 |
 |
|
|
Rural California Communities: Trends in By Elaine Allensworth, M.A. Graduate Assistant, Department of Sociology Refugio I. Rochin, Ph.D. Professor of Sociology & Agriculture Economics
October 1995
SUGGESTED CITATION Allensworth, Elaine M., and Refugio I. Rochin, Rural California Communities: Trends in Latino Population and Community Life, CIFRAS: JSRI Statistical Brief No. 7. The Julian Samora Research Institute, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, October, 1995. Table Of Contents
During the last several decades many Chicanos and Latino immigrants have made rural communities their permanent homes. As their numbers have increased, the numbers of non-Hispanic white people have decreased in absolute and relative amounts in these areas. Rural Latinos are currently concentrated in about 100 communities where there are agricultural jobs.l Correlation analyses show that greater concentration of Latinos is associated with more of the population in poverty, more of the labor force in agriculture fewer adults with a high school degree or some college education, lower per capita community revenues, and lower per capita community expenditures.2 These trends can be partially, but not entirely, explained by increasing immigration from Mexico, and depressed wages and conditions in the farm labor market. While immigration generally brings more income to local communities, it also can increase underemployment, poverty, and public assistance use.3 As conditions in the farm labor market deteriorate, so do the service provision efforts of farmdependent communities. An increasingly poor community cannot support a viable commercial sector, and without much local commerce, city governments have stagnant tax bases.4 To counter such problems, rural development policy has focused on helping people acquire skills and move out of rural areas, and promoting investment in communities to stimulate growth.5 However, these solutions don't improve the well-being of the community-better educated people move out, leaving space for new, poorer migrants, while economic growth does not bring relief from poverty for all groups of residents.6 This Statistical Brief provides a basis for further study of these phenomena by examining trends in population and community well-being among rural communities in California. It then profiles eight specific communities located in a highly agricultural area-between Fresno and Bakersfield in the San Joaquin valley. These eight communities have been selected by means of percentile rankings as being representative of general trends, yet differing somewhat from neighboring communities. These analyses allow us to focus on the following questions: (1) What are the specific relationships between greater agricultural employment, immigration, Latino population concentration, and community life variables? (2) Which demographic variables best predict economic well-being among rural communities? (3) What patterns are discernible in terms of immigration and economic health for rural communities? Are communities experiencing similar patterns? How are these patterns emerging in specific communities?
Overview | Correlations Between Community Demographic and Well-Being Indicators | A Closer Look At Eight Communities | Appendix A. Community Profiles | Appendix B. Nonmetropolitan California Communities (pop. 1,000-20,000) | Endnotes CORRELATIONS BETWEEN COMMUNITY DEMOGRAPHIC AND WELL-BEING INDICATORS We begin by addressing the first question: What are the specific relationships between greater agricultural employment, immigration, Latino population concentrations and community life variables? Communities of similar size have much in common, but also differ according to their different resources, types of employment, and the "human capital" of their residents (i.e., education, work experience, social connections). The statistical measures of small, rural communities allow us to see what differences exist across these places. Table 1 displays correlation's between several demographic and community well-being indicators across 366 rural communities (population between 1,000 - 20,000) in California. The first five variables represent demographic variables. These can be compared to the remaining variables that indicate the well-being of the community.7 Recall that the closer a coefficient is to zero, the smaller the relationship between the two variables. Coefficients that are closer to one, or to negative one, represent stronger relationships between variables. To understand the correlations, let us take, as an example, the bottom row (Row 12). This row shows that the percent of the workforce employed in agriculture is not related to the size of the rural community (-.01), and is only slightly related (-.12) to the average amount of household income community residents spend on rent. However, greater employment in agriculture is strongly and positively related to the percent of the population that is Latino (.86), and the percent of the community that consists of new immigrants to the United States (.87). Communities that have more agricultural employment also tend to have younger residents, as more agricultural employment is associated with a greater percent of the population under age 18, and a smaller percentage over age 65. Further reading of the correlations shows that greater employment in agriculture is also associated with more poverty, greater unemployment, lower per capita income, and smaller percentages of high school and college graduates among adults in the community. Notice the very high correlations (from .75 to .87) between employment in agriculture, percent Latino, percent new immigrants, and percent high school graduates (negatively correlated). Where there is higher employment in agriculture, there are more Latino residents, more recent immigrants, and less high school graduates. The strength of these correlations shows that there are few exceptions to this pattern. Comparison of the differences between columns two and three allows for examination of the variables representing percent Latino and percent new immigrants in a community. If the problems of rural communities are due mostly to influxes of new immigrants to the United States, there should be a stronger relationship between community distress (unemployment, poverty, etc.) and the percentage of recent immigrants in the community, than between community distress and the percent of the population that is Latino. However, the opposite is true. Variables representing the proportions of Latinos and recent immigrants in a community are both strongly and positively correlated with unemployment, the percent of children in the community, and employment in agriculture. They are both strongly negatively correlated with the percent elderly population, per capita income, and the percentages of high school and college graduates in the community. However, except for employment in agriculture, the correlations of the above variables are stronger with the variable representing percent Latino, than with the variable representing percent new immigrants. This suggests that the problems of communities with high concentrations of Latinos result from more than recent immigration, i.e., immigrants alone do not "explain" problems of poverty and community well-being. Occupational and residential segregation, the psychological impacts of discrimination, and structural barriers to human capital acquisition (i.e., education, job skills, social connections) are possible answers to the greater association of distress with percent Latino residents, than with percent new immigrants.
