“with regional data showing that the surge is now receding, and with the Bay Area one of the most vaccinated regions in the country, the health officers agree it is time to plan for a transition.”
Total population includes residents under age 12 who are not yet eligible for vaccinations.
As decisions to vaccinate and wear face coverings indoors drive down COVID-19 case rates and hospitalizations, health officers for the nine Bay Area jurisdictions that require face coverings in most indoor public spaces today reached consensus on criteria to lift those health orders.
These health officers continue to work together across the Bay Area to protect public health with a consistent regional approach, and to plan for the next phase of response to COVID-19 as this wave of the pandemic ebbs.
The counties of Contra Costa, Alameda, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Sonoma and the City of Berkeley will lift the indoor masking requirement in public spaces not subject to state and federal masking rules when all the following occur:
1) The jurisdiction reaches the moderate (yellow) COVID-19 transmission tier, as defined by the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC), and remains there for at least three weeks
AND
2) COVID-19 hospitalizations in the jurisdiction are low and stable, in the judgment of the health officer
AND
3) 80% of the jurisdiction’s total population is fully vaccinated with two doses of Pfizer or Moderna or one dose of Johnson & Johnson (booster doses not considered) NOTE – Total population includes residents under age 12 who are not yet eligible for vaccinations.
OR
Eight weeks have passed since a COVID-19 vaccine has been authorized for emergency use by federal and state authorities for 5- to 11-year-olds.
Most Bay Area health departments issued the masking requirements for their respective jurisdictions on August 3, following a summer surge in cases, hospitalizations and deaths.
But with regional data showing that the surge is now receding, and with the Bay Area one of the most vaccinated regions in the country, the health officers agree it is time to plan for a transition.
“It is no accident that transmission is slowing in Contra Costa County. Public health interventions, including the masking requirement, are working,” said Dr. Chris Farnitano, Contra Costa’s health officer. “We believe that health orders, along with vaccination, outreach and education are all adding layers of protection against COVID-19 in our community – and saving lives.”
Lifting a local indoor mask mandate would not prevent businesses, nonprofits, churches or others with public indoor spaces from imposing their own requirements. As COVID-19 easily spreads through airborne droplets, face coverings remain highly powerful in preventing its spread.
Each jurisdiction will rescind its order when criteria are met in that respective county or city. The criteria were developed to assist in determining the safest time to lift the indoor masking orders, based on regional scientific and medical consensus. The criteria also provide safety for school children, ages 5-11, who need the added protection of masks in the community to keep case rates low so they can remain in school until they can be vaccinated.
“Contra Costa is coming back strong, thanks to so many of our residents making healthy choices, such as getting vaccinated, or doing the courteous thing and wearing masks in places where the risk of transmission is a little higher,” said Diane Burgis, chair of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors. “I’m thankful for every resident who has done their part.”
California’s health guidance for the use of face coverings will remain in effect after local masking requirements are lifted, meaning that people who are not fully vaccinated for COVID-19 must continue to wear masks in businesses and indoor public spaces.
The state also requires face coverings for everyone, regardless of vaccination status, in healthcare facilities, public transit and adult and senior care facilities. California’s masking guidelines in K-12 schools would also not be affected by changes to local health orders.
An FDA advisory committee is scheduled to consider an application from Pfizer-BioNTech to grant emergency use of its COVID-19 vaccine for 5- to 11-year-olds on October 26.
Visit cchealth.org/coronavirus for local information about COVID-19 and Contra Costa County’s emergency response to the pandemic.
Allen Payton contributed to this report.
Read MoreCounty public meetings to continue online for 30 more days; COVID cases decrease by 27.9% over past two weeks
By Daniel Borsuk
In a show of respect for her 34 years of public service, retiring Contra Costa County Board of Supervisor Karen Mitchoff will manage the board’s gavel in 2022, a year when vice chair Federal Glover would have taken over the board leadership duties from current chair Diane Burgis of Brentwood.
Vice chair Glover of Pittsburg, who would have customarily been automatically approved by his supervisorial colleagues as chair for 2022, made the motion to transfer the board chair duties to Mitchoff as an act of respect for her public service dating back to 1981 in the office of late Contra Costa Sherriff-Coroner Richard Rainey as his executive secretary.
Glover, who represents District 5 on the board, will continue to serve as vice chair in 2022 and assume the chair duties in 2023.
Mitchoff of Pleasant Hill has served as District IV Supervisor since January 2011.
