In April, Plumas County barber Steve Betts became one of the first Californians to face a criminal penalty for violating coronavirus health orders when he refused to close his two stores.
After local sheriff’s agents warned him twice, they quoted him on his third visit. Now due to return to court in August, he faces six months in jail and a $ 1,000 fine for each day he refused to close, he said.
“It just sucks, but at the same time I’m not sorry I did,” said Betts, whose businesses have since been legally allowed to open.
“For them, they just shut us down for no good reason other than (Governor Gavin) Newsom … it was more or less just games played.”
On Wednesday, when hospitalizations and positive tests for the virus soared in many parts of the state, Newsom announced that it was once again time to close bars, restaurants, and other high-traffic businesses in 19 counties. And this time, he wasn’t playing, although he recognized that the challenge was real.
“Enforcing the law is difficult, and I’m not naive about it … I’m not Pollyannish about it,” Newsom said.
Unlike past orders, when the governor heavily emphasized civic duty as the motivating force for compliance and left enforcement decisions to local governments, he presented rhetoric about possible state crackdowns.
He announced “strike teams” from licensing agencies for barbers and bars, and the California Highway Patrol, one of the only California law enforcement agencies directly controlled by the state.
“I think it is a responsibility … to chase people who are teasing their noses, they are aggressive, they are reticent,” Newsom said.
But what would an additional application mean in California? It is not entirely clear, and has raised questions for local law enforcement, who have been confronted since the start of the pandemic about their role.
While some law enforcement leaders have been adamant in executing health orders, others have flatly refused.
The variety of responses highlights the local nature of surveillance and creates a dilemma for state leaders who agree that a unified message is vital to focus public attention.
“When it comes to something like public health, that’s a new territory for law enforcement,” said Ed Obayashi, a Plumas County deputy and legal consultant for law enforcement across the state.
The new coronavirus, he said, is “like any other situation where we have discretion. We have discretion over minor violations of the law.”
Some local law enforcement officials, including in places affected by the virus, said they are doing well without state aid and question whether intervention is needed.
“It is always better for local entities to reach out to local businesses or individuals here,” said Imperial County Sheriff Raymond Loera.
Imperial County, in the southeast corner of the state, has seen an extreme outbreak in recent days and has had to transfer more than 500 patients to hospitals in other counties due to an overload.
But Loera said that while he is not sure why the virus has affected his region so much, it is not due to lack of compliance by local companies or the reluctance of local law enforcement agencies to enforce the rules.
Loera said her county borders Mexico and Arizona, which lifted the restrictions much earlier and has since seen a massive increase in cases, and sees large amounts of traffic from both.
It is also one of the poorest counties in the state and is predominantly Latino, a demographic blow badly affected by the pandemic. On Wednesday night, the county increased its closing orders to include parks and religious services in person.
Still, only one bar on the Arizona border refused to close until officers visited, Loera said.
“We responded and they complied,” he said. “None of this has been very conflictive.”
Now, Loera is not sure what the new state efforts will mean. He and other local law enforcement leaders across California said they were not informed of the state effort before the public announcement.
“I anticipate that because we are one of the highest areas [for cases]They will be here or very close, “he said.” And we need to know what they are doing. “
In San Bernardino County, also on the list of counties watched by the state, Jodi Miller, a spokesman for the Sheriff’s Department, said his agency has also not faced compliance problems from local businesses.
“That has never really been a problem for us,” said Miller. “We have been able to educate and obtain voluntary compliance.”
Ingrid Braun, the Mono County Sheriff, whose county is not on the state watch list, said she believes local authorities are best suited to handle law enforcement because they know their communities, which are often very united. Braun said her county has also seen no massive challenge to the orders, and like Imperial, it only had a single bar that it refused to close until deputies cited it.
Braun said he does not write appointments for health code violations, such as not wearing a mask, but instead seeks more serious charges, such as invasion if a customer without a mask refuses to leave a facility.
Braun said he was concerned about the state plan because it could involve sending people out of the area, potentially exposing them to the virus or taking it.
“It’s not like you’re sending them into a shootout where lives are at stake,” said Braun. “These are more theoretical lives … and you are putting their lives in danger by sending them.”
But other agencies have taken a different course, refusing to enforce orders. Sheriffs in counties like Sacramento, Riverside and Los Angeles have said they do not intend to enforce the restrictions, and they declined Newsom’s past orders.
“It is time to reflect on the decisions we have made under the guise of this pandemic: why were we forced to let more than 1,100 inmates out of the Sacramento COVID-free jail into a community where law enforcement still They are locked?” Sacramento Sheriff Scott Jones wrote on Facebook on May 6.
“It is time to recognize that We the People have voluntarily accepted the loss of freedoms, the loss of income, and the loss of social connection for the common good, but we are now ready to responsibly return to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. . “
State Senator Richard Pan (D-Sacramento) this week proposed a bill that would keep the addresses of public health directors private, because some have faced threats based on unpopular health orders.
Pan said sheriffs should be active in backing public health orders because they represent authority in their communities, but he thinks some do not for political reasons.
Across the county, masks and business closings have become political causes, and President Trump notably refuses to wear a mask.
“We have politicized our public health response,” said Pan. “There are sheriffs basically willing not to enforce the law.”
Some accuse that politics is at stake on all sides. The new guide does not include churches, except to discourage singing and singing. Houses of worship became critical points of defiance in California, including protests and lawsuits, after Newsom halted services in person for a time this spring. While such meetings still violate health orders in many places, Newsom has been silent about them, while highlighting the dangers of reuniting with family and friends.
Harmeet Dhillon, a lawyer who sued the administration for past shutdown orders, said in an email Wednesday that “situational ethics of what kinds of protests and business are acceptable” in California has given the orders “little credibility.”
Brian Ferguson, spokesman for the state Office of Emergency Services, which coordinates strike teams, said many of those involved have focused on law enforcement since the start of the pandemic, and the effort is aimed at coordinating the work of multiple agencies does not expand it.
“This really is aimed at people who are openly defiant,” he said. Ferguson said companies were the target of the effort, but he did not rule out complying with the state mandate to wear masks in public spaces, which has not yet been legally enforced on a large scale. He added that outreach to local agencies, “is happening right now.”
But some see the harsh conversation as little more than that: Newsom’s attempt to scare compliance as the state teeters on the brink of an uncontrolled outbreak.
“I really think his agenda is to get public attention because all of these things ultimately depend on voluntary compliance,” said Jack Pitney, a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College.
“There simply is not enough law enforcement [officers] in California to compel people to behave responsibly. “
