Contra Costa Herald

News Of By and For The People of Contra Costa County, California

Contra Costa, other Bay Area counties to extend Shelter-In-Place orders through end of May

By 1 Comment

Will include limited easing of some restrictions for small number of lower-risk activities

MARTINEZ – April 27, 2020) – Later this week, the Public Health Officers of the Counties of Contra Costa, Alameda, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara as well as the City of Berkeley will issue revised shelter-in-place orders that largely keep the current restrictions in place and extend them through May. The new order will include limited easing of specific restrictions for a small number of lower-risk activities.

The shelter-in-place orders in effect across the seven jurisdictions are set to expire on May 3, 2020. Thanks to the collective effort and sacrifice of the 7 million residents across our jurisdictions, we have made substantial progress in slowing the spread of the novel coronavirus, ensuring our local hospitals are not overwhelmed with COVID-19 cases, and saving lives. At this stage of the pandemic, however, it is critical that our collective efforts continue so that we do not lose the progress we have achieved together. Hospitalizations have leveled, but more work is needed to safely re-open our communities. Prematurely lifting restrictions could easily lead to a large surge in cases.

The Health Officers will also release a set of broad indicators that will be used to track progress in preparedness and response to COVID-19, in alignment with the framework being used by the State of California. Future easing of restrictions requires that each jurisdiction and various sectors continue to rapidly build critical infrastructure and systems to respond to and control the spread of coronavirus infections and to ensure the health care system’s ability to meet demand.

This global pandemic of COVID-19 is still in its early stages. The virus spreads easily, testing capacity is limited and expanding slowly, and vaccine development is just beginning. We expect to be responding to COVID-19 in our communities for a long time. As effective as our efforts have been, if we move too fast to ease restrictions, the potential of exponential spread could have grave impacts to health and wellness of our residents as well as the economy.

The Health Officers of these seven jurisdictions have been working closely together in leading a unified, regional approach, to protect the health and safety of our residents. Details regarding this next phase will be shared later in the week, along with the updated order.

Gov. Newsom announces plan to resume delayed health care deferred as hospitals prepared for COVID-19 surge

By Leave a Comment

Decision based on progress – one of California’s six indicators to gradually modify state’s stay-at-home order

State also announces plans to add at least an additional 80 testing sites, mainly in underserved communities; train up to 10,000 contact tracers

SACRAMENTO — Wednesday, April 22, 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom announced plans to allow hospitals and health systems to resume delayed medical care for Californians – such as heart valve replacements, angioplasty and tumor removals, and key preventive care services, such as colonoscopies – which were deferred as the state’s health care delivery systems prepared for a surge of COVID-19 patients. The decision was based on progress toward preparing California hospitals and health systems for a surge in COVID-19 patients – one of the six critical indicators the governor unveiled last week as part of the state’s framework for gradually modifying California’s stay-at-home order.

As part of the Western State’s Pact, California will work with Washington and Oregon to share best practices on how our states can allow hospitals and medical providers to resume delayed medical care in areas that have sufficient hospital capacity, while ensuring the safety and health of our health care workers and patients. The Western states had previously announced a shared, science-based vision for gradually reopening their economies and controlling COVID-19 into the future.

“From the beginning, I have said California’s decisions will be guided by science, not politics, and that Californians’ health comes first,” said Governor Newsom. “Thanks to the work our health care delivery system has done expanding hospital capacity and reducing the rate of spread of COVID-19, hospitals and health systems can consider resuming medical care that residents have delayed during this crisis, such as heart valve replacements, angioplasty and tumor removals, when such care can be delivered safety and with appropriate protections for health care workers. It’s in the best interest of the overall health of our state to allow these procedures to resume when they can be done safely.”

Last week, Governor Newsom announced six indicators that would drive California’s decision to gradually modify portions of the state’s stay-at-home order. They include:

  • Expanding testing and contact tracing to be able to identify and isolate those with the virus;
  • Preventing infection in people who are most at risk;
  • Being able to handle surges in hospitals and the health care delivery system;
  • Developing therapeutics to meet demand;
  • Ensuring businesses, schools and child care facilities can support physical distancing; and
  • Determining when to reinstate certain measures like the stay-at-home order if need be.

Also today, Governor Newsom announced that President Trump has personally committed to sending the state 100,000 testing swabs next week and 250,000 swabs the following week.

Health officials also outlined progress toward the first indicator: expanding testing and contact tracing to be able to identify and isolate those with the virus.

To that end, the state announced the expansion of community testing in underserved areas. The state is contracting with Verily, an Alphabet company, in partnership with Community Organized Relief Effort (CORE) and with support from Rockefeller Foundation and an anonymous donor, to establish six new community testing sites focused on underserved communities such as farmworkers and communities of color. Additionally, the state is contracting with OptumServe, to establish an additional 80 community testing sites, which too will be focused on underserved communities.

