My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2021
>
031621
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/12/2021 1:24:27 PM
Creation date
3/12/2021 1:24:19 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
3/16/2021
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
In response to Councilmember Balch's inquiry, City Attorney Sodergren clarified a violation of Alameda <br /> County's Health Order is considered a misdemeanor. He advised that several other counties have <br /> allowed Administrative Citations to be issued instead of criminal penalties enforced by city officers. He <br /> advised Alameda County has not done this so each city must determine if they want their officers to <br /> have the ability to issue citations for violating the County order. <br /> In response to Councilmember Balch's inquiries, City Manager Fialho confirmed state officials review • <br /> county level and not something as specific as the Tri-Valley. He confirmed the Tri-Valley cities could not <br /> create their own health rules superseding the County. <br /> In response to Councilmember Balch's inquiries, City Manager Fialho reported less than five <br /> Pleasanton businesses have required more than one visit by either the PPD or code enforcement <br /> officers to gain mask compliance. He advised there was opposition to the closure of certain activities <br /> early on in the pandemic, but eventually, everyone understood the significance as the pandemic grew. <br /> In response to Councilmember Balch's inquiries, City Manager Fialho advised he could not speak for <br /> the PPD's interest in this matter but noted he shared the statistics to show there is no correlation <br /> between each Tri-Valley city's enforcement policies and its case numbers. He credited the City's well- <br /> informed, educated, law-abiding residents for self-policing and a high participation rate for mask- <br /> wearing. He commented the PPD will do as it is directed and while they would rather not be put in a <br /> position where there is a conflict with the public they will enforce the laws. He advised the initial touch <br /> with this mandate would be light and education-oriented. <br /> In response to Councilmember Narum's inquiries, City Manager Fialho clarified the City itself has to <br /> follow the County order just like any other business. He advised there is signage at city-owned building <br /> entrances and screeners at the front doors looking for masks. He added it is an employment mandate <br /> for City employees. He reported the guidance on the national and regional level is for those who have <br /> been vaccinated to still wear a mask because they could still be a carrier. He advised that unless health <br /> orders are amended as vaccinations become more prevalent the City would rely on the more restrictive <br /> order between the County and State. <br /> In response to Mayor Brown's inquiries, City Manager Fialho theorized that calls to PPD regarding <br /> mask non-compliance would be weighed based upon the current call volume and the urgency of those <br /> calls. He reported the City has responded to complaints about businesses and others not complying but <br /> does so without the ability to issue citations. He explained it would be an extra tool for the officers. He <br /> commented that residents and officers alike would simply have to trust the residents are being truthful <br /> in regards to people with them who are in their daily social bubbles because it would be hard to verify in <br /> many cases. He advised the City would take guidance from Dublin and Livermore which have the <br /> mechanism for public enforcement but the reality is the enforcement is targeted towards businesses <br /> creating an unsafe environment because that is where the spread originates. <br /> In response to Mayor Brown's inquiry, City Manager Fialho clarified Alameda County gives cities the <br /> right to create enforcement policies. He noted no police agency in the County wants to issue citations <br /> for non-mask compliance and having it placed on people's criminal records. He advised Alameda <br /> County District Attorney Nancy O'Malley does not plan to adjudicate those cases leaving cities with the <br /> administration. He confirmed Livermore and Dublin are the only two cities in Alameda County with such <br /> a mask-wearing ordinance. <br /> Mayor Brown opened public comment. <br /> Emma Reddy expressed support for a meaningful mask-enforcement mandate on behalf of her many <br /> friends and family members who have contracted COVID-19 due to the preventable selfishness of <br /> others. She recommended many good uses for money generated from the fines. <br /> City Council Minutes Page 12 of 17 February 16, 2021 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.