CC SR 20210406 H - Assembly Bill (AB) 1251 Letter of Support (SPAs)
RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 04/06/2021
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Calendar
AGENDA TITLE:
Consideration and possible action to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter in support of
AB 1251.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Authorize the Mayor to sign a letter in support of AB 1251.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
ORIGINATED BY: Jesse Villalpando, Senior Administrative Analyst
REVIEWED BY: Karina Bañales, Deputy City Manager
APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
A. Draft letter in support of AB 1251 (page A-1)
B. December 7, 2020 letter from the Peninsula Cities to the Board of
Supervisors (page B-1)
C. Text of AB 1251 (as amended March 18, 2021) (page C-1)
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
On March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom proclaimed a state of emergency in the State of
California in response to the COVID-19 outbreak. Since the state of emergency was
declared, Governor Newsom along with county health departments have imposed
health orders aimed at curbing the spread of the virus. While well intended, the health
orders at times have had no data or scientific evidence to support the mandated orders.
In addition, the pandemic has impacted communities differently throughout Los Angeles
County. Los Angeles County is one of the largest counties in the nation at 4,084 square
miles, and has the largest population in the nation, with nearly 10 million residents, who
account for 27% of California's population. Due to the large size of L.A. County the
1
Department of Public Health divides the county into eight geographic Service Planning
Areas (SPAs) in an effort to develop and provide relevant public health and clinical
services targeted to the specific health needs of the residents in these different areas.
Despite this, the county imposed the same COVID-19 restrictions, regardless of local
transmission rates.
The combination of the County's vast geographic area with the significant population
size makes it difficult to address the specific needs of communities that are impacted
differently by the pandemic with one-size-fits-all policies. Each community and region
within the County have had drastically different case rates and hospitalization numbers.
LA County Public Health has amended the Health Officer Orders numerous times since
March 2020, the onset of the pandemic. The most recent Health Officer Order in effect
enacted the following restrictions:
• Museum, Zoos and Aquariums can open indoors at 25% capacity.
• Gyms, Fitness Centers, Yoga and Dance Studios can open indoors at 10%
capacity with masking requirement for all indoor activities.
• Movie Theatres can open indoors at 25% capacity with reserved seating only
where each group is seated with at least 6 feet of distance in all directions
between any other groups.
• Retail and Personal Care Services can increase capacity to 50% with
masking required at all times and for all services.
• Restaurants can open indoors at 25% max capacity under the following
conditions: 8 feet distancing between tables; one household per table with a
limit of 6 people; the HVAC system is in good working order and has been
evaluated, and to the maximum extent possible ventilation has been
increased.
• Indoor Shopping Malls can increase capacity to 50% with common areas
remaining closed; food courts can open at 25% capacity adhering to the
restaurant guidance for indoor dining.
• Institutes of Higher Education can re-open all permitted activities with
required safety modifications except for residential housing which remains
under current restrictions for the Spring semester.
• Schools are permitted to re-open for in-person instruction for students in
grades 7-12 adhering to all state and county directives.
• Private gatherings can occur indoors with up to 3 separate households, with
masking and distancing required at all times. People who are fully vaccinated
can gather in small numbers indoors with other people who are fully
vaccinated without required masking and distancing.
On February 19, 2021, Assembly Member Al Muratsuchi introduced Assembly Bill No.
1251 (AB 1251). AB 1251 requires that public health orders issued by the County of
Los Angeles’ local health officer during a public health emergency to be based on data
for each public health SPA and not on countywide data. The bill would further require
that any local public health orders related to the COVID-19 pandemic be issued in
2
accordance with the SPA data. AB 1251 aims to address the economic burden of many
businesses across Los Angeles County due to COVID-19 restrictions based on
countywide data and statistics.
For the past year, the City has been advocating for a decentralized approach to the
pandemic response, given the vast size of L.A. County. On December 7, the four cities
of the Palos Verdes Peninsula sent a letter to the Board of Supervisors requesting a
decentralized approach to the pandemic response (Attachment B).
For these reasons, Staff recommends the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign a
letter to Assembly Member Al Muratsuchi, as drafted or with revisions, supporting AB
1251.