Now we move to the second question: Which demographic variables best predict economic well-being among rural communities? Again, we contrast all 366 communities in terms of the correlations for community well-being variables. Education: Row and Column 9 display correlations with the percentage of high school graduates among adult community residents. The strongest correlations with the percentage of high school graduates are the percentage of Latino residents in a community (-.87) and the percentage of the workforce employed in agriculture (-.84). Communities with higher agricultural employment and higher percentages of Latinos have proportionately fewer high school graduates. Column and Row 10 Show similar, but smaller (less strong), correlations with the percentage of college graduates. Therefore, the percentage of college graduates in a community is less strongly associated with agricultural employment and Latino population concentration than is the percentage of high school graduates. Per capita Income: Row and Column 6 show correlations with per capita income. The strongest predictor of per capita income is the percentage of college graduates in the community (.81). A greater proportion of high school graduates is also highly correlated with per capita income. Poverty: Row and Column 7 show that the percent of the population in poverty is most strongly predicted by the percentage of high school graduates in the community. Communities with lower percentages of high school graduates have much higher rates of poverty. Unemployment and greater employment in agriculture are the next most important predictors of poverty. Rent as a percentage of household income: The strongest predictor of the amount of income people are paying towards rent is the percentage of residents over age 65. Communities with more older residents have proportionately higher rent-to-income ratios. Overview | Correlations Between Community Demographic and Well-Being Indicators | A Closer Look At Eight Communities | Appendix A. Community Profiles | Appendix B. Nonmetropolitan California Communities (pop. 1,000-20,000) | Endnotes A CLOSER LOOK AT EIGHT COMMUNITIES Now we address the third group of questions: What patterns are discernible in terms of immigration and economic health for rural communities? Are communities experiencing similar patterns? How are these patterns emerging in specific communities? On the basis of these correlations alone we can infer certain patterns of community well-being across California's rural communities. But, examining only these patterns begs the following question: aren't all communities unique? Are the general patterns hiding some serious problems or conditions? How do these patterns manifest themselves in communities? Looked at one by one, what kinds of differences are we overlooking? In the next part of this report, we address the following questions: 1) What is the extent of low income and poverty in rural communities with high percentages of Latino residents and agricultural employment? 2) How different are communities with high agricultural employment, and high percentages of Latinos in terms of education? Are these communities much below state averages? 3) How diverse is employment in highly agricultural communities? Are there recognizable patterns of employment in these communities? 4) How do communities with high Latino and agricultural employment differ from each other in terms of age distribution? 5) In what ways are geographically-close communities experiencing population changes? Are communities gaining population at similar rates? Are demographic changes occurring at similar rates? Are Latino and non-Latino residents migrating at similar rates? 6) What percentage of the residents of more agricultural communities are actually foreignborn, and, of these, how many are recent immigrants? How do communities differ in their patterns of Latino residents, foreign-born residents, and recent immigrants? To answer these questions we have attempted to remove any distortions that could be attributed to different geography, spatial advantages and natural resources. In short, we have taken a closer look at eight specific places located within a radius of 50 miles of each other, all within the San Joaquin Valley. Moreover, specific communities were chosen because they are typical of state trends, and yet differ somewhat from neighboring communities. All of the communities have substantial Latino populations, and agricultural employment. The remaining tables compare the eight communities to all other rural communities in California. Appendix A contains summary statistics and descriptions of each of the eight communities. The other 358 communities are described in Appendix B. If you are interested in the economic and demographic standing of these other communities, you can compare the figures listed in Appendix B to those shown on the following tables and charts.