“We know that communities of color are disproportionately affected by COVID-19,” said Governor Newsom. “We must ensure that we are deploying testing equitably in an effort to reduce the higher death rates we are seeing in African American and Latino communities.”

In addition, the state is:

  • Accelerating equitable COVID-19 testing by aiming to deploy 25,000 tests per day by April 30; establishing an additional 80-100 testing sites; and identifying five new high-throughput testing hubs.
  • Establishing a contact tracing workforce by surveying counties on their capacity; developing a statewide training academy; and training 10,000 public health connectors to conduct contact tracing.
  • Developing isolation protocols and supports by identifying regional alternate isolation sites and building private-public partnerships to support those who are isolated.
  • Deploying data management system and tools by publishing a symptom-check app; deploying a data management platform; and establishing a data dashboard for the public.

Now that testing has become more widely available across the state, California updated its testing guidance earlier this week to become the first state to recommend testing of some asymptomatic individuals such as health care workers, first responders and correctional workers. This action will better protect Californians and prevent COVID-19 spread in high-risk settings such as congregate living facilities and correctional facilities.

Face coverings now required on BART

By Leave a Comment

County health orders in Contra Costa, Alameda, San Francisco, and San Mateo now require all riders to wear face coverings inside BART stations and on-board trains.  The orders also require BART to take reasonable measures to remind the public that they need facing coverings and “must take all reasonable steps to prohibit any member of the public who is not wearing a face covering from entering and must not serve that person if those efforts are unsuccessful and seek to remove that person.” Failure to comply with the emergency health order is a misdemeanor.  Enforcement begins on Wednesday, April 22.

Prior to the order, most BART riders were already wearing face coverings while riding. BART will take the following steps to be compliant with the new orders:

Public Communication

  • Signs with pictograms and translations will be posted in all stations.
  • PA announcements will be made inside stations and on-board trains.
  • Platform digital signs will rotate a message.
  • Website and social media posts will be made.

BART Police Deployment and Enforcement Strategies 

BART Police Chief Ed Alvarez recently shifted deployment to focus police resources to the entrances of stations and near the faregates. This strategy was put into place to improve safety for our employees and riders and to prevent illegal behavior from occurring.  Continuing this deployment will help BART enforce the new orders.

BART Police will be responsible for reminding riders of the new requirement.  Consistent with BART’s current operating procedures, Station Agents will not be used to enforce the new public health emergency orders as they are not trained law enforcement personnel.
BART Police will give verbal reminders of the requirement to riders without face coverings when police encounter someone not covering their mouth and nose.  Police personnel will remind the rider they have the option to use any material to cover their face. Only upon refusal to cover their face with any material will an officer ask the person to leave the system.

Riders should not confront others without a face covering.  If someone isn’t wearing a face covering, riders should move away from the individual.

CDC recommends wearing cloth face coverings that can be fashioned from household items or made at home from common materials.  The cloth face coverings recommended are not surgical masks or N-95 respirators.  Those are critical supplies that must continue to be reserved for healthcare workers and other medical first responders, as recommended by current CDC guidance.

Contra Costa opens four sites for free by-appointment drive-through testing for COVID-19

By Leave a Comment

In Concord, Martinez, Pittsburg and San Pablo

By Kim McCarl, Assistant to the Director, Communications, Contra Costa Health Services

Contra Costa residents who have fever, cough or similar symptoms can make an appointment for free COVID-19 testing at one of four drive-through sites around the county.

The sites, opened Wednesday by Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS), are available to anyone regardless of insurance.

“Testing is more available now than it has ever been since this pandemic began, and we have the opportunity to give more people the health information they need to care for themselves,” said Candace Andersen, chair of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors. “Information is power, and it will help us flatten the curve in Contra Costa County.

Testing is available to people who have symptoms of COVID-19, such as fever, coughing or shortness of breath and fatigue.

Any Contra Costa resident with these symptoms can call 1-844-421-0804 for a confidential screening by a health professional. Telephone screenings will be available from 8 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Monday through Friday.

“It is crucial to ramp up testing in Contra Costa so we can get a more accurate idea of the spread of COVID-19 in our community,” CCHS Director Anna Roth said. “It is also crucial for everyone in the community to have access to testing, to better protect themselves and their families.”

Depending on their symptoms, callers may receive health advice during their screenings or an appointment for testing at one of four drive-through testing sites:

  • Contra Costa Public Health Clinic Services, 2500 Bates Ave., Concord
  • Martinez Health Center, 2500 Alhambra Ave., Martinez
  • Pittsburg Health Center, 2311 Loveridge Road, Pittsburg
  • West County Health Center, 23601 San Pablo Ave., San Pablo

Screening and appointments are only available by phone. Testing is not available on a walk-in basis.

