Ducey’s order mandates capacity limits

Many restaurants already operating at under 50%

Gov. Doug Ducey held a news conference on July 9 announcing restaurants must operate with less than 50% capacity in dining rooms.

The new order was issued in response to a continuing spike in coronavirus cases and related deaths. On Friday July 10, Arizona reported 116,892 cases and 2,082 total deaths one day after Ducey’s announcement.

Some were happy to see the governor appearing to crack down on restaurants to help slow the spread of COVID-19, while others asked what actually changed.

In a previous executive order issued on May 4, the governor allowed restaurants to open for dine-in service starting May 11 provided they “establish and implement protocols,” including “limiting the number of diners.”

But up until this point, much of the guidance for restaurants has come in the form of recommendations. With Ducey’s latest order, capacity limits can now be enforced.

However, as many in the restaurant industry have been proactive in taking measures beyond those required by the state to slow the spread of the virus, Ducey’s latest order won’t have a meaningful impact on the industry that has been so hard hit throughout the pandemic, restaurant owners say.

What’s does Ducey’s new order change?

Clever Koi, an Asian-style restaurant in midtown Phoenix, has leaned heavily on takeout orders to keep business going throughout the pandemic.

But the restaurant has reopened in fits and starts.

It reopened for dine-in service with limited capacity on May 11.

A few weeks later, however, owners Joshua James and Nick Campisano closed the dining room once again.

Now, one day after Ducey’s most recent order, Clever Koi opened back up for dine-in service.

The restaurant will be seating about 30 to 40% of its capacity, James says, or about 30 to 35 people between the dining room and patio.

“We still have a pretty high demand for dine-in,” James says, explaining many customers were disappointed to find the restaurant closed again.

It can be hard for restaurants to turn a profit when operating at such low capacity, but because of the continued demand for takeout, 30 to 40% works for Clever Koi, James says.

So for his restaurant, Ducey’s order doesn’t change anything about the way it will operate.

“We already had a plan in place,” James says. “We’ve been open since the beginning with less than 50%.”

‘If we have two tables we are lucky’

Hot Bamboo opened in Chandler in February. About six weeks later, the restaurant had to shut down because of the coronavirus pandemic and state-mandated closures.

Since then, owner Anna Heinbach and her team have been creative coming up with ways to keep the business afloat. The restaurant sells takeout along with frozen bao buns and family meal packs.

Now, the dining room is back open, but it continues to sit empty much of the time, which means the governor’s order won’t impact Hot Bamboo, says Heinbach.

“We don’t even have 50% capacity right now,” she says. “If we have two tables we are lucky.”

The restaurant seats 25 people when full, Heinbach says, but because the number of customers rarely reaches close to half of that, she thinks the governor’s order is too much.

“People have been doing their best,” she says.

Here’s why some owners won’t offer dine-in

Yesenia Ramirez owns one of five El Salvadoreño restaurants run by her family. Four out of the five — including hers, which is #3 — are currently serving takeout only.

Because her restaurant is currently only serving takeout, Ramirez wasn’t paying close attention to the governor’s orders impacting dine-in service. But she was surprised to see capacity limited to 50%; she thought that was already the rule.

“We didn’t even know we went up to full capacity ever,” she says, echoing the confusion about the governor’s most recent order.

In Ramirez’s opinion, restaurant dining rooms should have never reopened.

“With dine-in, you’re in an enclosed setting and you’re not wearing a mask while you are eating so you are still putting people at risk,” she says.

To keep her staff safe, Ramirez says she won’t reopen until the coronavirus case numbers decrease significantly. And keeping the dining rooms closed is something she wishes all restaurants had done.

“We should have just bit the bullet for a month or two because now we dealing with a worse situation than when we went into the first stay-at-home order,” Ramirez says. “So we don’t want to be encouraging people to dine-in.”

Industry leader says order provides clarity

Arizona Restaurant Association CEO Steve Chucri says the governor’s order helps restaurants navigate what they are supposed to be doing by providing clarity and uniformity.

“Some restaurants in reality were operating above 50% and others were not,” Chucri says. “What changed yesterday for us as an industry is now it’s a mandate.”

Chucri noted that in March, the heart of Arizona’s busy season, restaurants were operating between 90 and 100% capacity before the governor shut down dining rooms.

But since reopening, restaurants have not seen those numbers return. And especially within the last few weeks as coronavirus numbers continue to spike, customers are choosing to switch back to takeout or cooking at home.

“We’ve seen a good decline in patrons coming into restaurants, people are coming in with diminished frequency,” Chucri says.

The struggle for officials and the public alike is striking a balance, something Chucri says the governor’s order has done.

“To shut down the restaurant industry again would be foolhardy because you’re playing with people’s livelihoods,” Chucri says.

He estimates many restaurants will be able to stay afloat with 50% capacity. If the governor had decreased capacity to 30 or 40%, fewer businesses would be able to stay open.

This isn’t the action that restaurant owners wanted

Instead of implementing a capacity limit, Hot Bamboo owner Heinbach says she wishes the governor would have encouraged customers to spend money at restaurants, whether that be for dine-in or takeout.

“Maybe if he can promote restaurants rather than killing them, that would be nice,” she says.

And if that’s not possible because of concerns over the virus, he could have helped financially, she says. Although the restaurant sees so few customers, rent and utility bills are still coming in.

While Ramirez keeps her location of El Salvadoreño open for takeout service only, she also wishes the government was focused more on aid and less on reopening.

Her restaurant received assistance from the state and the City of Phoenix, which along with steady takeout sales, has helped her keep the business afloat. But she realizes many other restaurants have not been so lucky.

“The conversation should be along the lines of how can we support the businesses that didn’t get these programs instead of opening up the economy for people to go out and spend money,” she says.

Assistance could come in the form of financial aid or assistance with landlords and leases, she says. But because people need to pay rent, they are encouraged to go out and operate their businesses despite the governor’s repeated stance that everyone is “safer at home.”

“It is so irresponsible for the governor and the government to do that,” she says of Ducey’s inaction. “They are trying to absolve themselves from taking a stand or actually helping anyone.”

At Clever Koi, owners have kept the restaurant under 50% capacity throughout the pandemic, according to James. He just wishes Ducey’s order had come earlier. If the capacity limit had been in place, it could have stopped overcrowded bars catching national attention, James says.

“Once the order came to shut down bars I felt that was a really positive move for the state,” James says. “If we had done that from the beginning we would have a lot less criticism from the rest of the country. But hindsight is 20-20.”