Income and Poverty What is the extent of low income and poverty in the eight communities with high percentages of Latino residents and agricultural employment? Table 2 displays per capita income levels, poverty concentration, and the mean amount of household income that goes to rent in rural California communities. The first row indicates the average of these figures for all rural communities in California, while the remaining rows display these figures for the communities chosen for this profile. The average per capita income of all 366 rural communities in California is $12,461. The per capita income of the communities in this profile are all much lower than the state average, with per capita income ranging from $4,334 to $9,571. The extent to which these income levels are lower than other California communities can be seen in the percentile rankings column. These figures indicate the percentage of communities have incomes lower than the described community. For example, Cutler and Orange Cove were at the bottom one percent of all communities in the state in terms of per capita income in 1989. Ninety-nine percent of all rural communities in California had higher per capita income levels than Cutler and Orange Cove. Orange Cove was also in the top one percent (the 99th percentile) of all rural California communities in terms of the percent of its population in poverty. Almost half (47°/O) of the population of Orange Cove was in poverty in 1990. Between 22 and 38 percent (over one-fifth to one-third) of the population of the remaining seven communities was in poverty in 1990. These numbers were much higher than the state average of 15 percent. Exeter and Lindsay were higher than the other six communities in per capita income, and lower in terms of poverty rates. However, both communities had lower per capita incomes than 74 percent, and higher poverty rates than 80 percent, of other rural California towns in 1990. While many of the households in these communities were paying a large percentage of their 1990 incomes for housing, the average income to rent ratios (25-30%) did not differ markedly between rural California communities.
Education How different are the eight communities with high Latino and agricultural employment in terms of education? Are these communities much below state averages? Among all 366 California communities, the average percentage of adults
with a high school degree is 69 percent. The average percentage of adults
with a college degree is 13 percent. Table one shows that education, especially
high school education, is strongly (and negatively) correlated with employment
in agriculture, and the proportion of the Latino population of a community.
These community profiles display how severe this relationship is. As shown
in Table 3, education rates are much lower in these communities than in
other rural California communities. Exeter, which has the least agricultural
employment (11%) and the smallest proportion of Latino residents (26%) leads
the eight communities in terms of education, with 65 percent and eight percent,
respectively, of the residents over age 25 having high school and college
degrees. However, Cutler, Ivanhoe, and Orange Cove rank in the bottom ten
percent of all rural California communities in terms of both high school
and college education. In each of these three communities over 30 percent
of the work force employed in agriculture, and over 50 percent of the population
is Latino. Less than thirty percent of the adult population of Orange Cove
and Cutler has graduated from high school, and less than five percent of
the adult population of Cutler, Ivanhoe, and Orange cove has a four-year
college degree. While, in general, these towns follow the correlation patterns noted in Table 1, there are variations these patterns. For example, Orosi ranks in only the seventh percentile of rural communities in terms of high school graduates, but is in the 23rd percentile in terms of college graduates. Ivanhoe has smaller proportions of high school and college graduates than Lindsay, Wasco, and Woodlake, but these three communities have higher proportions of Latino residents than Ivanhoe.