Supervisor Mitchoff had initially announced her candidacy for the position of Contra Costa County Recorder-Clerk when former officer holder Joe Canciamilla resigned and sentenced for violating Fair Political Practices Commission laws by spending more than $130,000 in campaign funds for personal uses. Mitchoff eventually stepped away from actively pursuing the County Recorder-Clerk post when Assistant Recorder-Clerk Debbi Cooper announced her candidacy and eventually won the supervisors’ approval to accept the top post.
“I talked to Supervisor Mitchoff, who plans to not run for reelection after next year, to serve as our chairperson as an honor,” said Supervisor Glover. “Therefore, I would make a motion to nominate Karen Mitchoff as chair for 2022 and Glover serve as vice chair for 2022.”
Glover’s motion passed on a 5-0 vote.
“I want to thank Mr. Glover to allow me to serve as board chair in my final year on the board,” said Mitchoff. “It shows how wonderful it is to be on this board. We are always respectful and kind.”
Mitchoff’s eventual departure raises the question of who might run for her position.
Among some of the potential candidates are Ken Carlson, a gay retired Concord police officer who serves on the Pleasant Hill City Council. Concord City Councilmember Edi Birsan has also frequently said he would run for the supervisorial post.
Mitchoff, a Portland, OR native, is a Cal State East Bay B.A. graduate in Human Development and has an elected and appointed public service record that includes election to the Pleasant Hill City Council in 2008 and service as mayor in 2010. She was appointed to the Pleasant Hill Recreation and Park District Board of Directors in 2003 and election to the Board of Directors in 2004 and 2006. From 1992 to 1996 she served on the Pleasant Hill Planning Commission.
Online Meetings for 30 More Days
The return of in person public meetings, especially at the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors’ brand new $100 million county administration building in downtown Martinez, will be on hold for at least another 30 days because of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s signing of Assembly Bill 361. The law now allows public meeting to be held onlin through January 31, 2022. At least through November the supervisors and all county commissions and advisory panels – the Assessment Appeals Board, Merit Board, Planning Commission, and Measure X Advisory Commission – will continue to conduct meetings remotely.
The supervisor’s resolution states:
“The Board of Supervisors finds that in person meetings of the Board of Supervisors would present risks to the health or safety of the public, staff and officials attending meetings, in light of the high case rate of COVID-19 infections in the county.
“As authorized by Assembly Bill 361, effective immediately and for the next 30 days the Board of Supervisors, acting in all its capacities and all its subcommittees, will use teleconferencing for meetings with the provisions of Government Code section 54953e.”
County COVID-19 Cases and Vaccinations
In the meantime, the Contra Costa Health Services reported there were 1,532 COVID-19 cases reported in the past two weeks, for a 36.8 percent decrease. Seventy-three COVID-19 patients were hospitalized, a 27.9 decrease over the past two weeks, department records show.
The Contra Costa County Health Services also reported the county’s vaccination rate for residents ages 12 and older, who have received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, is 86.3 percent compared to a 75.9 percent national rate.
Read More
All seven state legislators representing portions of Contra Costa County voted for both bills
By Jonah McKeown | Catholic News Agency
California Governor Gavin Newsom signed a pair of bills Sept. 22 that relate to privacy surrounding abortion, and a policy expert commented to CNA that the laws highlight the importance of parent-child communication regarding difficult topics such as abortion.
All seven state legislators representing portions of Contra Costa County voted for both bills, including Senators Steve Glazer, Nancy Skinner and Bill Dodd, and Assemblymembers Tim Grayson, Jim Frazier, Rebecca Bauer-Kahan and Buffy Wicks.
Kathleen Domingo, Executive Director of the California Catholic Conference, told CNA that the new laws, while “absurd” and harmful, are just the latest in a pattern of performative pro-abortion actions taken by California lawmakers over a period of decades.
“The reality is that this isn’t really anything new, and I think this is important for people to know…this has been the agenda of California for decades,” she said.
AB 1184 allows insured individuals, including minors, to keep “sensitive services” confidential from the insurance policyholder, generally their parents.
The law requires insurance companies to “accommodate requests for confidential communication of medical information” regardless of whether “disclosure would endanger the individual.” Set to take effect in July 2022, the law specifically mentions “sexual and reproductive health” and “gender affirming care” as potentially “sensitive services.”
California has a parental consent law for minors seeking abortions on the books, but the law is permanently enjoined by court order, meaning minors in California can seek abortions without their parents’ knowledge or permission. Planned Parenthood provides resources instructing teens how to hide abortions from their parents, Domingo noted.
