Editing Santa Cruz County, California (section)

==Economy==
In the 19th century, Santa Cruz's economy was based on milling lumber, making lime cement from limestone, and tanning leather. By the mid 19th century, Santa Cruz was the second largest manufacturing area in the state. As natural resources depleted, tourism became the more important economic sector in the area.<ref name=ProQuest304420788>{{cite thesis |id={{ProQuest|304420788}} |last1=Gendron |first1=Richard Arthur |title=Faultlines of power: The political economy of redevelopment in a progressive city after a natural disaster |year=1998 }}</ref>

In 1989, Santa Cruz was named as a surplus labor area by the U.S. Department of Labor.<ref name=":3">{{Cite book|title=The Public Response to Homelessness|author1-link=Celine-Marie Pascale|last=Pascale|first=Celine-Marie|year=1995}}</ref> A surplus labor area has an unemployment rate 20% higher than national unemployment. As of 2024, Watsonville city was still on this list.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/lsa|title=United States Department of Labor|date=2024|website=United States Department of Labor}}</ref>

10% of jobs in Santa Cruz County are food producing/processing jobs. These employees make less than an average of $10 an hour.<ref name=":02"/>

As of 2003, 21% of residents work outside of Santa Cruz County. This is down form the 28% outside employment rate of 1989.<ref name=":02"/>

The agriculture businesses are significant enough to be prominent in local politics, where they influence issues of water, pesticide use, and labor.<ref name=":02"/>

There are mandated living wages for Santa Cruz county, and individually in the cities of Watsonville and Santa Cruz. These occurred after The Santa Cruz Living Wage Coalition campaigned to set up ordinances.<ref name=":02"/>

The low wage sector of Santa Cruz experiences workplace abuse. Data from 2015 show that in the county, 38% of Agricultural workers have experienced overtime pay violation, 14% of tipped workers reported tips stolen by their employers, and 50% of service sector workers reported violations on receiving breaks. It is California law for employers to make written workplace policies available. However, in a county wide survey, 30% of workers reported that they did not receive an employee handbook.<ref>McCay, S., Espinoza, R., & Mora, S. C. (2015). ''Working For Dignity: The Santa Cruz County Low-wage Worker Study'' (Rep.).</ref>

Service sector laborers have a resource for navigating labor law through the Economic Justice Alliance of Santa Cruz County, a local organization that educates community members on issues of "sustainable wages and working conditions."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.ejasc.org/|website=Economic Justice Alliance of Santa Cruz County|access-date=February 6, 2018|title=Economic Justice Alliance of Santa Cruz County|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180208004315/https://www.ejasc.org/|archive-date=February 8, 2018|url-status=dead}}</ref>

=== Housing market ===
In 2002, the [[National Association of Realtors]] reported that Santa Cruz was the most unaffordable place to live in the United States.<ref name=":02"/> This statement remains true with 2017 data that shows that Santa Cruz is the least affordable county for renters.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web|url=https://noplacelikehomeucsc.org/en/|title=No Place Like Home|website=No Place Like Home UCSC|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180501193634/http://noplacelikehomeucsc.org/en/|archive-date=May 1, 2018|url-status=dead}}</ref>

In Santa Cruz County, 60% of residents rent and a median monthly rent is $3000. UCSC's No Place Like Home Project reports that in Santa Cruz County, 2.5 minimum wage jobs would be needed to afford renting a 2 bedroom apartment. UCSC's "No Place Like Home" project identifies four main rental markets: agricultural workers, UCSC students, Silicon Valley tech workers, and short term vacation rentals. Short term rentals in particular have been a rising concern to local politicians, who have proposed parking restrictions to discourage short term renters.<ref name=":11">{{Cite news|url=http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/article/NE/20170330/NEWS/170339963#author1|title=Santa Cruz County supervisors want rules for hosted rentals|last=Gumz|first=Jodi|date=March 30, 2017|work=Santa Cruz Sentinel}}</ref>

Rent control has been attempted as a policy in Santa Cruz three times between the 1970s and 1980s, but it never passed. National policies since the 1980s have deregulated rental markets, which decreased the rights of tenants and exacerbated frustrations for renters all across the country as well as in Santa Cruz.<ref name=":1" />

27% of surveyed Santa Cruz County renters experience "overcrowding" in their homes, which is described as when there is more than one person per room of a house, which includes all rooms not just bedrooms.<ref name=":1" />