Occupational Distribution How diverse is employment in highly agricultural communities? Are there recognizable patterns of employment in these communities ? Figure 2 and its corresponding table display occupational distributions for each of the profiled communities, as well as the average distribution among all rural California communities. Bar lines represent the proportion of a community's workforce that is employed in a particular type of occupation. Charts in which one or two bars are much larger than the other bars have less diversity in employment than communities for which the bars appear more even. In the typical (average) rural community, the occupational distribution is as follows: about one quarter (26%) of the work force is in technical, sales or administrative support occupations, about one-fifth (19%) of the workforce is in managerial or professional occupations, about 15 percent of the work force is in each: service, precision production/craft/repair, and operator laborer occupations, and ten percent of the workforce is involved in farming, forestry, or fishing. While Exeter approximates the state occupational profile (although a greater percentage of its workforce is employed as operators/laborers), each of the other profiled communities has lower percentages of workers involved in managerial/professional, technical/sales/administrative support, and precision production/craft/repair occupations than is typical, and more residents involved in farming/forestry/fishing and operator/laborer occupations. In other words, these communities have few high-skill and higher-paying jobs, and more low-skill and lower-paying jobs. Agriculture is especially important in these communities-approximately half of all employed residents of Cutler and Orange Cove are involved in agriculture, and 24 to 38 percent of the work forces of Ivanhoe, Lindsay, Orosi, Wasco, and Woodlake are employed in agriculture. As would be predicted from the correlations in Table 1, Cutler and Orange Cove are largely made up of Latino residents, have large percentages of recent immigrants (about one quarter of the residents of Cutler and Orange Cove came to the United States after 1980), and are dominated by agricultural employment. However, in contrast, Orosi has similar percentages of first generation residents and recent immigrants as Cutler and Orange Cove, but it has more diversity in employment, and more managerial and professional occupations. The diversity of employment is much smaller in Cutler, Orange Cove, Orosi, and Woodlake than in the state as a whole. In general, these communities also show lower percentages of managerial/professional, service, and precision production/craft occupations than technical/sales/support, agriculture, and operator/laborer jobs. Wasco, Lindsay, and Exeter, the three largest communities in this profile, have the most diverse occupational profiles.
Population In what ways are geographically-close communities experiencing population changes? Are communities gaining population at similar rates? Are demographic changes occurring at similar rates? Are Latino and non-Latino residents migrating at similar rates? Each of the eight communities in this profile grew in population from 1980 to 1990. However, the rates of population growth ranged from 20 percent (Lindsay) to 255% (Orange Cove). The rest of the communities experienced population growths of between 23 and 41 percent. These differences in population growth do not seem to be related to either population size or housing costs. The Latino population of each community also grew relative to the non-Latino population from 1980 to 1990. The largest increase occurred in Ivanhoe, which jumped from 29 to 52 percent Latino over the decade. Cutler experienced the smallest change (from 89 to 95 percent) because the Latino proportion of the population was already very high in 1980. In most of the communities this change occurred both because of a slight loss of non-Hispanic population, and a large increase in the number of Hispanic residents. Exeter and Orange Cove, however, experienced an increase in both Latino and non-Latino residents.
Foreign-Born Residents What percentage of the residents of more agricultural communities are actually foreign-born, and, of these, how many are recent immigrants? How do similar communities differ in their patterns of Latino residents, foreign-born residents, and recent immigrants ? With the exception of Exeter, all of these communities have higher percentages of foreign-born residents than most rural California communities (see Table 4). On average, 12 percent of the residents of rural communities are foreign-born, and only five percent of these residents immigrated since 1980. However, in Cutler, Orange Cove, and Orosi over 40 percent of the population was born outside of the United States. Between 26 and 32 percent of the residents of Ivanhoe, Lindsay, Wasco, and Woodlake were born outside of the United States. Cutler, Orange Cove, and Orosi also lead in the percentage of residents that are new immigrants to the United States, with almost 25 percent of the population of these communities reporting that they entered the United States after 1980. Only 8 percent of Exeter residents were foreign-born, much less than the state average, and only four percent of the residents of Exeter were recent immigrants to the United States. While the correlations presented in Table 1 show that, in general, the percentage of recent immigrants in a community is higher in communities with greater percentages of Latino residents, notice that there are exceptions to this trend. Exeter, for example, has a much larger Latino population than most rural California communities, but has less recent immigrants, and foreign-born residents than most communities. Additionally, none of these communities are composed mostly of foreign-born residents, although up to 95 percent of the residents are Latino. Most of the residents of these communities were born in the United States. Therefore, it is not just recent immigrants who are living in impoverished agricultural communities.