Also signed Sept. 22 was AB 1356, which makes it illegal to film or photograph patients or employees within 100 feet of an abortion clinic “with the specific intent to intimidate a person from becoming or remaining a reproductive health services patient, provider, or assistant.” Domingo said this law could affect pro-life campaigners and sidewalk counselors, who may merely want to film or photograph themselves and their work outside abortion clinics.
Domingo said laws of this kind reinforce the importance of parents and guardians talking to and building trust with their children, and encouraging them to seek their parents’ advice in difficult situations.
“It really comes down to having conversations in your own families, and making sure that your children understand what your values are, and understand that they can come and talk to you if they have situations that are difficult,” Domingo said.
“If they know of someone who has a situation, if they themselves get into a situation where they need help, I think more than anything it’s just continuing that conversation and making sure are families are equipped to know what to do in those moments, that our parishes are equipped to know what to do, so that if you have a situation where a young woman finds herself in need, she knows who to talk to: our pregnancy resource centers and our pro-life pregnancy clinics up and down the state.”
Domingo said while performative pro-abortion laws will likely continue to be passed in California, supporting pro-life alternatives is the best way to combat them.
“That truly is the work that is needed. We can’t necessarily combat these laws that keep compounding abortion in California, but we can do the grassroots efforts that we have been doing for almost 50 years in California of helping people one at a time and saving families one at a time.”
A group of Republican lawmakers wrote to Newsom before he signed the bills into law, urging him to veto them instead.
“We should be encouraging parents and family to be involved in their children’s lives, not removing them further from it,” the letter reads, which was signed by nine state senators.
They also argued, in a more pragmatic vein, that AB 1184 would put policyholders in the “impossible position” of being financially responsible for bills incurred by their dependent children, but which they have no means of verifying because of the new confidentiality rules.
Newsom’s office heralded the laws as a strengthening of California’s status as a “haven” for women seeking abortions.
“This action comes in the wake of attacks on sexual health care and reproductive rights around the country, including the U.S. Supreme Court’s failure to block Texas’ ban on abortion after six weeks,” a statement from Newsom’s office reads, referring to a pro-life law in that state that took effect Sept. 1.
“California is a national leader on reproductive and sexual health protections and rights, and Governor Newsom’s actions today make clear that the state will remain a haven for all Californians, and for those coming from out-of-state seeking reproductive health services here.”
Allen Payton contributed to this report.
Read MoreHelp draw your representatives’ districts the way you’d like to see them; provided by 2020 California Citizens Redistricting Commission and Statewide Database
SACRAMENTO, CA—On Saturday, Oct. 2, the 2020 California Citizens Redistricting Commission announced the Statewide Database’s release of two free-to-use tools to help Californians submit redistricting plans to the Commission. These are the only redistricting applications through which users can submit their input directly to the state of California’s official redistricting process.
“The Commission is excited to share these free resources to help people draw their own district maps,” stated Commission Chair Sara Sadhwani. “The success of this decennial process depends on the participation of all Californians. We want to hear from everyone and want to know if our line drawing is heading in the right direction.”
“The Statewide Database is proud to provide two map creation tools that are free of charge,” said Karin Mac Donald, Director of the Statewide Database. “The key to participation is access. These online tools aim to expand access to every Californian in hopes that they have the tools necessary to participate in the redistricting process.”
Tell the CRC about your community today!
The previously released Draw My CA Community allows users to draw a map of and respond to a few simple prompts about their Communities of Interest. When finished, users can submit community input directly to the California Citizens Redistricting Commission for consideration in the statewide redistricting process. (https://drawmycacommunity.org/)
Draw My CA Districts is a free-to-use online tool for creating district maps
Through the newly released Draw My CA Districts web application, users can create district maps throughout the state of California and submit those maps directly to the Commission. (https://drawmycadistricts.org/)
Draw My CA is a free-to-use plugin for the open-source GIS platform, QGIS
Today’s release of the Draw My CA QGIS plugin allows users to download a California redistricting application to their own computer. With this plugin, users can create redistricting plans for the state of California and submit those maps directly to the Commission while having access to a full GIS platform. Draw My CA will be available 10/03/2021 at: https://www.redistrictinggroup.org/installer/.
To learn more about these tools, please visit https://drawmycalifornia.org/.
Both the online district mapping tools (Draw My CA Districts and Draw My CA) include functionality to assist users to comply with population deviation, contiguity and assignment checks.