One of the constraints on Santa Cruz's development are environmental protections. The restrictions on land prevent development from responding to housing and employment demands, which is an issue particularly politically relevant in the Watsonville jurisdiction. This conflict between residents wanting to protect the environment and those wanting more housing is also racially divided, as most residents favoring environmental protection are white, while the population on the side of developing housing is more heavily Latino.<ref name=":02" /> A 2010–2011 report by a Santa Cruz County grand jury states that Watsonville had no policy for assessing environmental hazards, and would give out land use and building permits without any investigations of the environmental conditions of the land in question.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2011_final/City_of_Watsonville.pdf|title=City of Watsonville: Fastest Growing City Looking For Leadership and a Fire Truck|last=Santa Cruz Grand Jury Final Report 2010-2011}}</ref>

One of the housing solutions that residents have resorted to is the occupation of accessory dwelling units. Commonly known as "mother-in-law" units, these secondary housing spaces on residential property used to be illegal to build. In 2002, Santa Cruz leaders changed the law and encouraged construction with affordable mortgages. The goal was to contain [[urban sprawl]] while still finding housing alternatives for residents in light of the crisis that was exacerbated by UCSC growth and Silicon Valley encroachment.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/06/realestate/in-santa-cruz-affordable-housing-without-the-sprawl.html|title=In Santa Cruz, Affordable Housing Without the Sprawl|last=Bernstein|first=Fred A.|date=February 6, 2005|work=The New York Times}}</ref>

=== Land use ===
Debates about land use in Santa Cruz were particularly important after the [[1989 Loma Prieta earthquake|1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake]], which destroyed the central business district of Santa Cruz and led to the loss of an estimated 2,000 jobs.<ref name=ProQuest304420788/>

Already contentious debates about land were present in the area due to its large tourism industry and the relatively new UCSC campus, but after the quake both private interests and public servants had a stake in how rebuilding would go. This led to a necessary compromise, a public-private partnership that debated the how to rebuild the pacific garden mall space, with considerations of green space, timely implementation, and supporting local business and economy. Many constituents felt left out of this process, and reported that the political elite and economic elite were monopolizing control over the rebuilding movement.<ref name=ProQuest304420788/>

===Top employers===

According to Santa Cruz County's 2020–21 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report,<ref>{{cite web |date=December 22, 2021 |title=Budget and Financial Reports |url=https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/auditor/acfr_2020-21/ACFR_2020-21.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220509080026/https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/auditor/acfr_2020-21/ACFR_2020-21.pdf |archive-date=May 9, 2022 |access-date=July 31, 2022 |website=www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us}}</ref> the top employers in the county are:

{| class="wikitable sortable" border="1"
|-
! #
! Employer
!Product/Service
! # of Employees
|-
|1
|[[University of California, Santa Cruz]]
|Education
|1,000–4,999
|-
|2
|[[Pajaro Valley Unified School District]]
|Education
|1,000–4,999
|-
|3
|County of Santa Cruz
|County Services
|1,000–4,999
|-
|4
|[[Catholic Healthcare West|Dominican Hospital]]
|Hospital
|1,000–4,999
|-
|5
|Santa Cruz Governmental Center
|City Services
|1,000–4,999
|-
|6
|[[Graniterock]]
|Excavating Contractors
|500–999
|-
|7
|[[Plantronics]]
|Telephone Apparatus Mfg.
|500–999
|-
|8
|Watsonville Community Hospital
|Hospital
|500–999
|-
|9
|Source Naturals
|Vitamin Manufacturer
|500–999
|-
|10
|Santa Cruz Health Center
|Clinics
|500–999
|-
|11
|Monterey Mushrooms
|Agriculture
|500–999
|-
|12
|Larse Farms Inc
|Agriculture
|500–999
|-
|}

===Winemaking and wineries===
{{Main|Santa Cruz Mountains AVA}}

[[File:SantaCruzMountains.jpg|thumb|right|Vineyard in the Santa Cruz Mountains]]

[[Winemaking]]—both the growing of the grapes and their vinting—is an important part of the economic and cultural life of Santa Cruz County.
The wines of the [[David Bruce Winery]] and [[Ridge Vineyards]] were selected for tasting in the [[Judgment of Paris (wine)|Paris Wine Tasting of 1976]] ([[#Sources|Tabor, p.167-169]]).