Patients with appointments must travel in their personal vehicles to their appointments, Testing is done without patients leaving their vehicles. Testing results are available in three to five days.

Applications for Pandemic Unemployment Assistance for business owners, self-employed and independent contractors begin April 28

By 1 Comment

Information on State and Federal Benefit Payments

From – https://edd.ca.gov/about_edd/coronavirus-2019/pandemic-unemployment-assistance.htm

As part of the federal CARES Act, the new Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) program helps unemployed Californians who are business owners, self-employed, independent contractors, have limited work history, and others not usually eligible for regular state UI benefits who are out of business or services are significantly reduced as a direct result of the pandemic. The provisions of the program once operational include:

  • Up to 39 weeks of benefits starting with weeks of unemployment beginning February 2, 2020, through the week ending December 26, 2020*, depending on when you became directly impacted by the pandemic.
  • An additional $600 to each PUA weekly benefit amount you may be eligible to receive, as part of the separate CARES Act Pandemic Additional Compensation program. Only the weeks of a claim between March 29 and July 25* are eligible for the extra $600 payments.

* Under the CARES Act of 2020, the $600 additional benefits are available through 07/31/20. However, the U.S. Department of Labor has issued guidance to clarify that, for most Californians, the last full week of benefits will end on 07/25/20. Similarly, the PUA program has a legislative end date of 12/31/20, but for Californians the last full week of benefits will end on 12/26/20.

Benefits can be retroactive to weeks starting on or after February 2, 2020, depending on your last day of work due to COVID-19 and regardless of when you submitted your claim application. The effective date of your claim will begin the Sunday of the week when you last worked and became unemployed due to reasons directly related to COVID-19.

Important Information

Note: Because this is a brand new program, each state will need time to develop all of the necessary system programming, forms, processes, and procedures. This page will be updated as information becomes available, including when and how to apply for these benefits. Once this new complex program is built and staffed, it will likely rival the size of the regular UI program the EDD already administers.

As we work to implement this new program, you can:

Eligibility

The PUA benefits are payable if you don’t qualify for regular UI benefits in California or another state and also do not qualify for State Disability Insurance or Paid Family Leave benefits. This includes:

  • Business owners
  • Self-employed individuals
  • Independent contractors

You can also be eligible if you qualified for regular UI benefits, but have collected all benefits for which they are eligible.

If you are not a citizen of the United States, you cannot be paid PUA benefits unless you were legally permitted to work in the United States at the time such services were performed. In addition, you must be authorized to work for any week of PUA benefits claimed to be eligible for payments.

You must also meet one of the following criteria:

  • You have been diagnosed with COVID-19 or are experiencing symptoms of COVID-19 and are seeking a medical diagnosis.
  • You are unable to work because a health care provider advised you to self-quarantine due to concerns related to COVID-19.
  • A member of your household has been diagnosed with COVID-19.
  • You are providing care for a family member or a member of your household who has been diagnosed with COVID-19.
  • A child or other person in the household for whom you have primary caregiving responsibility is unable to attend school or another facility that is closed as a direct result of the COVID-19 and the school or facility care is required for you to work.
  • You became the breadwinner or major support for a household because the head of the household has died as a direct result of COVID-19.
  • You have to quit your job as a direct result of COVID-19.
  • Your place of employment is closed as a direct result of COVID-19.
  • You were scheduled to start a job that is now unavailable as a direct result of the COVID-19 public health emergency.
  • You are unable to reach the place of employment as a direct result of the COVID-19 public health emergency.
  • If you work as an independent contractor with reportable income, you may also qualify for PUA benefits if you are unemployed, partially employed, or unable or unavailable to work because the COVID-19 public health emergency has severely limited your ability to continue performing your customary work activities, and has thereby forced you to stop working.

Benefit Payments

In order to provide benefits as quickly as possible, payments will be issued in phases. If you qualify for PUA, and depending on the effective date of your PUA claim, the initial payments you will receive are as follows:

  • Phase 1
    $167 per week for each week you were unemployed from February 2, 2020 to March 28, 2020 due to a COVID-19 related reason.
  • Phase 2
    $167 plus $600 per week for each week you were unemployed from March 29, 2020 to July 25, 2020, due to a COVID-19 related reason.
  • Phase 3
    $167 per week, for each week from July 26, 2020 to December 26, 2020, that you are unemployed due to a COVID-19 related reason, up to a total of 39 weeks (minus any weeks of regular UI and certain extended UI benefits that you have received).

Note: If you qualify for your claim to be backdated to an earlier PUA effective date based on your last day of work, you could receive payment for prior weeks you were unemployed due to COVID-19.

You will be required to “certify” for your benefit payment. Certifying is the process of answering basic questions every two weeks that tells us you’re still unemployed and otherwise eligible to continue receiving biweekly payments.