- % Deviation check – tells the user to what extent any of their districts are above or below the ideal population of the distinct type they are working on
- Contiguity check – lets the user know if their districts are contiguous or not
- Assignment check – lets the user know if they have unassigned areas in their redistricting plan
The Commission must follow the following criteria, in this order, when drawing district maps:
- Districts must be of equal population to comply with the US Constitution.
- Districts must comply with the Voting Rights Act to ensure that minorities have an equal opportunity to elect representatives of their choice.
- Districts must be drawn contiguously, so that all parts of the district are connected to each other.
- Districts must minimize the division of cities, counties, neighborhoods and communities of interest to the extent possible.
- Districts should be geographically compact: such that nearby areas of population are not bypassed for a more distant population. This requirement refers to density, not shape. Census blocks cannot be split.
- Where practicable each Senate District should be comprised of two complete and adjacent Assembly Districts, and Board of Equalization districts should be comprised of 10 complete and adjacent State Senate Districts.
In addition, the place of residence of any incumbent or political candidate may not be considered in the creation of a map, and districts may not be drawn for the purpose of favoring or discriminating against an incumbent, political candidate, or political party.
Every 10 years, after the federal government publishes updated census information, California must redraw the boundaries of its electoral districts so that the state’s population is evenly allocated among the new districts.
In 2008, California voters passed the Voters First Act, authorizing the creation of the independent California Citizens Redistricting Commission to draw new State Senate, State Assembly, and State Board of Equalization district lines. In 2010, the Voters First Act for Congress gave the Commission the responsibility of drawing new Congressional districts following every census.
For more information, please visit WeDrawTheLinesCA.org.
Read More
Would allow creation of “Education Savings Account” for each K-12 student; organizers will need to gather signatures of one million voters
Labor Day is the traditional end of the summer and the beginning of fall. Before government created the perpetual school year, Labor Day also marked the beginning of the school year. This year, Labor Day marked the beginning of what will be a decisive and tumultuous year. Californians will have the opportunity to establish true educational freedom in our wonderful Golden State.
School Choice Initiative Filed with Attorney General
In August, key leaders of the California School Choice Foundation joined other Californians to formally present a school choice initiative to the California Attorney General’s office for what is known as “Title and Summary.” We expect to receive that summary no later than October 12, 2021. Once that happens, we can then begin to gather the 1.0 million valid signatures necessary to place it on the November 2022 ballot. Just to make sure, we plan to gather 1.5 million signatures.
Empowers Parents and Revolutionizes Education in California
The key four points of the initiative are these:
Educational Freedom Act
- An Education Savings Account (“ESA”) will be established for each K-12 child in California on request.
- Each year, that account will be credited with the student’s share of what are known as Prop 98 funds. That share will begin at $14,000 per year per student.
- The parent will be able to direct the ESA trust funds to a participating, accredited private or parochial school. The money will follow the student not the politicians.
- Any unspent funds will accumulate and can be spent on college, vocational training or other qualified educational expense.
This plan is both simple and revolutionary. Once passed, California will become the first state to enact universal school choice. More important, it will be the first state to recognize that It’s Your Kids, Your Money and Your Choice!
Get Ready and Get Involved NOW!
I need not tell you that school choice is the hottest issue in the country. It was the linchpin of at least two candidates in the recall election: Larry Elder and Kevin Kiley. Each endorsed our school choice initiative. You can understand why this is initiative is already driving bureaucrats and social engineers insane. No matter what happened in the recall election, school choice is not going anywhere. Thousands of supporters are now mobilizing to get it on the ballot and pass it. Scores of candidates for statewide and local offices will make school choice the focal point of their campaigns.
This is why you need to get involved right now. We don’t have a moment to lose.
Super Sunday – Happy Halloween! Trick or Treat?
As I mentioned above, we are not standing still for a moment. We know we will be able to start gathering signatures a month from now. We have been organizing and advocating for the last three years.
We want to hit the ground running. That’s why we are pre-planning a major event for October 30-31. Whether you call it Super Sunday or Halloween, you need to let us know what church or other venue you will be covering on that weekend. Our goal is to calendar at least 1,000 events statewide. Nothing will send a more powerful message than this. Friends and foes alike will know we are serious about our freedom and the future of our children.
This campaign will run for the next 13 months, ending in victory on Tuesday, November 8, 2022.
The following was provided by Stephen Smith:
Q1. What about California’s public education system led to this grassroots effort for the initiative?
