Golis: Tearing down barriers to success

Strolling among the throngs of happy people at the Cinco de Mayo celebration in Roseland last week, you didn’t need to be a census taker to notice this was a younger crowd. The place was jumping with the energy of teenagers, young adults and families with young children.

Say hello to Sonoma County’s changing demographics, perhaps best explained in an analysis published in March by the Sonoma County Economic Development Board and the Workforce Investment Board.

The median age of Latino residents is 19 years younger than the median age of white residents, the report said. Among Sonoma County residents under 20 years of age, more than 44 percent are Latino. Among people over 65, only 7 percent are Latino.

If you confine your world to Roseland and southwest Santa Rosa, you think people are younger and more likely to be Latino. If you live in one of the east side enclaves, you think folks are older and predominantly Anglo. And there is where the risk of misunderstanding begins.

While we might not want to think of Santa Rosa as a divided city, these differences can’t be ignored. If community leaders fail to respond, the existence of two Santa Rosas will affect all of us - and not in a good way. The question is, what are we going to do about it?

For now, Latino kids are more likely to come from low-income families, which means they are more likely to trail other students in reading proficiency and more likely to drop out of high school.

This is not OK. Twenty years from now, we can project that something like 44 percent of the local work force will be Latino. We need to help these young people stay in school and find economic success because everyone’s well-being will depend on it.

Progress is being made. Drop-out rates are declining, and the number of Latino kids going to college is increasing every year.

Many will become the first in their families to earn college degrees - a pattern familiar to anyone who has studied the history of immigrant groups in America.

The New York Times last week published data about income mobility in every county in the United States. It turns out that “location matters - enormously.”

Low-income kids growing up in Sonoma County, the analysis found, “are less likely to become single parents, more likely to go to college and more likely to earn more” than low-income youngsters in most U.S. counties.

At age 26, a child from a low-income family who spends the first 20 years of his or her life in Sonoma County will make $1,300 a year more than a child who grows up in similar circumstances in the average American county.

In their analysis, Harvard researchers found five indicators for increased economic mobility: Less segregation by income and ethnicity, less violent crime, less income inequality, better schools and more two-parent households.

Did you notice the part about segregation by ethnicity and income?

In completing the annexation of Roseland to Santa Rosa and otherwise pursuing economic development options there, city and county leaders are investing in kids’ futures - and in the creation of a local workforce prepared for 21st century jobs.

“The broader lesson of our analysis is that social mobility should be tackled at a local level by improving childhood environments,” said lead economists Raj Chetty and Nathaniel Hendren.

Local agencies are embracing the challenge. The broad range of programs and organizations operating under the umbrella of county government’s Cradle to Career initiative acknowledges the demographic changes. It aims to invest in education, health care, housing and safe and healthy neighborhoods.

The new-to-Sonoma-County scholarship program, 10,000 Degrees, is quickly growing the support and financial aid necessary to make sure more kids graduate from college.

And last week, Santa Rosa Junior College opened the Dream Center, providing one-stop services for the 900 students who are also undocumented.

SRJC President Frank Chong, the son of an immigrant family, explained to Staff Writer Lori A. Carter: “Even in disagreement of who should be American, studies have shown that the future of California is dependent on the success largely of Latin Americans and immigrants in general.”

People can and will protest illegal immigration and complain about social programs.

It’s reasonable to insist that government do a better job of managing international borders, and it’s reasonable to insist that government spend wisely.

Beyond the politics, however, what remains is one simple, practical and unassailable calculation: Now and in the future, the well-being of every community depends on the well-being of all the people who live there.

Pete Golis is a columnist for The Press Democrat. Email him at golispd@gmail.com.