When to File a Claim

We have a dedicated team working around the clock with state partners to build this new program as quickly as possible. The EDD will begin accepting online applications for this program on Tuesday, April 28. This page will be updated with instructions for filing a claim for PUA benefits when details become available.

If you are unsure if you are an independent contractor or an employee who could be eligible for benefits, file for regular Unemployment Insurance benefits and we will determine your eligibility.

After you have filed, refer to our step-by-step UI claims process. You’ll learn what to expect and the actions you need to take through the course of your claim for receiving benefit payments as long as you’re eligible.

Supervisors ban evictions, rent increases during COVID-19 shelter in place with 6-month grace period

By Leave a Comment

No late fees for 120 days

By Daniel Borsuk

Residential and commercial renters will get some rental and eviction relief during the COVID-19 pandemic after the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors voted 5-0 to approve an ordinance containing a 180-day grace period, two months more than what supervisors initially had in mind, during a special meeting on Tuesday. (See entire ordinance, here).

By liberally extending the grace period an extra two months, supervisors are handing over to thousands of renters in the county more financial and housing relief during this stressful period when COVID-19 has decimated their financial livelihood. In March, the county’s unemployment rate was 4 percent and April’s unemployment rate will very likely rise sharply when it is release later on.

Instead of inserting a 120-day grace period that other counties like Santa Clara County have inserted in its COVID-19 rent control and eviction moratoria ordinance, Contra Costa County supervisors at the request of District 1 Supervisor John Gioia of Richmond convinced other supervisors that a longer grace period is needed given the uncertainty of the duration of the medical and economic repercussions from the current local and state-mandated stay-at-home orders.

Gioia said he favored the more expansive 180-day grace period because the ordinance, as it was proposed to supervisors, does not protect all tenants whether they are delinquent or current in their rent.

“You have to be up to date on rent in order to be protected by the ordinance presented by counsel,” said Gioia. “It’s very unfortunate that the governor’s order requires this. Tenants must be current on rent to qualify for the grace period.”

Supervisors listened to 45 emailed comments from county residents, most of whom were in support of at least a 120-day grace period, little knowing that Gioia would propose a more expansive 180-day grace period.

“We’re dealing with uncertain times,” said District 3 Supervisor Diane Burgis of Brentwood. “We’re dealing with people who have not paid rent. People who have lost jobs because businesses have shut down.”

District 4 Supervisor Karen Mitchoff of Pleasant Hill preferred to retain the ordinance’s 120-day grace period clause saying it was sufficient for renters, but eventually agreed to the 180-day grace period for rent and eviction moratoria purposes until May 25 when supervisors plan to revisit the issue.

Other features of the ordinance taken mainly from the Santa Clara County ordinance include countywide, no-fault evictions, definition of owner, attorney fees, and no late fees.

Public Health Ad Hoc Committee Created

While COVID-19 health measures will remain in place for the foreseeable future, Board Chair Andersen proposed the creation of an ad hoc Public Health Committee that will weekly with county health department officials.

The committee that will consist of Burgis and Board Chair and District 2 Supervisor Candace Andersen of Danville. The committee’s key role is to be advisory to supervisors and Contra Costa County Health Officer Dr. Christopher Farnitano who will retain ultimate authority on health issues.

“This is not meant to replace the health officer’s directive,” said Supervisor Mitchoff. “There’s been some concern about communication. People are getting frustrated.”

Contra Costa Coronavirus Update: 19 deaths in county, 685 cases

By Leave a Comment

Screenshot of CC Health Services Coronavirus Dashboard.

By Allen Payton

As of Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 11:30 a.m. Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS) is reporting a total of 685 cases of COVID-19/coronavirus, and a total of 19 deaths in the county, three more than yesterday. There are 37 people diagnosed with the virus currently hospitalized.

A total of 8,944 people have been tested for the virus in the county.

The county’s coronavirus dashboard also offers hospital information. It shows the daily Intensive Care Unit Occupancy Rate and Ventilator Utilization for all hospitals in the county.

The largest category of those who have been diagnosed with the virus continue to be people ages 41-60 with 251 cases.

To see the all the statistics provided by CCHS, click here.

Drive-in churches now legal in California thanks to lawsuit victory

By Leave a Comment

“But, it’s problematic because going to church still isn’t considered essential” – Attorney Harmeet Dhillon

By Allen Payton

A victory, Friday in a lawsuit on freedom of worship is forcing California to allow drive-in church services.

The lawsuit against the State of California naming Governor Gavin Newsom over his executive order, was filed by San Francisco attorney Harmeet Dhillon, founder of the non-profit Center for American Liberty and co-counsel Mark Meuser, on behalf of three southern California churches and one parishioner. (See related article)

According to twitter posts by Dhillon, a government brief filed late (Friday) morning claimed that “drive in” is a “technology” like streaming video, and now OK. In response to this executive order “clarification” by opposition brief, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties update(d) their health decrees to allow drive-in worship.