The reasons are legion.
- California schools can hardly be called an “education” system. Despite spending $20,000 per student per year – – that’s an average of $500,000 per classroom of 25 – – California schools rank near the bottom of the nation at 48th place. This has happened even though per pupil spending has almost doubled in the last decade.
- Increasingly, California schools preferred to indoctrinate rather than educate. In the face of vigorous parental opposition, social engineers (*1) disguised as “educators” continue their efforts to implement critical race theory. They also have frustrated efforts of parents to opt out of equally controversial “sex-ed” programs. (*2)
- Parents are outraged by the closure of the schools and mask mandates. Eighteen months after the start of the Covid panic, schools are still not fully reopened.
- Parents are frustrated by being ignored by school boards, teachers’ unions and politicians. They feel strongly – – and correctly – – that they are the parents and should be making basic decisions about the health, education and formation of their children. This is a basic human right that is frustrated daily by a leviathan system that cares little for them for their children. (*3)
(*1) https://freebeacon.com/coronavirus/la-teachers-union-president-there-is-no-such-thing-as-learning-loss/ “There is no such thing as learning loss,” the union president told Los Angeles Magazine. “Our kids didn’t lose anything. It’s OK that our babies may not have learned all their times tables. They learned resilience. They learned survival. They learned critical thinking skills. They know the difference between a riot and a protest. They know the words insurrection and coup.” Cecily Myart-Cruz, president of the United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA)
(*2) https://capitolresource.org/ca-sex-education/
(*3) CPC report and polling data https://californiapolicycenter.org/new-polling-shows-covid-19-shifted-california-voters-opinions-on-schools-2/
Q2. How will the state provide the $14K per student?
- The principal source will be Proposition 98 tax revenues which, in the coming school year, will average approximately $14,000 per student. In fact, as noted above, the State spends approximately $20,000 per student per year.
- Ultimately, of course, parents, like every other taxpayer in California, will pay dearly for their own K-12 education as well as that of their children. Politicians and other advocates of centralized, inefficient, and incompetent government schools, never let on that under proposition 98, 40% of California state tax revenues are earmarked for what they are pleased to call “education.” As a practical matter, therefore, everyone in California will pay for K-12 education their entire lives. The only question is whether they get the education they pay for. Therefore, we say: It’s Your Kids, Your Money, and Your Choice.
Q3. Why do students and families need school choice?
- It should be recognized that what we call “school choice” is another way of describing parental choice. As discussed above, California schools, dominated by corrupt teachers’ unions and politicians have utterly failed to educate our children. This system particularly affects poor and minority communities who have no ability to escape the system. Therefore, they have no opportunity to escape the cycle of poverty and ignorance that so often characterizes our inner cities.
- It is not only that they need school choice. It benefits all of us. In California, indeed in America itself, real progress depends upon economic, social, and political mobility. The foundation of this mobility is a decent education without which our poorest citizens cannot hope to participate fully in our complex economy and our form of government. The current government school monopoly both creates and sustains a permanent underclass. This system is not only immoral, but also dangerous. Therefore, our school choice initiative must first be understood as a preferential option for the poor.
- School choice is wildly popular among parents and citizens at large. There are several polls showing that approximately 70% of black and Latino Democrat parents desire some form of school choice.
- Another example is homeschooling. It is estimated that there were only 73,000 homeschooled children in 1973. In the wake of school closures and the rapid decline in education, that number has swollen to as much as 5 million. These parents are tired of arguing with the teacher unions and politicians.
Q4. Is this the first ballot initiative of its kind in the U.S.?
- This is not the first time that Californians have tried to get some form of school choice. There was an initiative on the ballot in the early 90’s and again in 2000. Both failed. That said, there are several states that have various forms of school choice that often include the ability of parents to choose a public school to attend but only within the system. Other state programs do allow limited funds to attend a private school or provide funds for certain educational expenses procured outside the system. Arizona and Florida are examples of each. Some states have put Education Savings Accounts into place to implement parental choice.
- The Educational Freedom Act initiative goes further than any other proposal of which we are aware. It grants the right of any parent to request the creation and funding of an Education Savings Account that they can use to enroll their child in any accredited school of their choice and save anything left over for college or vocational training. It is both simple and revolutionary.
Q5. Why does it need to happen through a voter referendum instead of the state legislature?