Age Distribution How different are communities with high Latino and agricultural employment in terms of the age distribution of their populations? In an average rural California community, 29 percent of the residents are under 18, while 14 percent of the population is over 65. While Exeter and Lindsay approach the rural state average of minors (29 percent), almost 40 percent of the residents in Cutler, Ivanhoe, Orange Cove, Orosi, Wasco and Woodlake are under 18 years old. The youthfulness of these communities can also be seen by the small percentages of elderly population (three to nine percent) in Cutler, Orange Cove, Orosi, Wasco, and Woodlake. Ivanhoe and Lindsay are closer to the state average in percentage of elderly residents, while Exeter slightly exceeds the state average for rural communities. The combination of large percentages of minors with small percentages of elderly residents results in most of these communities having percentages of population of working age (between 18 andg65 years old) that approximate state averages. Exeter, however, exceeds the state average of people not of working age (under 18 and over 65 years old).
Overview | Correlations Between Community Demographic and Well-Being Indicators | A Closer Look At Eight Communities | Appendix A. Community Profiles | Appendix B. Nonmetropolitan California Communities (pop. 1,000-20,000) | Endnotes Appendix A. Community Profiles
Cutler has experienced substantial population growth over the last decade, although it is still relatively small in size. Almost all residents are Latino, and 41 percent of the population was born outside the United States. Over half of the work force is employed in agriculture, with the remainder of the work force somewhat evenly distributed between the different occupational categories. Cutler ranks in the bottom one percent of rural California communities in per capita income, and 38 percent of the population is in poverty. Although Cutler has more agricultural employment and a greater percentage of Latino residents than Orange cove (with similar age and foreign-born population distributions) it has less poverty.
Exeter has much less agricultural employment and fewer Latino residents than the nearby towns of Lindsay and Woodlake, although it is about the same size. It also has less poverty and more high school and college graduates. The percentage of elderly population (18%) is greater than the state average, while the percentage of minors is also larger than average. Therefore, less of the population of Exeter is of working age (18 ~ 65) than is typical of rural California communities. The percent of residents who are not foreign-born (92%) is also greater than the state average. Therefore, the Spanish-origin population in Exeter consists mainly of second and later-generation Latinos. The occupational distribution of Exeter's work force is very similar to the state norms for rural communities.
Ivanhoe is the smallest of the communities in this profile. This is partially due to the small increase in population over the last decade, compared to neighboring communities. While there has been a large increase in the proportion of Latinos in the community, the percentage of Latinos in Ivanhoe is much smaller than the nearby community of Woodlake, and much higher than that of Exeter. Only 37 percent of the adult population of Ivanhoe has a high school degree, and one percent has a college degree, placing it in the bottom percentile of rural California communities in terms of the percentage of college graduates. Most of the work force is employed in agriculture or in operator/laborer occupations. Per capita income is low, and 30 percent of the population of Ivanhoe is in poverty. The ratio of rent to income is also high in Ivanhoe, suggesting a lack of affordable housing.
Lindsay has experienced a large increase in percent Latino over the last decade, but no increase in the percentage of people employed in agriculture. Poverty and high school graduation rates have increased moderately. Lindsay has higher percentages of both high school and college graduates than most of the other communities in this profile. Although the increase in percent Latino and the proportion of recent immigrants have been greater in Lindsay than in Wasco, the increase in percent in poverty has been much smaller, and there has been an increase in high school graduates. Lindsay is closer to state norms in terms of population under 18 and over 65 than the other communities in this profile. Additionally, a smaller percentage of the work force is involved in agriculture (24%) than in most of the other communities. Most of the work force of Lindsay is split between occupations in: technical/sales/administrative support, farming/forestry/ fishing, and operator/laborer occupations.
The population of Orange Cove has increased by over 255 percent over the last decade. This increase has been accompanied by a large increase in the poverty rate, and increases in the proportion of the work force involved in agriculture, and in the proportion of Latino residents. Almost 40 percent of the residents of Orange Cove are under age 18, almost 50 percent of the work force is in agriculture, and almost 50 percent of the population is in poverty. Orange Cove is in the bottom one percent of all rural California communities in terms of per capita income, and in the top one percent in terms of poverty. Forty-four percent of the population was born outside of the United States, with 24 percent of the population immigrating since 1980. Compared to Cutler, Orange Cove has less agricultural employment, a smaller proportion of Latino residents, and similar age and foreign-born population distributions, but it has a much higher poverty rate, fewer high school graduates, and more college graduates among the adult population.