“This development is a partial victory in our lawsuit, but it still does not allow in-building services – meaning people seeking spiritual guidance and fellowship safely, are given no right to do so but the same people can visit wine, pot, food, laundry shops with a mask legally,” she tweeted.

“We continue to wait for ruling on TRO (temporary restraining order),” Dhillon continued. “People of faith may be treated no less favorably than any other people in California. Reporters, termite guys, tree trimmers, baristas, stir-fry chefs, grocery workers, and customers of all have rights – so do religious leaders & followers!”

She was asked why this applies to the entire state, when she was only representing the three churches and one parishioner in Southern California.

“But I sued the State of California over the statewide order, and the counties,” she explained.

The place where the so-called policy changes were announced are hidden in the ruling, with the state agreeing that “of course drive-in churches are a technology like streaming video,” Dhillon shared. “You and I both know that’s absurd. But, it’s problematic, because going to church still isn’t considered essential.”

There’s no requirement for the state to publicize the court’s decision.

“It’s sneaky,” she said.

Asked about her clients Dhillon said, “I’m only representing those who are socially responsible, like anyone else.”

According to their website, “The Center for American Liberty defends the Free Speech rights and Civil Liberties of Americans.”

“The non-profit hired my firm to represent the plaintiffs,” she explained.

The decision was handed down by the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California in Los Angeles, which also includes Riverside and San Bernardino Counties.

“I’m glad we were able to do this. This is a small thing,” Dhillon added. “You’re probably not going to see a lot of drive-in churches in the next week or two. But, it’s better than nothing, dressing up, driving in and seeing your friends.”

Gov. Newsom issues executive order on actions in response to COVID-19 including CSU admissions criteria, deadline for real estate license extensions

By 1 Comment

The order also addresses background checks for essential workers

SACRAMENTO (Apr 16, 2020) – On Thursday, Governor Gavin Newsom signed an executive order addressing a variety of issues in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, including adjusting admissions requirements for the California State University system and providing flexibility for 60 days on background checks for critical infrastructure sectors. (See the entire order, below).

Specifically, the CSU system will be able to waive hearing requirements to be able to make adjustments to admissions criteria for students applying this coming fall to enter as freshmen in the fall of 2021.

Additionally, the order will allow the California Department of Justice to develop procedures to perform name-based background checks to protect health and safety and avoid delays in processing employment for critical sectors, such as health care services and care and support for vulnerable populations.

The executive order also will allow federal stimulus checks to flow directly to custodial parents owed back child support payments and will additionally allow for commercially licensed food trucks to be able to temporarily operate in roadside rest areas for a period of 60 days, to ensure essential infrastructure workers have access to food. Caltrans will be charged with developing and implementing a process to administer the temporary permits.

The text of the Governor’s executive order can be found here and a copy can be found here.

Learn more about the state’s ongoing COVID-19 response efforts here. Visit covid19.ca.gov for critical steps Californians can take to stay healthy, and resources available to those impacted by the outbreak.

EXECUTIVE ORDER N-52-20

WHEREAS on March 4, 2020, I proclaimed a State of Emergency to exist in California as a result of the threat of COVID-19; and

WHEREAS despite sustained efforts, COVID-19 continues to spread and is impacting nearly all sectors of California; and

WHEREAS the COVID-19 pandemic and the necessary physical distancing measures implemented have affected governmental agencies, workers, private businesses, and California residents alike, with associated impacts on adherence to certain statutory and regulatory deadlines; and

WHEREAS a shortage of fingerprinting services has arisen in California despite those services being included among the essential critical infrastructure sectors identified pursuant to Executive Order N-33-20, and this shortage is impacting other essential critical infrastructure sectors, including the healthcare sector and other programs that provide care and support to vulnerable Californians; and

WHEREAS to prevent potential impairment of delivery of critical healthcare services and of care and support for vulnerable populations, the California Department of Justice, working in concert with the California Health and Human Services Agency and other agencies and departments, is developing procedures to perform name-based criminal background checks, consistent with Penal Code sections 11105.7 and 11105.75, and subject to certain conditions, including a requirement that each applicant’s identity and criminal history be verified by fingerprints as soon as practicable after an initial check based on other identifying information has been performed; and

WHEREAS individuals who are tested for COVID-19 should have access to test results, and important information on test interpretation, isolation, and care guidance, in an expeditious and deliberate manner; and

WHEREAS illness due to COVID-19 and physical distancing requirements imposed to limit spread of the virus impede the ability of the California Coastal Commission, the State Water Resources Control Board, members of the public, and others to meet certain time limits set forth in the Permit Streamlining Act and the Public Resources Code; and