- This is simple. The politicians, special interests and the teachers’ unions have a monopoly on what millions of Californians say, think and do. They also control for their own benefit 40% — over $100 billion – of the California budget. They will not give up this power willingly. We anticipate that the enemies of educational freedom will spend $100 – 200 million to defeat parents’ rights.
Q6. What is most important for people to know?
- The most important thing for people to know is that help is on the way. For the first time:
- Parents, not politicians, bureaucrats or zip codes, will determine how and where their children will be education.
- Because all schools, both public and private, will have to compete for students, ALL schools will get better.
- Because of competition, all schools will have to deal respectfully with parents who will be customers with a choice.
- Parents, including homeschoolers, will be able to shape their children’s education in a way best suited to their needs and talents, not the government’s.
- Because educational funding will now follow the student and empower parents, California will experience unprecedented innovation in education. California will once again lead the nation in educational innovation and excellence.
For more information visit www.CaliforniaSchoolChoice.org or our Facebook page.
Michael Alexander is President and Chairman of the Board and Stephen Smith is Vice President of Californians for School Choice.
Allen Payton contributed to this report.
Read MoreSunday night, Sept. 26, 2021, at about 7:51 p.m., Contra Costa CHP was advised of a solo vehicle crash vs. a pedestrian on I-680 southbound, north of Marina Vista. For unknown reasons at this time, a pedestrian was within the roadway of I-680 southbound while a vehicle (a white Toyota sedan) approached. The driver of the Toyota was unable to avoid the pedestrian and struck them. The pedestrian was pronounced deceased at the scene. The Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Coroner’s Office will be handling the release of identity of the deceased pedestrian.
The driver and other people in the Toyota were not injured, remained on scene, and were cooperative in the investigation.
This collision is still under investigation. If anyone witnessed it or the events leading up to it, please contact Contra Costa CHP in Martinez, (925) 646-4980.
Read MoreBy Jimmy Lee, Director of Public Affairs, Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff
At about 12:03 Saturday morning, Oct. 2, 2021, Muir Station Deputy Sheriffs were dispatched to a domestic disturbance on Island View Drive in Bay Point.
Deputies arrived, finding a man and woman in the street. The man fled on foot but was apprehended by deputies.
The woman sustained injuries and was transported to a local hospital. Early this afternoon, she was pronounced deceased at the hospital.
The man is identified as 47-year-old Richard Ortiz of Bay Point.
He is currently booked at the Martinez Detention Facility on the following charges: murder, domestic violence, and resisting an executive officer.
The investigation into this incident is ongoing.
Anyone with information is asked to contact the Sheriff’s Office Investigation Division at (925) 313-2600 or through Sheriff’s Office dispatch at (925) 646-2441. For any tips, email: tips@so.cccounty.us or call (866) 846-3592 to leave an anonymous voice message.
Read MoreWashington—Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), on Wednesday, introduced the U.S. Air Travel Public Safety Act, a bill that would require all passengers on domestic airline flights to either be fully vaccinated, have recently tested negative for COVID-19 or have fully recovered from COVID-19.
The bill would require the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in consultation with the Federal Aviation Administration, to develop national vaccination standards and procedures related to COVID-19 and domestic air travel in order to prevent future outbreaks of the disease.
The bill would also require the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to make recommendations for COVID-19 vaccine use in health care settings and among health care personnel in other settings.
The legislation builds on a current CDC requirement that all air passengers traveling to the United States from a foreign country must provide proof of a negative COVID-19 test result or documentation of recovery from COVID-19. Last week, the Biden administration announced it will work with airlines to implement additional protocols to prevent the spread of COVID-19 on international flights.
“We know that air travel during the 2020 holiday season contributed to last winter’s devastating COVID-19 surge. We simply cannot allow that to happen again,” Feinstein said.
“Ensuring that air travelers protect themselves and their destination communities from this disease is critical to prevent the next surge, particularly if we confront new, more virulent variants of COVID-19. This bill complements similar travel requirements already in place for all air passengers – including Americans – who fly to the United States from foreign countries. This includes flights from foreign countries with lower COVID-19 rates than many U.S. states.
“It only makes sense that we also ensure the millions of airline passengers that crisscross our country aren’t contributing to further transmission, especially as young children remain ineligible to be vaccinated.”
The bill is supported by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Public Health Association.
Dr. Barbara D. Alexander, president of the Infectious Diseases Society of America and professor of medicine and pathology at Duke University School of Medicine said: “Vaccination is a critical strategy to end the COVID-19 pandemic, and vaccination requirements in multiple settings are an important mechanism to boost vaccination rates, prevent infections and hospitalizations and save lives. The Infectious Diseases Society of America supports Senator Feinstein’s legislation to require vaccination for domestic air travel as part of our nation’s broader COVID-19 vaccination strategy.”
