Sides argue economics, ethnicity

Alicia Robinson

The questions of how cities should handle under-the-table employers

and illegal immigrants and whether economic progress necessarily

means expelling the poor have been lying dormant in Costa Mesa,

occasionally flaring up when a City Council member would suggest

closing the city-run Job Center.

Such flare-ups sparked to life last month, when the council

finally voted to close the center, which pairs day laborers with

employers. The debate since has done little but fan the flames.

Elected officials have given economic reasons for closing the

center -- its cost to the city, the boost its closure will give

property values on the Westside -- and some residents are in

wholehearted agreement with that logic.

But in another segment of the community, there’s a perception that

the council’s decision, perhaps unwittingly, is bowing to pressure to

make the Westside whiter -- ethnically, that is -- by moving out an

institution that serves mainly Latinos.

Since the Job Center opened in 1988, there has been opposition to

it. Members of past councils have tried to close it but could not get

enough votes. It was a campaign promise of Chris Steel, who served on

the council from 2000 to 2004.

“If this had come up eight months ago, and Chris would have been

the one to bring it forward, he would have gotten no or lukewarm

support for it,” said former Councilman Mike Scheafer, who was

appointed to the council in 2003 and lost an election bid last fall.

“The influence of some of the Westside activists and the election of

two of them to the council has changed the dynamic.”

Councilman Eric Bever and Mayor Allan Mansoor both campaigned for

council seats -- Mansoor in 2002 and Bever in 2004 -- on platforms of

improving the Westside.

To the councilmen who voted to close the center -- Bever, Mansoor

and Councilman Gary Monahan approved the closure, while Councilwomen

Linda Dixon and Katrina Foley opposed it -- the new dynamic is about

economic progress on the Westside.

They have pointed out that the city is looking into other methods

to match short-term workers with employers, such as private-sector

employment agencies or a telephone referral system.

“We’re looking for other ways to provide work for these folks, but

just not through a government-funded, untaxed, underground economy,”

said Monahan, who proposed closing the Job Center.

But the closing of the Job Center won’t bring an end to the

underground economy. Some workers say they’ll look for jobs on the

street or in parking lots, and they won’t use a private firm, because

the jobs they get that way don’t pay well.

“My sense is that the council is addressing another issue, which

is illegal immigration,” said Mirna Burciaga, a Westside business

owner who ran for council in November. “If we close the center, are

we really doing something to prevent illegal immigration? I don’t

think so.”

The argument has been made that the city shouldn’t sponsor a

service that helps illegal immigrants get work. But to some

observers, the issue is simply brown and white.

The major revitalization effort the city has launched on the

Westside means industrial properties can be sold at a profit to

developers, resident Geoff West said.

“With the industrial uses go the jobs, and who occupies the jobs?

The Latino population,” he said. “The fact remains that what they’re

trying to accomplish here, their definition of improvement, in my

view, means extracting the Latinos, and everything will get better.”

Even some workers who use the Job Center see the decision as a

message that because of who they are, the city doesn’t care about

them.

“If we were Americans, they would send people to train us, to get

some skills,” said Arturo Hernandez. “Mostly we are Latinos. I guess

that’s the problem.”

Some view the decision to close the center as racist in part

because that’s how they see one of the center’s most vocal opponents,

Martin Millard.

His writings have been published by at least one organization that

has been characterized as a hate group, and one of his essays refers

to “little brown people” who reproduce like cockroaches and describes

immigration as an “invasion without guns.”

But when it comes to the Job Center, Millard said, “I see it

basically as an economic thing. I don’t see race as an issue at all.”

City statistics -- from crime figures to school test scores --

show Costa Mesa is in a decline, and the Westside industrial area is

like dead weight, he said.

The low incomes of Westside residents won’t attract upscale

businesses, he added.

The charge of racism is just a last-ditch effort to fight changes

on the Westside by those who have a vested interest in the status

quo, Millard said.

“A lot of the people that don’t want to see any improvement in the

city are doing anything they can to fight it,” he said. “There’s a

lot of money in the slums for those that are making a profit.”

Monahan has been on the council for 10 years. In the past, he said

the center should stay open, but he has opposed spending city money

on it.

He said his record speaks for itself, and he doesn’t need to

defend himself to people who perceive racism in the Job Center

decision. People “argue the race card,” he said, when they can’t

argue the facts.

“I think it’s a cop-out,” Monahan said. “Make a case for why it

should be open, but don’t go saying it’s an anti-Latino [measure].”

Mansoor has called the perception of racism “silly,” and Bever

declined to comment publicly on the issue.

But such dismissals don’t cut any ice with some Job Center

supporters.

“There is a racial undertone to this whether they admit it or

not,” Scheafer said. “They have to be aware that that issue is there,

and to just blow it off isn’t going to work.”

The community likely will remain sharply divided on the Job

Center, and the various arguments will be rehashed tonight when the

council considers Foley’s request to rehear the issue.

Workers who use the center felt they were denied a chance to speak

before the vote to close the center because they didn’t know about

the meeting, and a number of them plan to attend tonight.

Their comments may fall on deaf ears, however. Monahan said

rehearing an issue requires new information that may have resulted in

a different vote.

“I think I’ve heard every argument over the Job Center from every

angle over the last 10 years,” Monahan said. “I don’t know what new

information [Foley will] bring forward, but I’ll be curious what it

is.”

* ALICIA ROBINSON covers government and politics. She may be

reached at (714) 966-4626 or by e-mail at alicia.robinson

@latimes.com.