WHEREAS the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent school closures has disrupted the lives and educational progress of K-12 students, impacting their ability to meet existing admissions prerequisites for the California State University system; and

WHEREAS it is important that the trucking industry have access to food at highway rest areas while maintaining the critical supply chain throughout this state; and

WHEREAS federal financial relief provided under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) should be made swiftly available to individuals who would otherwise be entitled to it—including custodial parents and other caregivers entitled to past due support—notwithstanding state law providing that certain federal tax refund offsets should first be applied to support owed to the State; and

WHEREAS under the provisions of Government Code section 8571, I find that strict compliance with various statutes and regulations specified in this order would prevent, hinder, or delay appropriate actions to prevent and mitigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor of the State of California, in accordance with the authority vested in me by the State Constitution and statutes of the State of California, and in particular, Government Code sections 8567, 8571, and 8627, do hereby issue the following Order to become effective immediately:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1) The timeframes set forth in Business and Professions Code, Division 4, Part 1, Chapter 3, Article 2 (Section 10150, et seq.) are hereby extended for a period of 60 days. The deadlines specified in Business and Professions Code, Division 4, Part 1, Chapter 3, Article 4 (Section 10200, et seq.), related to payment of real estate license application, and renewal fees, are hereby extended for a period of 60 days.   2) The timeframes set forth in the Business and Professions Code Division 4, Part 1, Chapter 3, Article 2.5 (Section 10170 et seq.), relating to continuing education requirements for real estate licensees, are hereby extended for a period of 60 days.

3) The deadlines specified in existing Orders issued by the Real Estate Commissioner pursuant to Business and Professions Code, Division 4, Part 1 are hereby extended for a period of 60 days.

4) The June 1, 2020 deadline specified in Education Code section 8434(g), related to the election of a representative for family childcare providers, is extended to August 1, 2020.

5) The requirements specified in Harbors and Navigation Code section 1176 and in California Code of Regulations, title 7, sections 217.5 and 217.10 that a pilot be found fit-for-duty as a condition of having his or her license renewed and that a pilot trainee be found fit-for-duty to be allowed to continue in the training program are temporarily waived. The temporary waiver of a fit-for-duty determination applies to pilots whose license expires between April 1, 2020, and July 31, 2020, and to trainees whose anniversary of admission to the training program falls between these same dates. These fit-for-duty requirements must be satisfied by December 31, 2020, unless this Order is further extended.

6) The training requirements specified in California Code of Regulations, title 7, section 215 relating to continuing education for pilots are temporarily waived for those pilots required to complete training in 2020. These pilots must satisfy these waived training requirements by June 30, 2021, unless this Order is further extended.

7) The three-year maximum length of the training program for pilot trainees specified in Harbors and Navigation Code section 1171.5 (c) and California Code of Regulations, title 7, section 214 (c) is extended by one year for trainees who have been unable to train on vessels because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

8) The provisions of California Vehicle Code section 2501 requiring all licenses issued to privately owned or operated ambulances used to respond to emergency calls, privately owned armored cars, and fleet owner inspection and maintenance stations that expire one year after the licenses are issued are hereby extended for a period of 60 days from the license expiration date. This extension is applicable to licenses expired on or after March 4, 2020, or will expire within 60 days from the date of this Order.

9) For holders of current commercial driver’s licenses or certificates, whose required medical certificate has or will expire on or after March 1, 2020, the timeframes set forth in Vehicle Code section 12804.9(c), and accompanying regulations, pertaining to possessing a valid medical certificate in order to maintain a valid commercial driver license or certificate, are waived until June 30, 2020.

10) The time limits set forth in the Permit Streamlining Act in Government Code sections 65943, 65950, 65952, and 65956, and in Public Resources Code sections 30512, 30513, 30603, 30606, 30621, 30622, 30625, 30714, and 30812 are suspended, with respect to actions by or matters before the California Coastal Commission or the State Water Resources Control Board, for a period of 60 days. This paragraph pauses the time limits in the referenced sections but does not restart them, and should be construed to toll those timeframes for 60 days, such that no time should be counted for 60 days, but that any days that elapsed prior to this suspension are still counted.

11) To the extent any provision of state law might restrict the exercise of the California Department of Justice’s authority to conduct criminal background checks pursuant to Penal Code section 11105 based on identifying information other than fingerprints for individuals performing tasks that require licensure pursuant to pursuant to Division 2 of the Business and Professions Code or providing services or care pursuant to the California Community Care Facilities Act (Chapter 3 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code), the California Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly Act (Chapter 3.2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code), the California Child Day Care Facilities Act (Chapter 3.4 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code) or In-Home Supportive Services (Article 7 of Chapter 3 of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code and Welfare and Institutions Code sections 14132.95, 14132.952, and 14132.956), those provisions are suspended for a period of 60 days.