ALTERNATIVES:
In addition to the Staff recommendation, the following alternative action s are available
for the City Council’s consideration:
1. Identify revised language to add to the letter.
2. Do not authorize the Mayor to sign the letter.
3. Take other action as deemed appropriate by the City Council.
3
April 6, 2021 Via Email
The Honorable Al Muratsuchi
California State Assembly
State Capitol
P.O. Box 942849, Room 2179
Sacramento, CA 94249-0066
SUBJECT: Notice of Support for AB 1251
Dear Assemblymember Muratsuchi:
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes supports Assembly Bill 1251, which would require Los
Angeles County Health Officials to factor in local transmission data when developing
restrictions and reopening plans.
Los Angeles County, being comparable to the size of Delaware and Rhode Island
combined, is the largest populated County in the United States, and larger in population
than 41 individual states. As you are aware, due to the large size of L.A. County (4,300
square miles), the Department of Public Health divides the county into eight geographic
Service Planning Areas (SPAs) to develop and provide more relevant public health and
clinical services targeted to the specific health needs of the residents in these different
areas. Despite this, the county has imposed the same COVID-19 restrictions across the
county, regardless of local transmission rates.
Assembly Bill 1251 would require public health orders issued by the County of Los
Angeles health officer to be based on data for each service planning area, rather than
on countywide data. The bill would further require that any local public health orders
related to the COVID-19 pandemic be issued in accordance with the service planning
area data. By requiring the County of Los Angeles to prepare emergency local public
health orders based on data for each service planning area, this bill ensures that public
health services and orders are based on the specific needs of residents in the
respective service planning areas and not on data for the entire County of Los Angeles.
A-1
Assemblymember Muratsuchi
April 6, 2021
Page 2
While the City appreciates the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health’s
leadership and efforts to protect and support residents during this unprecedented public
health crisis, a "one size fits all health officer orders" does not support a long-term
approach to the well-being of our collective community. The City supports the intent of
AB 1252, which further amplifies the importance of a decentralized approach to the
pandemic response, given the vast size of L.A. County.
We appreciate your leadership on this important issue and, for these reasons, the City
of Rancho Palos Verdes supports AB 1251.
Sincerely,
Eric Alegria
Mayor
cc: Ben Allen, Senator, 26th State Senate District
Jeff Kiernan, League of California Cities
Meg Desmond, League of California Cities
Marcel Rodarte, California Contract Cities Association
Jacki Bacharach, South Bay Cities Council of Governments
Rancho Palos Verdes City Council
Ara Mihranian, City Manager
Karina Bañales, Deputy City Manager
A-2
December 7, 2020
The Honorable Kathryn Barger and Members of the Board of Supervisors
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors
500 W. Temple Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Dear Honorable Chair Barger and Members of the Board of Supervisors,
We, the four cities on the Palos Verdes Peninsula, firmly joined together by a common cause, are writing to you
today to request you to follow science and, more importantly, data and statistics to make decisions about COVID-
19 across our Los Angeles County (County). We support our colleagues throughout 88 cities of the County who
oppose your decision. In strong terms, we also support our South Bay COG's position, which in a letter on
December 1, 2020, highlighted the importance of a decentralized approach to the pandemic response. Before
many cities and regions consider forming their own health departments, we ask for the restructuring of the County
Health Department's governance to fit the mission described on its web site.
Los Angeles County, the size of Delaware and Rhode Island combined, is the largest populated County in the
United States, and larger in population than 41 individual states. As such, a “one size fits all” approach to
policymaking is simply not workable and has become untenable.
As you know, the County of Los Angeles Public Health's web site states, "Due to the large size of LA County
(4,300 square miles), it has been divided into eight geographic areas (Service Planning Areas ((SPA)). These
distinct regions allow the Department of Public Health to develop and provide more relevant public health and
clinical services targeted to the specific health needs of the residents in these different areas." We agree and urge
the Department of Public Health to begin implementing COVID-19 responses by area.
We respectfully request that each district collects precise data for its respective district to "provide more relevant
public health and clinical services targeted to the specific health needs of the residents in these different areas."
This precision already in place is all we ask to govern and serve our communities better.
The undersigned are elected representatives of jurisdictions located in "District 8 (South Bay)." Our geographic,
demographic, and pandemic realities are substantially different than other districts in this vast and beautiful
County. The County’s decisions ignore these realities. To be specific and to use the County data, here is how our
jurisdictions compare to others.
