At least one person made a salient point at a recent Santa Barbara County ad-hoc committee meeting about farmworker conditions, specifically when it comes to the concept of implementing a $26 minimum wage for farmworkers in the county.
“Say I’m Driscoll’s. I could buy from Santa Barbara County, I could buy from our neighboring counties, I could buy perhaps from Georgia, or from Mexico,” 3rd District Supervisor Joan Hartmann said. “I’m going to go where I’m going to get it cheapest because it’s not a local market. It’s an international market and that to me seems like a really important difference to address as we think about: What are the impacts of setting a minimum wage?”
But the workers are leaving because county farmers apparently don’t pay enough, Central Coast Alliance United for a Sustainable Economy (CAUSE) Associate Organizing Director Daniel Segura said. Oh?
So, we should force farmers to tack on an extra 40 percent to the wages they pay farmworkers so they can have enough workers? This minimum wage increase that CAUSE is advocating for is actually for the farmers. I see.
Maybe we should ask them about that. I’m not so sure they would agree with you, Segura.
Plus, he added, corporate growers could absorb the increased costs of labor and wouldn’t pass it along to the consumer. The consumer, he said, will only see a 4 percent increase in price—or $25 a year for the average household, according to the UC Davis study he cited. Does the average household not purchase fresh fruits and vegetables every week? Because I’m having a hard time with that math.
However, he did say that small growers could have a hard time adjusting to the burden that comes with a $26 minimum wage.
“Which is why policymakers should discuss phased adjustments or differentials based on company size,” Segura said.
But what about the market forces that would push laborers to work the higher paying jobs and not work for the small farms? Wouldn’t that lead to the exact same issue that you said is already happening?
Honestly, this isn’t a county-level conversation. The issue of wages and labor and immigration should be happening at a much higher level of government—those are just the outside forces that impact the local farmworker market.
Maybe Santa Barbara County should talk about making policy on things that it actually has control over—like signs. That’s what Solvang’s talking about!
Apparently the city’s Design Review Committee (DRC) has been flouting case law when it comes to the subjective decisions it makes about who gets to put what on a sign.
“Previous city staff did not advise, in my professional opinion, this DRC board properly, based on previous court cases of content-based signage and being content-neutral,” Planning and Building Manager Rafael Castillo said in 2023.
Way to throw the city’s ex-staff under the bus!
Apparently, even signs that comply with the city’s rules are getting pulled from consent agendas and picked apart by the DRC. Perhaps, the authority has gone to their heads! Solvang has a brand to uphold, after all.
“Our brand means everything,” Castillo said.
But even branding has its limits. Time to let go of some sign power.
The Canary is always on-brand. Send marketing advice to canary@santamariasun.com.
This article appears in Nov 21 – Dec 1, 2024.