12) To the extent any provision of state law might restrict the exercise of the California Department of Justice’s authority to waive or eliminate the applicable fee for a criminal background check conducted pursuant to Paragraph 11, those provisions are suspended for a period of 60 days.     13) Health and Safety Code section 123148(b)(1) is suspended to the extent it requires a health care professional to review COVID-19 test results before those test results may be disclosed to a patient via the Internet or other electronic means, on the condition that any such disclosure must be conducted in accordance with an order of the State Public Health Officer or a local public health officer, and with guidance issued by the California Department of Public Health pursuant this paragraph. The California Department of Public Health shall issue guidance concerning large-scale COVID-19 testing, as well as appropriate test interpretation, isolation, and care measures to be undertaken in conjunction with such testing.

14) All requirements in Education Code section 89030.5, which permits a change in the criteria for admission to a California State University campus to become effective only after public hearings have been held and only after a period of at least six months or one year (as applicable) has elapsed after that change is approved by the chancellor, are waived through June 30, 2021.

15) The restrictions for commercial activities in safety roadside rest areas specified in Streets and Highways Code sections 225 and 225.5 and Vehicle Code sections 22518, 22520.5 and 22520.6, and accompanying regulations, are suspended for a period of 60 days, to the extent necessary to allow commercially licensed food trucks to operate and sell food in designated safety roadside rest areas in compliance with a temporary permit issued by Caltrans. Caltrans is authorized to develop and implement a process to issue and administer temporary permits allowing commercially licensed food truck vendors that otherwise are in compliance with state and local licensing and permitting requirements to operate and sell food in designated safety roadside rest areas. The development and implementation of this process shall not be subject to the Administrative Procedure Act, Government Code section 11340 et seq.

16) Code of Civil Procedure section 695.221(e), concerning credits to the State from certain collections received from federal tax refund offsets when the recipient of such a refund owes past due support, is suspended.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that as soon as hereafter possible, this Order be filed in the Office of the Secretary of State and that widespread publicity and notice be given of this Order.

This Order is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity, against the State of California, its agencies, departments, entities, officers, employees, or any other person.

UPDATE: Contra Costa Sheriff issues misdemeanor citation to North Richmond church for holding Easter service

By Leave a Comment

All Nations Church of God in Christ from Google Maps and Pastor Wyndford Williams, Sr. from the church’s Facebook page.

UPDATE: Filed the case with DA’s office for prosecution; parishioners weren’t wearing masks nor practicing social distancing according to the Deputy Sheriff. Pastor denies those claims.

By Allen Payton

In a press release from the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s spokesman Jimmy Lee wrote, “at about 12:32 PM on Sunday, April 12, 2020, the Office of the Sheriff received an anonymous complaint of an unlawful assembly at the All Nations Church of God in Christ at 1225 York Street in North Richmond.

A deputy responded to the location and saw approximately 40 people inside the church. None of them were wearing a face mask and they did not practice social distancing.

The deputy first spoke to the deacon and asked to speak to the pastor who was in front of the parishioners. The pastor was uncooperative and refused to talk to the deputy.

The deputy left the location and wrote a report.

On April 13, 2020, a Deputy responded to the church and issued a misdemeanor citation for violation of the Health Officer order (California Health and Safety Code § 120295).

The Sheriff’s Office later filed a case with the Contra Costa DA’s Office for prosecution.

‘Our focus has been on education of the Health Officer Order and in the vast majority of cases we ask for voluntary compliance and that solves the problem,’ said Contra Costa Sheriff David Livingston. ‘This was different. The pastor refused to cooperate and put the lives of dozens of parishioners at risk.’”

Asked if the deputy attempted to interrupt the church service to speak to the pastor, Lee responded, “no” and reiterated that the deputy first spoke to the deacon. Asked if the deputy waited until after the church service was over to speak to the pastor, Lee responded, “I don’t have that detail but the Deputy made several attempts to talk to the pastor, who refused to talk to him.”

Attempts to reach the church’s pastor, Wyndford Williams, Sr., for comment by phone and email were unsuccessful prior to publication time. A message on the church’s Facebook page Thursday afternoon stated media inquiries were to be sent to the pastor’s email address and that “a reply will be sent within 24 hours.”

5:11 PM UPDATE: The following “official statement” was received from the pastor refuting the Sheriff Deputy’s claims in his report – “Easter Sunday is one of the most important celebrations in the Christian faith. A small service was held with approximately forty people in attendance. Masks were worn. Hand sanitizers were provided. Families that lived together sat together. Otherwise, social distancing was observed.”

On Monday, U.S. Attorney General Barr issued a statement on “Religious Practice and Social Distancing”.