The City of Torrance prepared the chart below for the majority of jurisdictions in District 8. This chart makes it
abundantly clear our realities compared to those of the County at large.
B-1
To further illustrate our point, we highlight a few specific comparisons in District 8 from the beginning of the
pandemic to November 22. This data presumably became the basis to shut all outdoor dining in the County
without regard to the science and data shown on the chart below. While this data represented your decision point
last week, our current data as of yesterday does not show much change at all. Our constituents want to know why
their excellent work of reasonably controlling the pandemic by following mitigation measures of wearing a mask,
socially distancing, and their businesses investing in protective equipment and diligent sanitation is being
punished.
B-2
Every death is tragic; however, our death rates, compared to other deaths from various causes, are also statistically
negligible. For example, the COVID-19 attributed death rate per capita on the Palos Verdes Peninsula is
extremely low: Rancho Palos Verdes is 0.03%, Palos Verdes Estates is 0.01%, Rolling Hills Estates is 0.04%,
and Rolling Hills is 0.00%.
Our hospitalization rates are also different. We do not suffer from the lack of beds or ICU capacity in our world-
class hospitals like Torrance Memorial, Providence Little Company of Mary, etc. The image below for the South
Bay region (District 8) is currently reporting nearly two new cases per 100 hospital beds, which is among the
lowest of the region. In the summer surge, the South Bay region number was closer to three.
B-3
We expect policy decisions affecting our community to be based on our jurisdictions' statistics rather than the County's collective data. We, as a vast County, must reverse this course. Every signatory to this letter respects you all. We have a tradition of working with you in co ntract cities as well as independent cities. We also
understand your concerns. By our requests, we do not question your heart. We suggest that we need to learn to live with this deadly virus rather than hide from it indefinitely. We seek collaboration as opposed to competition
with your policy.
The County's actions are devastating our communities, especially our communities who need the most employment and economic stability. Our small businesses are our backbone. While disproportionately allowing
large companies to operate, you have made it impossible for small businesses, in this case, mostly restaurants, to
continue their existence. Our chefs, servers, kitchen staff depend on their wages and tips to feed their families. To the extent that funds are available, we urge you to work with the Governor to use some of the unexpected tax proceeds of $26 billion to provide relief to small businesses and restaurants that are struggling to survive.
Our local jurisdictions, especially those that are "low, low" property tax cities, rely on sales tax revenue to provide local services. Some of these services under the contracting model are provided by the Cowity for a fee. While the County takes close to 25% of the property tax revenue ( not counting County related special districts revenues for another 25%), most of our "low, low" property tax cities receive less than 7%. The County's actions are also devastating to our cities. Unfortunately, there is no data to support your last decision countywide, much less in our jwisdictions. We have seen no evidence that outdoor dining is the cause of any COVID case surge in various
parts of the County. The City of Pasadena chose science and data over your decision. We in District 8 ask for the same treatment as Pasadena, which is located in the same County.
While we disagree with the state's "one sizes fits all" approach, we understand that the County is currently operating under the state's Stay-at-Home Order for the Southern California Region due to ICU bed capacity. When the state's Order is lifted, we respectfully ask that you act on our request for a regional approach using regional data. In particular, we expect the re-opening of our outdoor dining facilities as soon as possible. Failing to do so is causing some cities to explore constituting their own health departments.
Respectfully,
David McGowan, Eric Alegria
City of Palos Verdes Estates, Mayor City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Mayor
.·tfk Jeff Pieper Velveth Schmitz
City of Rolling Hills, Mayor City of Rolling Hills Estates, Mayor
B-4
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 18, 2021
california legislature—2021–22 regular session
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 1251
Introduced by Assembly Member Members Muratsuchi and Lackey
February 19, 2021
An act to amend Section 68725 of add Section 53024 to the
Government Code, relating to courts. public health.
legislative counsel’s digest
AB 1251, as amended, Muratsuchi. Commission on Judicial
Performance. Local public health orders.
Existing law, the California Emergency Services Act (CESA), among
other things, authorizes the Governor to proclaim a state of emergency
in an area affected or likely to be affected. The CESA also authorizes
the governing body of any city, county, or city and county, or an official
designated by ordinance adopted by that governing body, to proclaim
a local emergency, as provided. Existing law authorizes local health
officials to take any preventative measures that may be necessary to
protect and preserve the public health from any public health hazard
during any state of emergency or local emergency.
