That’s according to a new report released Monday by the Economic Roundtable, a Los Angeles-based nonprofit research organization. The report highlights how the fast-food industry’s low-wage jobs contribute to the state’s homeless crisis and proposes improvements to keep workers and their families housed.

The research found fast food workers make up 5.9% of California’s homeless population and 11% of all homeless workers in the state. The poverty rate for the households of frontline fast food workers is also roughly three times higher than the rest of the state’s workers.

“We need to raise the playing field…If we raise the expectations, the wage levels, the hours of employment for everyone in the industry, then it doesn’t hurt any company individually,” said Daniel Flaming, president of Economic Roundtable and lead author of the report. “But it makes the service they provide socially sustainable rather than a bottom feeder activity.”

Flaming argues if the industry provided sustaining pay and stable employment, there would be roughly 10,000 fewer homeless workers in California.

“That alone is not the sole solution to homelessness, but it’s a big piece of a solution,” he said.

Per the report, a fast food worker collects $59 per hour for corporations. The top five publicly traded fast-food corporations operating in California generated $12 billion in 2022.

“In a state with the fourth largest economy in the world, corporations are able to get away with paying poverty wages simply because we let them,” said Devon Gray, president of End Poverty in California. “And the reason they’re allowed to do this is because we’ve internalized classist and, often, racist notions of deservedness that say fast food workers and other low-wage workers don’t need to get paid enough to meet their basic needs.”

The report comes in the middle of an ongoing battle between labor advocates and the fast-food industry over a first-in-the-nation council that would set pay and working standards for fast-food employees in California.

The council would apply to any chain restaurant with at least 100 locations in the United States and could lead to a $22 per hour minimum wage for workers.

Gov. Gavin Newsom approved the council by signing the FAST Recovery Act last year on Labor Day. But the following day, opponents filed a referendum to halt its formation.

Paid signature gatherers would collect more than 1 million signatures over the next few months while facing accusations of lying and misrepresentation. Following a statewide count, 77% of the signatures were deemed valid and the referendum qualified.

The approval sets the stage for voters to decide the council’s fate on the November 2024 ballot. It also likely means a costly battle, with spending reaching hundreds of millions of dollars.

The labor organization Service Employees International Union, which has worked for more than a decade to organize in fast food restaurants, provided $50,000 to the Economic Roundtable to produce the independent report.

SEIU led a campaign in 2016 to push California to raise its minimum wage to $15. And most recently, the organization has advocated for a measure that would make fast food corporations liable for any health and safety violations of their California franchisees.

Currently, fast food companies are not legally responsible for any labor violations if individual stores are owned by franchisees.

The proposed move comes as the administration tries to pull back on spending on a range of measures that were previously enacted. But some advocates and lawmakers are urging the governor to reconsider, citing the benefits and need for funding of the Court Appointed Special Advocates program, better known as CASA.

The program, which began in 1977, enlists volunteers across the nation to help and advocate for foster youth navigating the judicial and child welfare system. In California. CASA operates 44 centers and consists of more than 11,000 volunteers.

Volunteers Sharon Holgerson was “shocked and disappointed” when she saw Newsom’s January budget proposal to scale back CASA funding by two-thirds.

“What are you thinking?” asked Holgerson.“You’re hurting our youth. Why would you take it back after you’ve already allocated and made a budget?”

Holgerson is referring to last year when CASA was granted $60 million over the next three years to assist with recruiting, training and fundraising. The program received the first $20 million in December.

The remaining funding is crucial to completing CASA’s 10-year “Serve Every Child” vision, said Sharon Lawerence, chief executive for the California CASA Association. Currently, the program helps roughly 13,000 youth, which is about 16% of the state’s foster population.

California has approximately 78,000 foster youth, the most in the country. By 2023, CASA hoped the funding would go toward serving 50,000 of those youth.

As of now, CASA receives $2.7 million in state grants, while also fundraising another $58 million that mostly stems from private donations.

“$40 million is such a small part of our billions and billions of dollars budget…It’s so small and there’s other places that I think that we can cut the budget other than child welfare,” said Lawrence.

Bipartisan opposition to cuts

A request for comment from the governor’s office resulted in a referral to H.D. Palmer, spokesperson for the Department of Finance.

“Pulling back future funding for the CASA program is a proposal, like many others, that would not have been put forward were it not for the necessity of closing the shortfall,” said Palmer.

Both Republican and Democrat lawmakers have stated their opposition to the cuts, citing the vital role of advocates to the foster care system.