In it, he wrote, “In exigent circumstances, when the community as a whole faces an impending harm of this magnitude, and where the measures are tailored to meeting the imminent danger, the constitution does allow some temporary restriction on our liberties that would not be tolerated in normal circumstances.

But even in times of emergency, when reasonable and temporary restrictions are placed on rights, the First Amendment and federal statutory law prohibit discrimination against religious institutions and religious believers.  Thus, government may not impose special restrictions on religious activity that do not also apply to similar nonreligious activity. For example, if a government allows movie theaters, restaurants, concert halls, and other comparable places of assembly to remain open and unrestricted, it may not order houses of worship to close, limit their congregation size, or otherwise impede religious gatherings.  Religious institutions must not be singled out for special burdens.”

The Department of Justice filed a Statement of Interest in support of a church in Mississippi that sought to hold “parking lot worship services, in which congregants listened to their pastor preach over their car radios, while sitting in their cars in the church parking lot with their windows rolled up.” That was because the “city (of Greenville) appears to have…singled churches out as the only essential service (as designated by the state of Mississippi) that may not operate despite following all CDC and state recommendations regarding social distancing… while permitting citizens to attend nearby drive-in restaurants, even with their windows open.”

In the case of the All Nations Church of God, neither the pastor nor parishioners were following the guidelines and practices of social distancing as outlined in the county health officer’s order of “no gatherings”. (See related article)

Asked if the Sheriff’s Office wouldn’t have cited the church if the parishioners had been wearing masks and practiced social distancing, or if it was because more than 10 people were gathered, Lee responded, “Everything we want to say is in the press release.”

See the complete statement by Attorney General Barr, here:

Attorney General William P. Barr Issues Statement on Religious Practice and Social Distancing; Department of Justice Files Statement of Interest in Mississippi Church Case

Attorney General William P. Barr issued the following statement:

“In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, the President has issued guidelines calling on all Americans to do their part to slow the spread of a dangerous and highly contagious virus.  Those measures are important because the virus is transmitted so easily from person to person, and because it all too often has life-threatening consequences for its victims, it has the potential to overwhelm health care systems when it surges.

To contain the virus and protect the most vulnerable among us, Americans have been asked, for a limited period of time, to practice rigorous social distancing.  The President has also asked Americans to listen to and follow directions issued by state and local authorities regarding social distancing.  Social distancing, while difficult and unfamiliar for a nation that has long prided itself on the strength of its voluntary associations, has the potential to save hundreds of thousands of American lives from an imminent threat.  Scrupulously observing these guidelines is the best path to swiftly ending COVID-19’s profound disruptions to our national life and resuming the normal economic life of our country.  Citizens who seek to do otherwise are not merely assuming risk with respect to themselves, but are exposing others to danger.  In exigent circumstances, when the community as a whole faces an impending harm of this magnitude, and where the measures are tailored to meeting the imminent danger, the constitution does allow some temporary restriction on our liberties that would not be tolerated in normal circumstances.

But even in times of emergency, when reasonable and temporary restrictions are placed on rights, the First Amendment and federal statutory law prohibit discrimination against religious institutions and religious believers.  Thus, government may not impose special restrictions on religious activity that do not also apply to similar nonreligious activity. For example, if a government allows movie theaters, restaurants, concert halls, and other comparable places of assembly to remain open and unrestricted, it may not order houses of worship to close, limit their congregation size, or otherwise impede religious gatherings.  Religious institutions must not be singled out for special burdens.

Today, the Department filed a Statement of Interest in support of a church in Mississippi that allegedly sought to hold parking lot worship services, in which congregants listened to their pastor preach over their car radios, while sitting in their cars in the church parking lot with their windows rolled up.  The City of Greenville fined congregants $500 per person for attending these parking lot services – while permitting citizens to attend nearby drive-in restaurants, even with their windows open.[1]  The City appears to have thereby singled churches out as the only essential service (as designated by the state of Mississippi) that may not operate despite following all CDC and state recommendations regarding social distancing.

As we explain in the Statement of Interest, where a state has not acted evenhandedly, it must have a compelling reason to impose restrictions on places of worship and must ensure that those restrictions are narrowly tailored to advance its compelling interest.  While we believe that during this period there is a sufficient basis for the social distancing rules that have been put in place, the scope and justification of restrictions beyond that will have to be assessed based on the circumstances as they evolve.

Religion and religious worship continue to be central to the lives of millions of Americans.  This is true more so than ever during this difficult time.  The pandemic has changed the ways Americans live their lives.  Religious communities have rallied to the critical need to protect the community from the spread of this disease by making services available online and in ways that otherwise comply with social distancing guidelines.

The United States Department of Justice will continue to ensure that religious freedom remains protected if any state or local government, in their response to COVID-19, singles out, targets, or discriminates against any house of worship for special restrictions.”