This bill would require a public health order issued by the County of
Los Angeles local health officer during a state or local public health
emergency to be based on data for each service planning area, as
defined, rather than on countywide data. The bill would further require
that any local public health orders related to the COVID-19 pandemic
be issued in accordance with the service planning area data. By
requiring the County of Los Angeles to prepare emergency local public
health orders based on data for each service planning area, this bill
would impose a state-mandated local program.
98 C-1
This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the
necessity of a special statute for the County of Los Angeles.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state.
Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates
determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state,
reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory
provisions noted above.
The California Constitution establishes the Commission on Judicial
Performance and authorizes the commission to disqualify, suspend,
retire, or censure a judge for specified acts of misconduct or for
disability that seriously interferes with the performance of the judge’s
duties or that is, or is likely to become, permanent. The California
Constitution requires the commission to make rules for the investigation
of judges and authorizes the commission to provide for the
confidentiality of complaints to, and investigations by, the commission.
Existing statutory law also governs procedures for the conduct of these
investigations. Existing law requires state and local departments and
their employees to cooperate with the commission in an investigation
conducted by the commission.
This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to this
provision.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no yes.
State-mandated local program: no yes.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
line 1 SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares the following:
line 2 (a) State and county public health departments should develop
line 3 and provide relevant and data-based public health and clinical
line 4 services targeted to the specific health needs of residents in
line 5 different communities and regions.
line 6 (b) The County of Los Angeles, comparable to the geographic
line 7 size of the States of Delaware and Rhode Island combined, has
line 8 the largest population of any county in the United States. The
line 9 County of Los Angeles is larger in population than the nine
line 10 counties of the San Francisco Bay area, with a population of
line 11 approximately 10,000,000 residents.
98
— 2 — AB 1251 C-2
line 1 (c) The County of Los Angeles is divided into geographic areas,
line 2 known as service planning areas, to allow the Los Angeles County
line 3 Department of Public Health to provide relevant public health and
line 4 clinical services targeted to the specific health needs of the
line 5 residents in each of the service planning areas.
line 6 (d) To achieve the goals of developing and providing more
line 7 relevant and data-based public health services during a statewide
line 8 or local public health emergency, the Los Angeles County
line 9 Department of Public Health public health orders, and the
line 10 enforcement of these orders, must be based on data for each public
line 11 health service planning area and not on countywide data.
line 12 SEC. 2. Section 53024 is added to the Government Code, to
line 13 read:
line 14 53024. (a) For the purposes of this section, “service planning
line 15 area” means the subdivided areas of the County of Los Angeles
line 16 intended to facilitate and improve local service and health care
line 17 planning, as defined in Section 3.29.010 of the Los Angeles County
line 18 Code.
line 19 (b) In the event of a “state of emergency” or “local emergency”,
line 20 as defined by Section 8558, a public health order issued by the
line 21 County of Los Angeles local health officer pursuant to Section
line 22 101040 or 120175 of the Health and Safety Code shall be based
line 23 on data for each respective service planning area and not on data
line 24 for the entire County of Los Angeles.
line 25 (c) The requirements described in subdivision (b) shall apply
line 26 to all public health orders issued by the County of Los Angeles
line 27 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
line 28 SEC. 3. The Legislature finds and declares that a special statute
line 29 is necessary and that a general statute cannot be made applicable
line 30 within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California
line 31 Constitution because of the unique circumstances regarding the
line 32 large population of the County of Los Angeles. It is necessary that
line 33 special legislation be enacted to ensure relevant data-based public
line 34 health services and orders are based on the specific needs of
line 35 residents in the respective service planning areas within the County
line 36 of Los Angeles.
line 37 SEC. 4. If the Commission on State Mandates determines that
line 38 this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to
line 39 local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made
98
AB 1251 — 3 — C-3
line 1 pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division
line 2 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.
line 3 SECTION 1. Section 68725 of the Government Code is
line 4 amended to read:
line 5 68725. State and local public bodies and departments, officers
line 6 and employees thereof, and officials and attaches of the courts of
line 7 this State shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance
line 8 and information to the commission and any authorized
line 9 representative thereof, in connection with any investigations or
line 10 proceedings within the jurisdiction of the commission.
O
98
— 4 — AB 1251 C-4