must participate in 35 hours of work activities per week. Welfare-to-work activities include: unsubsidized employment; subsidized private sector employment; subsidized public sector employment; work experience that helps provide job skills (limited to 12 months); on-the-job-training; self-employment; community service; adult basic education; job skills training directly related to employment; vocational education and training; job search and job readiness assistance; education directly related to employment; satisfactory progress in secondary school; mental health, substance abuse, and domestic violence services, and; other activities necessary to assist an individual in obtaining unsubsidized employment. There is a 60- month lifetime limit for the receipt of aid for adult caretakers.

With less than 400 adult recipients per year on average, Colusa County has one of the smallest welfare recipient populations in the state. State administrators suggested that rural areas like Colusa County have a particularly difficult time administering this welfare program because of their small size. Smaller population size means smaller grants, and therefore a reduced ability to provide services to their clients. Welfare providers were anxious about what they considered to be unique concerns for these small rural areas.

In addition to the shortage of well-paying, full time jobs, the lack of existing social service infrastructure is one of the biggest problems facing welfare administrators attempting to implement reform in Colusa County. Despite the obvious need among the county’s poor and farmworker families, there are very few social service resources in Colusa County. Those requesting services are often directed to agencies outside of the county, usually to Yuba City, which is just under an hour away or to Chico City in Butte County.

One specific area of need in Colusa County is for drug and alcohol dependence services for recipients. A Colusa County welfare administrator estimated that nearly 30 percent of the county’s welfare recipients would require treatment for alcohol or drug abuse before they could move successfully from welfare to work. Under CalWORKS, drug or alcohol dependents will not be excused from working because of their addiction. However, resources for treatment have been cut dramatically. For many addicted persons, this lack of institutional support will mean even greater hardship. There are no treatment facilities within Colusa County, and the modest state grant of $45,000 the county receives under new welfare legislation will not even come close to meeting the cost of adding a staff member, much less building a treatment center. Nor will Colusa County residents find much help in neighboring counties: in nearby Siskiyou County, treatment funds were slashed from nearly $1 million a year to $46,000 a year under the new legislation.

County caseworkers acknowledge that moving individuals from welfare to work is ideal, yet they are unsure of how Colusa County will achieve this given the county’s lack of resources, such as childcare centers and public transportation. Given the modest grant that the county receives for welfare support and administration, a little over $750,000, it is going to be difficult to fund these kinds of expensive programs. Furthermore, caseworkers stress that they are skeptical about the ability of the existing local economy to support those coming off the welfare rolls. One welfare staff person commented that, "The jobs are not there. Period. And this is with an economy that is stronger than it’s been in decades--imagine what will happen with a recession."

Beyond the state-run support programs, there are few local assistance agencies in the county and there are wide gaps in the services that they offer. Several churches in the area run "food closets" where individuals and families can receive basic groceries. Similar programs that provide clothing and blankets for poor families are also active in the county. To receive any sustained social service assistance, Colusa County families must travel to neighboring counties. Given Colusa County’s lack of public transportation, this is often an impossible undertaking for the 41 percent of county welfare families without access to an automobile.

State administrators are impressed with the drop in welfare rolls across the state and confident that welfare reform will continue to be successful.⁶⁵ In a 10 month period, the number of families on welfare in California dropped by more than 100,000, or 12 percent. The state estimates that it saves approximately $54 million a month with the reduced rolls. Even in counties with double-digit unemployment, like Colusa County, there has been a steady decline in welfare rolls. Colusa County has seen a 30.5 percent drop in its welfare rolls since 1996. Whites have left the system at a slightly higher rate than Hispanics, with a 31.5 percent drop for white recipients, as compared to a 27 percent drop for Hispanics since 1996.

Impacts and Expectations

Given the programmatic restrictions of welfare reform and the state of the local economy, county caseworkers and clients alike are anxious about the future of welfare reform in rural Colusa County. Welfare rolls in the county are decreasing, and from 1996 to 1998, the county welfare department reported a 30 percent decline in its caseload. There were, however, several concerns identified by local social service administrators about the future of reform and quality of life for former recipients.

Overall, county caseworkers see reform and the drop in the rolls as a positive accomplishment for their clients. While the county keeps records of current participants and those leaving the rolls, there is no method of tracking clients once they are employed. Caseworkers were uniformly interested in this population; most wondered how their former clients were doing with their jobs and how their families were faring. Funds have not been allocated to track former recipients to determine their progress and thus, there is no way, in the administrators’ view, to measure the true success of the CalWORKS program.

In addition to the good economy, several Colusa County administrators and caseworkers suspect that the drop in rolls should also be attributed to clients leaving welfare out of their frustration with the newly imposed work requirements. One county welfare staff person remarked that many farmworker families who formerly received assistance have decided they did not want to participate in California’s mandatory "work first" policy, which requires that they secure employment almost immediately after receiving benefits. Instead, they are saving their meager salaries from the picking season and combining them with unemployment payments. The administrator was convinced that stretching these limited funds would be a serious financial hardship for these families, many of whom are barely making ends meet with full support. And, this administrator is also concerned that this will probably create or exacerbate housing cost burden for the farmworker families who pursue this route. Without housing assistance, which is extremely difficult to access in the county, farmworker and other low-income households will not have adequate wages to keep themselves housed.

Among clients who are complying with the new requirements under welfare reform, caseworkers are somewhat afraid that they may fall through the cracks at some point in the future. County administrators seem resigned that even if families manage to find work and get off of welfare, they will always teeter along the poverty line. California’s "work first" policy was cited by some as a cause. With the focus being shifted from training and education to work, clients are left with little opportunity to improve their skills and obtain higher-paying employment. Instead, they will continue to work in unskilled jobs, which often pay poverty level wages.

One county welfare administrator had this to say about the CalWORKS program, "I hate to admit it, but I really think it’s the kids who might someday benefit from welfare reform, not their parents." She commented that working parents are an excellent role model for children, and that this would give the children the incentive to develop skills that might lead to more personally and financially rewarding careers. Recent programs in the Colusa County public school system seem to reflect this "investment in the future" approach to welfare reform. The school district has created a mentor program for students, which focuses on building skills that will assist students in finding careers.

There is a widespread perception among county caseworkers that while reforming the welfare system was necessary, the benefits of these actions would be felt in the future generation. In the context of the county’s high unemployment rates, the predominance of low wage jobs, and the demands of a reformed welfare system, Colusa County caseworkers have adopted a "wait and see" position that is not proactive towards current needs. This will be a difficult wait for Colusa County residents who are in need, especially without the aid and assistance of local service organizations.

On to Next Section

Back to Table of Contents