Street vendors in Santa Maria may soon be required to obtain a permit and undergo a background check under a new ordinance that has support from the majority of City Council but garnered significant community opposition.
The ordinance would require street vendors to obtain a permit to vend from public sidewalks. Permit applicants must have a Santa Maria business license; a California Department of Tax and Fee Administration seller’s permit; proof of general liability insurance; and, for food vendors, a current health permit and food handlers’ certificate from the county. Applicants would also be required to submit a LiveScan background check, which would be conducted by the Santa Maria Police Department. The ordinance additionally places restrictions on where vendors can sell, such as not being within 500 feet of schools or freeway entrances and exits.
The council was split 4-1 on the issue after its first hearing, with Councilmember Gloria Soto being the only dissenting vote. Assuming the council members stick to their initial convictions, the ordinance will likely pass after its second reading.
At the Jan. 5 meeting, City Attorney Thomas Watson provided some background information on the state’s 2018 Safe Sidewalk Vending Act, “which made changes to the government code to allow for entrepreneurial sidewalk vending, primarily with an expectation to bring additional economic resources to smaller communities.”
In other words, it decriminalized street vending across the state.
Since then, Watson continued, Santa Maria has seen an increase in sidewalk vending, which prompted the city attorney and code enforcement offices to review other cities’ street vending ordinances and come up with something “to regulate what has been an unregulated business model” in Santa Maria.
Code Enforcement Supervisor Joy Castaing added during the meeting that the city is seeking to address potential Americans with Disabilities Act concerns with sidewalk blockage, the dangers of vending near freeways, and the sometimes poor working conditions that street vendors face, such as long work hours and no access to bathrooms.
Soto was quick to express her opposition to the ordinance, inquiring why the city hadn’t held a community workshop to hear from street vendors before drafting the proposal. Watson said that such meetings wouldn’t be necessary unless the ordinance passes.
“I know that other cities have done that, before even passing an ordinance,” Soto responded. “They do have community workshops, and they do ask for community input. And particularly input from the folks who are going to be most impacted by the ordinances that the city’s going to pass.”
Councilmembers Etta Waterfield, Mike Cordero, Carlos Escobedo, and Mayor Alice Patino all voiced strong support for the proposal, citing unregulated working conditions as a main point of concern, as well as the impact that street vendors may have on brick-and-mortar businesses. But Soto opined that, if those are the council’s concerns, the current ordinance does not address them.
“I’m hearing, ‘We need to protect workers,’” Soto said. “I’m hearing all the right things that I’m definitely in favor for. However, this ordinance doesn’t do that. On the contrary, what it’s doing is it’s pushing these vendors further into the closet.”
Escobedo asked whether a Social Security number would be required for the LiveScan background check, given the impact this would have on undocumented vendors. Watson said it wouldn’t be required.
“We have no intention of it in any way impacting undocumented [people] or folks who just don’t otherwise have tax ID numbers,” Watson said.
The Code Enforcement Division of the City Attorney’s office did not respond to the Sun’s request for further comment.
Some local organizations say the effect the ordinance could have on the undocumented community is complex.
“The city’s arguing that LiveScans don’t require Social Security numbers and patting themselves on the back that they’re not requesting Social Security numbers, but anyone with common sense knows an undocumented immigrant is going to be very hesitant to go to the police station and get fingerprinted,” Central Coast Alliance United for a Sustainable Economy (CAUSE) Community Organizer Director Hazel Davalos told the Sun.
Public commenters at the Jan. 5 meeting largely agreed: Nearly every written and oral public comment was in opposition to the ordinance, with many arguing that it would be harmful to the street vendors’ livelihoods and would target low-income people in the middle of a pandemic.
Davalos said she spoke with one local vendor who had no qualms about applying for a permit, especially if he was “provided support and education.”
“He said, ‘Yeah, totally, I would love to because then I wouldn’t have to stress all the time,’” Davalos said. “But when we asked him, would you do it if you had to get a LiveScan, he said, ‘No I would not.’
“So I think that really speaks to the alternative approach we would recommend,” Davalos continued. “Let’s hire a staff member that actually works with these vendors instead of citing them.”
Juliana Neel, president of Santa Maria Valley Young Democrats and a delegate candidate for Assembly District 35, sees street vendors as an integral part of Santa Maria.
“I’m personally concerned for the street vendors that are walking through downtown Santa Maria, in communities,” Neel said. “It’s something that I believe brings culture to Santa Maria, and brings something different that not a lot of other cities have in our area.”
Neel and her organization spearheaded a #SavethePaletero (#SaveStreetVendors) campaign, which encouraged community members to voice their opinions on the ordinance and has gained traction on Instagram.
“We were really lucky this time to get a lot of people engaged, but oftentimes big issues pass without a lot of community engagement,” Neel said. “So I would just highly encourage the public to be engaged in the community so they know what’s happening.”
Reach Staff Writer Malea Martin at mmartin@santamariasun.com.
This article appears in Jan 21-28, 2021.