“These advocates can play a pivotal role in the outcomes of foster children and can change the trajectory of whether these young people enter our justice system or become homeless — or whether they go on to living healthy, thriving lives,” said Assemblymember Phil Ting, D-San Francisco.

Assemblymember Joe Patterson, R-Rocklin concurred, saying that the funding should remain despite the budget situation.

“Everybody knew that this budget year was going to be different, but you can’t pull the rug out from underneath them after just making the commitment a few months ago,” he said.

Patterson pointed out that research highlights how advocates help mitigate or eliminate negative outcomes for foster youth, who are disproportionately represented in prisons and homelessness.

More than 24% of 21-year-olds who had recently left the foster care system went on to experience homelessness, according to a 2019 study from the USC Homelessness Policy Research Institute.

Patterson also expressed optimism that the funding would be restored given the bipartisan blowback. Adjustments to Newsom’s budget will be released in May.

If the funding is not put back, Patterson plans to advocate for it through the budget committee.

“There is plenty of money to have this $40 million put back in there,” Patterson said. “It really comes down to priorities. And this funding should be a priority.”

On Monday, Sen. Anna Caballero, D- Merced, introduced Senate Bill 831 — the Agricultural Worker Permanent Residency Program. The bill would authorize the California governor to work with the federal government to establish a pilot program allowing agricultural workers to start a process toward legal status.

The legislation marks an attempt to circumvent the decades-long effort by the federal government to stabilize the agricultural workforce. It’s been more than three decades since broad federal immigration reform.

The legislation is an attempt to stabilize California’s agricultural workforce, a feat the federal government has tried to accomplish on a national level for decades.

Last year, the Farm Workforce Modernization Act passed twice in the House but never came to a vote in the Senate.

“Creating a pathway to permanent residency status allows our undocumented friends, family and neighbors to come out of the shadows, to live lives free of fear and allow them to qualify for the safety net programs that they deserve and pay into,” said Caballero in a statement.

Between one-third to half of all farmworkers in the United States reside in California, which would include about 500,000 to 800,000 people, according to the Center for Farmworker Families. About 75% of California farmworkers are undocumented, according to the UC Merced Community and Labor Center.

Other state proposals failed

Under the bill, undocumented farmworkers who have lived in California and worked in agriculture for five years would qualify. Federal standards for citizenship would apply including a criminal history background check, national security check and fees. Application fees for permanent resident status vary but are generally $1,225 for individuals aged 14 to 78.

Similar, less aggressive, legislation has failed in the past.

In 2018, Caballero and Assemblyman Eduardo Garcia, D- Coachella authored AB 1885, which died in the Assembly Labor Committee. The proposed legislation would have formed a group of state representatives to create a state guest worker program.

Three years later, another farmworker proposal called AB 1510 did not reach a committee hearing. The bill would have required the governor to make a formal request to the federal government to implement a statewide program to provide workers who were deemed “essential critical infrastructure workforce employees” with a permit to work and live in California.

In her news release, Caballero referenced the COVID-19 pandemic as evidence of why farmworkers are “essential” and should be eligible for federal benefits that only come through legal status.

“Our country experienced a shortage of many things throughout the pandemic, but fresh fruits and vegetables were not one of them,” Caballero said. “If we want to truly show our gratitude, and address the disparities faced by our undocumented workforce, then we need to address the issue at the root of the problem.”

Though a pilot program, the bill currently does not specify an end date. There is also no estimated cost yet.

SB 831 will be heard in the Senate Human Services Committee on April 17 or 24.

“I want to be able to spell my name correctly,” he said on Wednesday afternoon, while holding his teddy bear.

Due to the interpretation of a 37 year-old law, his name is Nicolas Agustin on his California birth certificate. The use of diacritical marks — like tildes and accents — are not allowed on marriage licenses and certificates of birth or death. When attached to a letter, the marks indicate a particular pronunciation as well as meaning.

The ban can be traced back to Proposition 63 in 1986, which established English as the official state language. Since then, the Department of Public Health has mandated diacritical marks as unacceptable.

But Assembly Bill 77 would change that.

The legislation, authored by Assemblymember Blanca Pacheco, D- Downey, clarifies that diacritical marks can be used. The bill would also retroactively apply to children like Nicolás, if a written request and fee are submitted.

Pacheco said the legislation is especially important to the state’s 16 million Latinos, but not only specific to that one community. She cited Asian, Hebrew and German names that use diacritical marks.

“It will allow individuals to be able to write their name correctly and be respectful of everybody’s various identities in different cultures,” Pacheco said.