Background
- According to a study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, COVID-19 vaccines continued to offer strong protection after the Delta variant became predominant over the summer. People who were fully vaccinated were five times less likely to be infected and more than 10 times less likely to be admitted to the hospital or die compared to those who were unvaccinated.
- According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, the United States is seeing its highest weekly totals of pediatric COVID-19 cases since the pandemic began. The CDC also found that in August, emergency department visits and hospital admissions among children were higher in states with lower vaccine rates and lower in states with higher vaccine rates.
- According to a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, people traveling to other counties or states last year contributed to higher COVID-19 case numbers in their destination communities. Authors of the study later observed that this was especially true during the 2020 summer and winter holidays.
- According to a Mayo Clinic Proceedings study, COVID-19 testing requirements for airline passengers could have a meaningful effect on detecting active infections either immediately before or after a flight.
- According to a poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation, about three in 10 people surveyed who were waiting to be vaccinated said they would be more likely to get vaccinated if airlines required passengers to be vaccinated. This number increased to about four in 10 among unvaccinated individuals who said they would only get the vaccine if required.
To contact the senator’s office, visit Contact – United States Senator for California (senate.gov).
Read More“Case Rates for unvaccinated people in the county…peaked on Sept. 13, one day before the new health orders were issued.”
“…we are a long way from the levels of community transmission we experienced in spring…” – Contra Costa Health Services spokesman
By Allen Payton
The statistics on the Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS) Coronavirus Dashboard show COVID hospitalizations and cases in the county were already declining before the new health orders by county health officer, Dr. Chris Farnitano, issued them on Sept. 14. While the data trails the report by seven days, as the dashboard states, “data from the last 7 days is still being reported”, all the COVID-related stats continued to decline before the orders went into effect last Wednesday, Sept. 22.
The press release from CCHS on Sept. 15 read, “While the peak of the surge seems to have passed.” But the statistics showed it had passed. (See related article)
Hospital Bed Utilization
The 7-Day Average COVID-19 Inpatient Bed Utilization in the county decreased from 11.5% on Sept. 8 to 9.9% by the time the orders were issued on the Sept. 15. That continued to decrease to 8.1% on Sept. 22. They have continued to decrease through Sunday to 7.3% and were on the decrease since Aug. 28 when the percentages were first included in the stats, from 13.6%. CCC COVID Hospitalization stats
The statistics also show the percentage of COVID inpatient beds to Contra Costa Total Hospitalizations has decreased from a high of 19.4% on Sept. 6 to 10.7% on Sunday, Sept. 26.
In addition, of all the inpatient ICU beds in the county, about one-third have been filled by COVID patients has decreased from a high of 46% to 29% between Aug. 28 and Sept. 26.
New Cases
The Seven Day Rolling Average number of new COVID cases in the county peaked on Sept. 10 at 217.3, almost two weeks before the new health orders went into effect on Wed., Sept. 22.
Case Rates
The Case Rates for unvaccinated people in the county at 40 per 100,000 population and fully vaccinated people at 8.7 peaked on Sept. 13, one day before the new health orders were issued. Both continued to decline through Sept. 19 to 29.6 and 7.4 respectively, three days before the orders went into effect.
Questions for Farnitano & Health Services Staff
In light of that information, Farnitano and health services staff were asked the following questions via email Monday evening: “Why are the latest orders still in place? Are you willing to lift them, now? If not, what else must occur for that to happen?”
Karl Fischer, Contra Costa Health Services spokesman responded, “For the past few weeks Contra Costa County’s COVID-19 transmission data have been trending in the right direction after a severe, sudden spike in new cases, hospitalizations and deaths earlier this summer.
It’s also true that county data remain elevated since that spike, far above where they were when California relaxed its health orders in mid-June. As the press release you quoted correctly points out, our average daily case rate is similar to what we were recording in February, on the downslope of another severe spike. That information is also available on the dashboard.
It is no accident that our county is now trending in the right direction.
COVID-related public health measures, including recent health orders requiring people to wear masks when visiting indoor public spaces and show proof of vaccination or a recent, negative test result to enter the indoor parts of some high-risk public establishments, are helping to reduce transmission of the virus in our county.
