How to resolve AdBlock issue? The draft ordinance, discussed in concept last week, will be discussed as an untimed item during the board’s meeting this Tuesday. It will apply in the unincorporated county.
It can be seen below.
The ordinance temporarily designates county Code Enforcement officers as compliance officers who “shall offer training, information, and other assistance to local businesses and members of the public as necessary in order to foster compliance with state and local public health orders and the County’s reopening plan during this period of the gradual reopening of the County of Lake.”
The document states, “In those rare situations where members of the public and/or local businesses reject offers of assistance and refuse to take corrective action to attain compliance with state and local public health orders and the County’s reopening plan, Compliance Officers may issue citations assessing administrative fines or penalties as described hereinbelow.”
The draft ordinance gives the Public Health officer the authority to determine whether a violation of the ordinance, state and local public health orders, and/or the county’s reopening plan exists and the authority to take appropriate action to gain compliance. It also gives the Public Health officer the power to issue notices of violation, the power to assess and collect civil fines and penalties, and the power to enter and inspect public and private property.
It would allow the Public Health officer and compliance officers the ability to impose administrative fines up to the maximum fine or penalty amounts for infractions set forth in subdivision of California Government Code section 25132.
That code section sets a first violation fine of $100, $200 for a second violation of the same ordinance within one year of the first violation and up to $500 for each additional violation of the same ordinance within one year of the first violation.
The document also includes an administrative appeal process for anyone served a notice of violation.
Proposal raised at last week’s meeting
The discussion that gave rise to the draft ordinance was not on the board’s original agenda last week and was added as an extra item over the objections of Supervisor Rob Brown, who countered that it did not meet the parameters for adding an item to the agenda.
Board Chair Moke Simon and Supervisor EJ Crandell said the proposal came from a “reopening committee” of local officials. The timing also was said to be connected to the next phase of reopening that began on Friday.
Simon said the cities of Clearlake and Lakeport have similar ordinances in place allowing enforcement. “Enforcement, at some point, needs to be put into place.”
Public Health Officer Dr. Gary Pace said the proposal is not about penalizing people for not opening their business, but enforcing proper and safe behavior that allows the county to move forward in a good way.
He said they’re not trying to fund their department through citation funds.
Supervisor Bruno Sabatier opposed taking punitive measures against businesses, offering instead that the county needs to talk about masks and lead by example. He said for businesses, some customers are more difficult than others.
“In my opinion, we should be finding ways to help our businesses, not ways to push them in a corner to make sure that they’re following the rules,” he said, noting that he’s observed that the majority are following the rules and regulations for reopening.
“There’s different ways to make this happen. I’m not in favor of penalizing. I’m in favor of continuing the conversations,” he said.
Crandell said that his concerns about rules arose from finding out that some local vacation rentals are continuing to be rented in violation of the county health order.
“As of Friday, that’s a moot point,” Sabatier replied, referring to the next phase of reopening that will include tourism amenities like vacation rentals to reopen.
Simon said the issue wasn’t just with masking but with social distancing and large gatherings. “Education is No. 1,” but Simon said there needed to be a conversation about the next step if there is noncompliance.
“The majority of our businesses are doing the right thing,” said Supervisor Tina Scott.
Scott said she wanted to see businesses requiring employees to wear masks, but she wouldn’t agree to penalizing businesses for the behavior of their customers.
Brown said he didn’t think they needed to have the conversation, as he maintained the county can’t enforce requirements like masking.
“It’s more wasted time and pretending that we’re doing something that’s going to make a difference,” Brown said, adding that they needed to trust people to run their own businesses.
So far, complaints submitted to the county about businesses or other organizations and their lack of adherence to county public health orders have been forwarded to board members, who in turn have reached out to educate businesses.
Sabatier said he wasn’t sure what other board members’ experiences were, but noted of the complaints, “There’s a strangeness to almost a majority of them,” with personal issues attached to the general issues of noncompliance. He said people have complained about coworkers and in one case an individual complained about their church.
“I wouldn’t want to see staff wasting their time on this,” Sabatier said.
He said Lake County has an elderly and medically fragile population whose members had to be careful about where they went and what they did before the pandemic, and will continue to have to do so for quite some time.
Unless the county starts to see a surge in COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations, Sabatier said they shouldn’t be having a discussion about penalizing businesses. “We need to reopen the economy, not open ‘em so we can slap them.”
County Counsel Anita Grant asked if the board wanted monetary sanctions included in the draft. Simon said he wanted staff to return to the board with an enforcement document that includes penalties.
“An ordinance without teeth isn’t an ordinance,” said County Administrative Officer Carol Huchingson.
Crandell said all of the entities on the reopening committee wanted to see a document with teeth.
During public comment, the board heard a mixture of reactions.
Lakeport resident Michael Green suggested they should focus on flagrant and repeat offenders and that it didn’t need to be punitive. “What nobody wants to do is close this county down again.”
Business owner Amy Crook said she worried about a blanket policy for all businesses, explaining that one size doesn’t always fit all, especially in the small business world.
Cathleen McCarthy told the board that she feels like continuing with masks is the best thing to do to protect businesses from closing again. She said she’d like for businesses to stay open and make progress and recover, and suggested the best way to ensure that is for people to wear masks.
There were three board members – Crandell, Scott and Simon – who supported bringing back the matter for further discussion.
However, Grant said the board ultimately will need to have four of its members vote in support of the urgency ordinance to have it go into effect.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
Urgency Ordinance Covid-19 ... by LakeCoNews on Scribd