“It’s much more than grammar”

In 2016 the parents of Nicolás, Nancy Chaires Espinoza and Pablo Espinoza were shocked to find out about the ban while filling out his birth certificate form in a Los Angeles hospital.

They initially thought the pushback was a keyboard issue.

“We were just confused as to why the state would be telling us that we couldn’t give our son the name that we had chosen,” said Chaires Espinoza, an education lobbyist.

Supporters, like Nicolás’ parents, say the correct spelling of a name is closely tied to identity and cultural heritage. They also point to the state being selective about which marks it allows.

Hyphens and apostrophes are allowed while diacritical marks are deemed “unacceptable entries,” according to the California Department of Health’s Office of Vital Records handbook.

That means the state accepts “O’Connell” and “Smith-Jones,” but not “José” or “Peña.”

“It might seem very minor to a lot of people that don’t have that sort of sense of connection with our roots. But it’s much more than grammar. It’s about identity. It’s about our values,” said Espinoza, an Assembly legislative staffer.

Espinoza argues the bill, if passed, would also be a source of local revenue with counties receiving a payment for certificate revisions.

Third time’s charm?

Similar legislation has failed in the past. A bill introduced in 2014 by Assemblymember Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, stalled in the appropriations committee. State agencies said the bill would cost roughly $10 million to reprogram and upgrade software.

Then in 2017, the Legislature overwhelmingly passed an identical bill. However, Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed the bill after opposition from the California Department of Public Health, County Recorders’ Association of California and the California Association of Clerks.

At the time, the Department of Public Health cited concerns that the bill would create inconsistencies with federal government records and require “significant state funds” to replace or modify existing systems. The U.S. federal government does not use diacritical marks on documents, such as passports and social security cards.

Pacheco said AB 77 is not anticipated to be too costly.

The Department of Public Health declined to comment on this year’s proposed legislation. Tomás Aragón, the current head of the department and state public health officer, uses diacritical marks in his name.

Chaires Espinoza said she is optimistic of the bill’s chances the third time around, particularly in a state that prides itself on diversity.

“We talk so much about inclusion and engagement of the public but how do you even get down that road of inclusion when you’re not even acknowledging somebody’s name,” she said.

This year, Nicolás has also joined the push. He will be speaking alongside his mother in the Assembly Health committee at 1:30 p.m. next Tuesday.

“I just want people to say my name right,” said Nicolás.

As a result, county assistance offices are experiencing casework backlogs, delays in service and employee burnout, the workers say. The crunch comes as the state expands the program this year, becoming the first in the nation to offer subsidized food benefits to undocumented seniors.

The complaints center on CalFresh, a $2.1 billion program administered by county social services offices that provides food benefits for about 4.6 million Californians, ranging from college students to working families.

The program received a budget boost from the Newsom administration this year, but county leaders say more needs to change to fund the services the state has promised.

In Fresno, the CalFresh county social services office maintains a vacancy rate of 18% for this year. In the last month, the office has seen the rate jump up to 23%.

Meanwhile, applications for food benefits increased by 18% from 2019 to 2021.

“I’ve been doing this for over 30 years, and I’ve never seen this exodus of people,” said Maria Villapudua Herrera, Social Services Program Manager for Fresno County. “The current situation is really new for all of us, but it’s becoming the norm.”

Herrera said the biggest challenge stems from retention, with new hires only showing up for a few months and then quitting. That leads to the remaining workers feeling “overwhelmed” and “burnt out.”

With demand surging for CalFresh, some county offices are setting aside work on applications for other benefits. Workers must prioritize CalFresh cases over the state’s Medi-Cal program because of federal rules requiring those eligible to receive food within three days.

For Fresno, 85% of CalFresh cases meet the expedited requirement.

Herrera said her office is meeting the requirement, but “other programs have suffered.” Federal guidelines give workers 45 days to process Medi-Cal applications.

“They are going to prioritize the three-day expedited application over other programs,” Herrera said. “That’s how we’ve been functioning. However, I don’t know how long we’re going to be able to sustain that.”

Marin County is experiencing the same stress, said Suzie Aceves, the county’s CalFresh department analyst. The county has an annual vacancy rate of around 15%, with applications for CalFresh increasing by 28% since the COVID-19 pandemic began in March 2020.

“It does have an impact on the process of application processing,” Aceves said. “And counties have had to just adjust workflow processes to meet federal and state timelines.”

Aceves and Herrera both attributed some of the rises in applications to recent legislation that required agencies to promote the CalFresh and expanded benefits to undocumented seniors.