For example, on Aug. 3, the day our indoor masking health order took effect, the 7-day average number of daily new COVID-19 cases reported in our county was 412. One month later, on Sept. 3, that number had dropped to 245.9.
We hope to see similar improvement in coming weeks from the most recent health order, which took effect just last week. But, as I mentioned, we are a long way from the levels of community transmission we experienced in spring, when the state briefly seemed to be emerging from the pandemic.
With winter approaching, a season where the spread of respiratory viruses such as COVID-19 is common, we are doing everything we can to prevent another severe surge, most importantly working to increase vaccination rates across our community – to save lives, keep our schools and businesses open, and our hospitals functioning.”
However, as the Dashboard shows, Contra Costa County was already trending in the right direction” two weeks before the new health orders went into effect.
Additional Questions
An additional question was sent late Wednesday afternoon, asking, “since Contra Costa was already significantly trending in the right direction through not just Sept. 3 but it continued through Sept. 22, with just the indoor mask-wearing order, why the need for the additional proof of vaccination or testing mandate? Is it an effort to pressure the unvaccinated to get vaccinated by taking away more of their freedoms?”
09/30/21 UPDATE: CCHS spokesman, Karl Fischer responded, “Contra Costa has made significant progress in lowering the number of new reported cases and hospitalizations in recent weeks. But, as I mentioned in my last response, our transmission data are still substantially far above the levels considered safe by the State of California when it lifted its health order on June 15.
I know you are aware of this information, as it is available on our public dashboard, but our 7-day rolling average number of daily new COVID-19 cases was 152.9 on Sept. 22, compared to 45.3 on June 15. Per capita, on June 15 we averaged 1.5 daily new hospital admissions due to COVID-19 for unvaccinated people, compared to 5.5 on Sept. 22. Contra Costa has a long way to go before it reaches the transmission levels the state considered just safe enough to reopen, just three months ago.
Contra Costa is committed to doing everything in its power to reduce COVID-19 transmission as quickly and effectively as possible – lives depend on it. That is why the county this month added a new, temporary requirement for patrons using the indoor areas of certain establishments where the virus is at high risk of spreading to show proof of vaccination at the door, or a recent, negative test result.
We believe this health order will help our community continue its progress reducing COVID-19 transmission, perhaps even accelerate it, and it may also help to head off another massive holiday surge in cases, hospitalizations and deaths, like the one we experienced last winter.
We encourage anyone who is eligible to get vaccinated. Our transmission data are now slowing down thanks to the 80%+ of county residents who have already chosen to get vaccinated, and the willingness of the majority to temporarily endure inconvenience so we all may eventually enjoy living in a community where there is no elevated risk of contracting a deadly but highly preventable disease.
Why No Recovery Documentation Option in Contra Costa?
On Wednesday, U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) on Wednesday, introduced the U.S. Air Travel Public Safety Act, a bill that would require all passengers on domestic airline flights to either be fully vaccinated, have recently tested negative for COVID-19 or have fully recovered from COVID-19. According to her office’s press release, “the legislation builds on a current CDC requirement that all air passengers traveling to the United States from a foreign country must provide proof of a negative COVID-19 test result or documentation of recovery from COVID-19.”
In response, the additional questions were sent to CCHS staff: “Why isn’t that last option, recovery documentation, being offered to people in Contra Costa to comply with the latest health orders if it’s allowed to be used for people traveling into our country? They aren’t even required to provide proof of vaccination. But we Americans do to participate in something that takes much less time than an international flight. Their plane trips are much longer than an hour which is usually the length of time it takes to have an indoor, sitdown meal. If that’s the science the federal government is following, why isn’t the CCHS also following it?”
Fischer replied, “Contra Costa Health Services did not include a provision for proof of prior infection in the Sept. 14 health order because, in our analysis of available research, we determined that the science remains unsettled around the efficacy or duration of natural immunity following a COVID-19 infection. We do have a better understanding of immunity provided by the available COVID-19 vaccines, thanks to the extensive clinical trials performed to ensure their safety and efficacy before they were made available to the public, and their performance in protecting millions of people worldwide this year.
While it’s true that someone who has COVID-19 must wait 90 days after their infection ends before testing again, they can receive COVID-19 vaccine as soon as their isolation period ends. So, in no case are patrons left without options for using the indoor portions of establishments affected by this order.”
Those who choose not to get the vaccine for one reason, or another will have to take a test and prove negative within three days each time they want to dine indoors at a restaurant, go to the gym, a bar, to the movies or another entertainment venue, such as a bowling alley.
Read More