Orosi has experienced large increases in its population size and composition over the last decade, but no change in agricultural employment. Only 36 percent of the adult residents of Orosi have high school degrees, placing it at the seventh percentile in the state. However, six percent of Orosi residents have college degrees, placing Orosi at the 23rd percentile in terms of college graduates. Although 31 percent of the work force is involved in agriculture, almost half of the work force is involved in managerial/professional, technical/sales/administrative support, or operator/laborer occupations. There is little service industry employment in Orosi. While Orosi is similar to Orange Cove and Cutler in terms of population size, and percentage of foreign-born residents, it has slightly smaller percentages of Latino residents, agricultural employment, and poverty. It also did not experience an increase in the percentage of residents involved in agriculture, while the other two did, and it has slightly higher per capita income. The increase in percent Latino residents was between that of Cutler (+6%) and Orange Cove (+ 14%)
Wasco has remained stable in terms of agricultural employment, and the percentage of high school graduates over the last decade, although neighboring communities have shown increases in both these dimensions. Wasco has also remained fairly constant in population size, although the proportion of Latinos in the community has increased greatly. The poverty rate has also increased notably in Wasco, slightly surpassing nearby Lindsay. Wasco also has lower per capita income than Lindsay. Thirty percent of the population of Wasco is foreign born, however most (two-thirds) of these residents immigrated prior to 1980. Thirty-seven percent of the residents of Wasco are under the age of 18, while only eight percent are over 65. While agriculture is the primary occupation of Wasco's residents, employing 31 percent of the work force, there is diversity of employment in the city, with over 15 percent of the work force employed in each: technical/sales/administrative, service, and operator/laborer occupations.
Woodlake has remained fairly constant over the last decade in terms of poverty and education levels, with proportionally few high school graduates and almost 30 percent of the population in poverty. However, Woodlake has slightly less poverty and more high school graduates than nearby Farmersville (35°/O poverty rate, and 36% high school graduates), despite more dependence on agricultural employment (36% compared to 28%) and a greater proportion of Latino residents (75°/O compared to 58%). Farming is the predominant occupation of the work force. Overview | Correlations Between Community Demographic and Well-Being Indicators | A Closer Look At Eight Communities | Appendix A. Community Profiles | Appendix B. Nonmetropolitan California Communities (pop. 1,000-20,000) | Endnotes Appendix B. Nonmetropolitan California Communities (pop. 1,000-20,000)
Overview | Correlations Between Community Demographic and Well-Being Indicators | A Closer Look At Eight Communities | Appendix A. Community Profiles | Appendix B. Nonmetropolitan California Communities (pop. 1,000-20,000) | Endnotes This research was sponsored by the USDA Project: Demographics and Economic Transformation of Rural Communities of the Southwest: ~Implications for Public Policy and Community Development, #94-37401-1266. 1 Rochin Refugio I., Elias S. Lopez. 1995. "Immigration and Community Transformation in Rural California." 2 Rochin, Refugio I. and Monica D. Castillo. 1995. "Immi ation and Colonia Formation in Rural California." Immigration Reform and U.S. Agriculture. ed. by Philip L. tartin, Wallace Huffman, Robert Emerson, J. Edward Taeor, and Refugio I. Rochin. University of Califomia, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Publication 3 Taylor, J. Edward. 1995. "Immigration and the Changing Economies of Rural Califomia." Paper presented at the conference "Immigration and the Changing Face of Rural California," Paper presented at Asilomar, CA, June 12-14. 4 Krissman, Fred. 1995. "Cycles of Poverty in Rural Californian Towns: comparing McFarland and Farmersville in the Southern San Joaquin Valley." Paper presented at Asilomar, CA, June 12-14. 5 Martin, Philip. 1995. Integrating Immigrants in Rural California and Rural America. Paper presented at the conference "Immigration and the Changing Face of Rural California," Paper presented at Asilomar, CA, June 12-14. 6 Krissman, Fred. op. cit. 1995. 7These communities are listed and described in Appendix A. This list is equivalent to the entire population of communities in California that conform to the specified definition of "rura~9" (population between 1,000 and 20,000, and not in an urbanized area). Overview | Correlations Between Community Demographic and Well-Being Indicators | A Closer Look At Eight Communities | Appendix A. Community Profiles | Appendix B. Nonmetropolitan California Communities (pop. 1,000-20,000) | Endnotes |
|
|
|
For more information, contact: |