The expansion of eligibility for undocumented residents 55 and older is estimated to benefit an additional 75,000 Californians each year, according to a report by the Legislative Analyst’s Office. It’s the first step in what many progressives hope will be the expansion of food assistance for all undocumented residents.

Workers praise broadening the eligible population for benefits, but say they’re not in position to process the applications in a timely manner.

“We’re waiting,” Herrera said. “We’re looking at it closely because that’s going to increase our numbers.”

More funding is on the way

Counties are poised to begin receiving more funding within the next two months as part of the new state budget deal. But advocates say it’s not enough and does not address the central issue.

Earlier this year, the County Welfare Directors Association of California asked the state to supply $60 million to address staffing shortages. Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the budget in June with an additional $35 million for the program.

“It’s a good amount but it’s well short of what we originally asked for just to fill the gap of what we’re currently spending,” said Cathy Senderling-McDonald, executive director of the association.

Senderling-McDonald said CalFresh funding has remained static over the years, with current funding resembling “2001” levels.

The $35 million is intended to be a temporary solution until state officials tackle their broader goal of overhauling the funding model.

The state and individual counties fund half of CalFresh costs, with the remaining money coming from the federal government.

The welfare directors group hopes that a new funding system better reflects caseload increases and takes into account “extraordinary” instances like the pandemic and legislation aimed at increasing eligibility. Senderling-McDonald also pointed to a need for cost-of-living adjustments that keep pace with the value of having “a worker behind a desk.”

“We were so far away from the reality of what it costs to really run the program properly…How do we make sure we don’t get 20 years behind again?,” said Senderling-McDonald.

The bill, known as the Excluded Workers Pilot Program, would have provided up to $300 a week for 20 weeks to unemployed individuals. To qualify, applicants would have had to demonstrate they were California residents, unemployed for at least one week and ineligible for state unemployment insurance.

Currently, unemployment insurance is distributed by the state’s Employment Development Department and is only available to residents who are legally allowed to work in the U.S. The pilot program would have been administered separately from the agency.

Newsom cited the bill’s potential cost in a veto message. He wrote the bill would have required the state to spend some $200 million to launch the program, and then about $20 million a year to sustain it.

He noted his administration has taken other steps recently to expand the social safety net for undocumented residents, including expanding access to health care, food assistance and other benefits.

Roughly 140,000 undocumented residents would have been eligible for the program, according to March 2022 analysis from the UC Merced Community and Labor Center. That same study found undocumented workers filling one in 16 jobs in the state, while also generating $3.7 billion in state and local tax revenues.

“Our immigrant communities are Californians who contribute millions to our unemployment program and economy. These excluded workers deserve and have earned access to unemployment relief,” Assemblyman Eduardo Garcia, D-Coachella, said in a statement on the bill before Newsom vetoed it.

Daniela Alvarenga, the economic justice policy coordinator at the California Immigrant Policy Center, said unemployment assistance is especially important given that the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated disparities among undocumented residents. In May 2020, California became the first state to give pandemic relief directly to undocumented households.

The bill “is a critical step in building true economic resiliency in California,” Alvarenga said before Newsom vetoed the measure. “Leaving Californians without access to economic recourse during a crisis will only lead to more housing insecurity, greater accumulation of debt, and more precarity in the labor market.”

At Tuesday’s meeting, the council unanimously approved the purchase and installation of three transfer switches which are necessary for generators to be used as back-up power.

Transfer switches will be installed at the Oroville Public Safety Department, City Hall and corporation yard.

The purchase of four generators totaling $239,480.94 was approved May 21.

City Administrator Bill LaGrone said all four generators are mobile and will be stored at the city corporation yard so they are secure from “tampering or vandalism.”

With the exception of $6,282.83, the costs of the generators and transfer switches are covered by the $300,000 Public Safety Power Shutoff Resiliency Allocation from the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services

Salary reduction

In an attempt to “honor” the decision and allow LaGrone to further explain his reasoning, Vice Mayor Scott Thomson pulled agenda item six from the consent calendar.

The item was brought to the council by LaGrone as he agreed to suspend 3 percent of his salary until city labor groups have received their contractually agreed-upon increases.

Labor groups have been asked to suspend contractual increases because of uncertain revenues caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

“I really believe a part of leadership is doing what you ask your people to do,” LaGrone said.

The City Council would unanimously vote to amend LaGrone’s salary until the labor groups receive increases.

