Gavin Newsom said he would punish counties for not enforcing COVID rules. Why hasn’t he?
Gov. Gavin Newsom this summer warned local officials they could lose out on $2.5 billion worth of state assistance if they didn’t enforce the state’s coronavirus orders.
“We have made contingent $2.5 billion of resources .... to counties that are unwilling to enforce their local health officers’ mandates,” he said at a July 2 news conference. “If we don’t see the level of enforcement.....that’s precisely why we put up two and a half billion dollars of contingent money.”
The threat was supposed to be part of the state’s effort to fight the virus, which at that time had killed more than 6,200 Californians.
Nearly six months later, almost every Californian is under a stay-at-home order. Coronavirus patients suffer in hospital gift shops. Healthcare workers in Los Angeles ration oxygen. An additional 23,000 Californians have lost their lives.
Yet the state has yet to withhold any county money. Two cities saw money redirected to support COVID-19 testing in their communities.
“Unless there’s clear consequences for our health orders, people will continue to ignore them,” said state Sen. Steve Glazer, D-Orinda. “Both businesses and individuals.”
Glazer for months has been calling on the state to focus on controlling the virus in order to restart the economy safely. While the majority of Californians are trying to do the right thing, he says, those who are not pay no price.
“I think the goal of the state should be COVID zero, and public health needs to be the driver behind all the decisions and restrictions that are made,” he said. “The administration has tried to balance the economy and health, and it is not working, and the numbers prove it.”
Newsom has used strong words when talking about his expectations for county compliance.
“The bottom line is, the rules are self-evident, if you refuse to comply, if you thumb your nose at the health of your constituency, the health of your community... you’re sending two messages,” he said late last month. “One, you don’t care about the health of your community in that respect… and you obviously don’t care to get the support of the state in regards to those dollars.”
The Democratic governor also says most counties have done a good job, however. Most of the $2.5 billion has already been distributed, according to the Department of Finance, although the state still has another $750 million it can redirect in the event the state finds that a county is not adhering to the public health rules.
Each month, counties must certify that they are in compliance with state health orders, and the state says compliance requirements will continue through June.
According to the state budget, compliance means adhering to federal guidance and the state’s stay-at-home requirements and any other health requirements as directed in state orders.
The county must have at least 15 staff per 100,000 people who can contact trace and provide other community support in the event of an outbreak. They must actively participate in the state’s reopening guidelines and support the use of such interventions as mask-wearing and social distancing.
Counties must also certify that they have not adopted an ordinance or resolution inconsistent with the public health orders, guidance, or other directives.
While no counties have been penalized, two cities have lost state funds for not adhering to the rules.
In July, the state sent letters to two cities, Coalinga and Atwater, saying they would lose out on a combined amount of about $600,000 in Coronavirus Relief Funds if they didn’t rescind recently-passed resolutions.
Coalinga had passed a resolution declaring local businesses to be essential businesses. The City of Atwater got a similar warning about a resolution declaring Atwater “a sanctuary city for all businesses.”
The cities never rescinded their resolutions, and financial officials said the money was redirected to use for testing in those communities.
Counties resist enforcement, with little consequence
In September, the Placer County Board of Supervisors issued a resolution ending an earlier COVID-19 emergency declaration. Residents were expected to follow state guidelines, but the county said it wouldn’t enforce them.
The resolution prompted the county public health officer, Dr. Aimee Sisson, to resign. At that point, Placer County’s two-week positivity rate hovered around 4%. The rate was about 13% on Thursday.
The September resolution stated, in part, that all residents of Placer County should recognize they are individually responsible for their own personal choices in response to COVID-19, that an individual’s behavior could increase or decrease their chances of being infected by COVID-19.
“Local government, in a free society, cannot eliminate all risk to COVID-19,” the Placer County resolution said.
County public health officers have much power to prevent the spread of communicable disease within their jurisdiction. Sisson, who now works in Yolo County and has taught masters of public health classes in recent years, said county health officers can issue isolation orders, quarantine orders and close down individual businesses to stop the spread of a disease.
Enforcement, however, is a different question.
“Most of us don’t have badges, we don’t have guns. We are not law enforcement,” Sisson said. “So we rely on partners to do the enforcement side of things.”
“This is where I think California has been challenged,” she added. “The state health officer has issued orders, local health officers have issued orders, but when our law enforcement partners are not willing to enforce those orders, there’s not really much that public health can do, enforcement-wise.”
El Dorado, Sacramento and Riverside County sheriffs have all publicly refused to enforce various state orders.
As local law enforcement shied away from cracking down, other county departments did what they could to educate businesses and others about the rules.
In November, when Newsom issued a curfew for counties in the strict “purple tier” of reopening, Sacramento County Sheriff Scott Jones said his office wouldn’t enforce any “health or emergency orders related to curfews, staying at home, Thanksgiving or other social gatherings inside or outside the home, maximum occupancy or mask mandates.” A few weeks later, Jones tested positive for the virus himself.
While Jones refused to enforce the state order, public health and code enforcement officials have taken steps to comply with state orders and encouraged businesses to do the same, a county spokesperson said.
But the county has not used cease and desist orders or sought relief in court from businesses that don’t comply, according to Brenda Bongiorno in the county’s public information office.
“To a few businesses, Public Health has sent a letter to reiterate the current business practices that are in violation of the Public Health Order are prohibited and must not operate in this manner to protect the health of staff, customers and the community,” Bongiorno said in an email.
El Dorado County hasn’t lost any funding either, despite the sheriff’s position of “education rather than enforcement,” said Carla Hass, the county’s director of communications and outreach.
However, El Dorado County’s Board of Supervisors has taken action such as pulling health permits and levying subsequent fines on establishments that don’t comply with state orders.
No martial law
From the outset, Newsom has shown a preference for education over enforcement, despite his budget threat.
He has shown sympathy for business owners, noting frequently that he was once an entrepreneur himself. On Friday, he proposed $1 billion in small business relief and job training measures to soften the economic blow of the pandemic.
“If you want to establish a framework of martial law, which is ultimate authority and enforcement, we have the capacity to do that, but we are not feeling at this moment that is a necessity,” Newsom said in March.
Newsom last week again emphasized that he doesn’t want to be punitive. The state partnered with locals over the New Year’s Eve holiday to check up on bars and restaurants across the state. State Alcoholic Beverage Control officers were deployed in 26 counties on New Year’s Eve, visiting 1,631 bars and restaurants.
Many still say the governor is imposing too many restrictions. State Sen. Melissa Melendez, R-Lake Elsinore, last week introduced measures aiming to “protect small businesses from malicious COVID-19 fines.”
Senate Bill 102 would prohibit regulatory boards and agencies within the Department of Consumer Affairs, and the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, from revoking licenses or penalizing small businesses owners for failure to comply with any COVID-19 emergency orders.
“Business owners are draining their finances to comply with COVID regulations, and the Governor has continued to change the rules with no data to support his mandates,” Melendez said in a statement. “Now small businesses are facing fines and penalties as they try to stay afloat and keep their lifelong dreams alive.”
Glazer acknowledges that businesses are suffering. But he said preserving life is more important.
“Senator Melendez is accepting a body bag count that is completely unacceptable to me,” he said. “I think the goal of the state is to protect people’s lives, and that should be the central focus of our policymaking.”
This story was originally published January 11, 2021 at 5:00 AM.