Other council news

All of the following items were also unanimously approved by the council:

• Placing solid waste liens from Recology on the city’s 2020-21 property tax roll as is done annually due to a franchise agreement.
• Approving minor and largely grammatical modifications to the city of Oroville’s CalHome Housing Rehabilitation Program Guidelines.
• Purchasing new stage curtains and asbestos abatement of restrooms and shower rooms for the Municipal Auditorium for $59,726.04.
• Adopting the 2020-21 annual budget which can be found at www.cityoforoville.org/services/finance-department/city-budget.
• Accepting $45,901 in the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control funding to finance police overtime activities that address alcohol-related crimes.
• Approving a project budget of $90,000 for the repair of the sewer that serves the Olive Glen neighborhood.
• Extending the agreement with the Chico State’s Geographical Information Center to host the city’s geographic information systems until 2021.

The next Oroville City Council meeting will be held at 5 p.m. Tuesday, July 21.

Meetings remain closed to in-person public attendance due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

To participate, email comments to publiccomment@cityoforoville.org before 3 p.m. July 21 or stand outside the City Council Chambers during the meeting and speak with the provided microphone.

Additionally, the City Council is expected to approve a voluntary salary reduction for City Administrator Bill LaGrone, the 2020-21 fiscal year budget and Municipal Auditorium improvements.

Back-up power

On May 21, the city purchased four generators as back-up power sources for essential city facilities during shutoffs. Transfer switches are now needed at these facilities for the generators to be operable.

The purchase of three transfer switches for the Oroville Public Safety Department, City Hall and Corporation Yard is estimated to be $16,951.89.

Both the costs of the generators and transfer switches are covered by the $300,000 Public Safety Power Shutoff Resiliency Allocation from the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services.

Reduction

The council will discuss amending the salary of LaGrone as he feels it is important to join city labor groups who are dealing with the impacts of COVID-19.

In Tuesday’s meeting agenda packet, LaGrone writes that he agrees to suspend three percent of his salary until “all the labor groups have received their contractually agreed upon increases.”

He also states that he does not expect any backpay or reimbursement.

If the council approves, the agreement will go into effect Aug. 1 and save about $5,250 in the city’s general fund.

Auditorium

Two separate items regarding improvements of the Municipal Auditorium.will be presented to the City Council.

The first proposal will look into the purchase of new stage curtains as the previous ones were damaged in an arson last year. A second agreement for the lead ceramic tile and asbestos abatement of restrooms and shower rooms may also be authorized.

The total of both improvements would cost $59,726.04 with the stage curtains being paid through an insurance company.

Other news

• The council may approve minor modifications to the city of Oroville’s CalHome Housing Rehabilitation Program Guidelines.
• Extending the agreement with the Chico State’s Geographical Information Center, which hosts the city’s geographic information systems, will be considered.
• The council may accept $45,901 in the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control funding to finance overtime activities that address alcohol-related crimes.
• A possible approval of the city’s intention to levy and collect assessments from all of Oroville’s Consolidated Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District zones for the upcoming fiscal year.
• The council may consider the placement of solid waste liens from Recology on the 2020-21 property tax roll.

The City Council meeting will be held at 4:30 p.m. Tuesday in the council chambers, 1735 Montgomery St.

Meetings remain closed to the public because of the COVID-19 pandemic. To participate, email comments to publiccomment@cityoforoville.org before 3 p.m. Tuesday or stand outside the council chambers during the meeting and speak with the provided microphone.

Cal Fire-Butte County’s public information officer Rick Carhart called Saturday’s holiday “quieter than some in the past but definitely a busier day than a typical non Fourth of July day.”

The department’s emergency command center received 131 calls throughout the day, nearly the same as last year’s 130 calls.

“That’s about twice as many as a typical day,” Carhart said. However, according to Carhart, the 57 fireworks complaint calls Saturday were down from last year’s 73.

Of those 57 complaints, approximately six warnings and one citation were given out.

Carhart added that at a certain point in the night, from about 8 p.m. to 10:30 p.m., calls began coming in about every 15 minutes, some within a span of a few minutes.

“They were coming fast and furious,” he said.

Except for a structure fire reported close to midnight, Chico police and the fire department also called the day  “average.”

Chico Police Dispatch Supervisor Sheri Marshall said the dispatch had 461 total calls Saturday, and of those calls, 96 were related to fireworks.

“I’ve been here 32 years and that’s pretty typical,” Marshall said.

Started at the backyard of a home on Notre Dame Boulevard and Webster Drive, the structure fire was reportedly started by fireworks but could not be confirmed by Chico police before this newspaper’s deadline.

The fire, which was put out by 1:26 a.m. Sunday, damaged a gas line in the backyard.

The fireworks display normally held at the Silver Dollar Speedway in Chico was canceled this year due to the COVID-19 pandemic.