Clippers, Crew hope for full capacity
Teams can make plans for 30%, governor says
Coming off its second MLS Cup title and a new stadium opening in July, the Crew would stand a good chance at breaking a single-season attendance record in 2021 – if it were a normal year.
It’s not a normal year, but there’s now hope a return to full capacity has begun ahead of the first game at the new stadium.
Gov. Mike Dewine said Monday that pro sports teams with outdoor stadiums – the Crew and Clippers in Columbus – can submit plans to have up to 30% capacity at home games when the MLS, MLB and Minor League Baseball seasons begin in April.
So what does this mean for the opening of the new Crew Stadium in July? The short answer: Full capacity is highly unlikely, but not impossible.
“There seems to be a positive light toward the end of this tunnel, but it doesn’t mean our responsibility lessens,” said Steve Lyons, the Crew’s chief business officer. “We’ll be optimistic that we’ll be able to have larger capacities (when the stadium opens), but there’s no indication from public health officials that that’s the case.”
The Crew was permitted to have only 1,500 fans at games last season. If its plans are approved, the Crew could have 5,990 fans at old Crew Stadium and 6,000 at the new stadium.
To get to full capacity, Dewine would have to rescind capacity limits, or the Crew could seek a variance that
requires approval from Ohio Department of Health and Columbus Public Health (which disapproved of the Crew’s decision to have fans during a stay-at-home advisory last fall).
Columbus Public Health Commissioner Dr. Mysheika Roberts said it’s not impossible for full capacity by midsummer, but “probably very unrealistic.”
“I don’t see us to rolling back to February 2020 come July 1,” she said before Dewine’s announcement, which is expected formally Thursday. “I just don’t see that happening because virus activity that we currently see is still higher than we need to see.”
Cases are declining in Ohio, with a 21day average of 2,681 new cases and a seven-day positivity rate of 4.9%, which is close to the positivity rate when Dewine signed an order in August.
Roberts said it is unknown how different variants of the virus that causes COVID-19 will impact the community. Dewine warned that the B.1.1.7 variant, commonly referred to as the “U.K variant,” is expected to be the dominant strain in Ohio by late March and could disrupt expanding stadium capacity.
Ken Schnacke, president and general manager of the Clippers, went through an entire year without baseball at Huntington Park in 2020. He’ll take any attendance when the park opens April 13, but is hopeful for more fans in the summer.
“Maybe by the time the Crew gets into the new stadium, maybe we’ll be north of 60%, maybe we’ll be at 75%,” Schnacke said. “We all want to get there as quickly as we can, but we know we have to do it as safely as we can too.”
The Cleveland Indians, Cincinnati Reds and FC Cincinnati all said they’re encouraged to start the year allowing 30% of fans through the gates.
To reach full capacity, the nation’s leading infectious disease expert, Dr. Anthony Fauci, told ESPN there needs to be herd immunity, which is estimated to be 70% to 85% of the population with immunity from a vaccine or having antibodies from contracting COVID-19.
With the caveat of ramping up supply and having seamless distribution, a Washington Post projection says 80% immunity can be reached on vaccine alone by July 19 with 2.85 million shots daily. A New York Times model predicts 1.7 million shots daily, plus the current rate of infection, would get the U.S. to 70% herd immunity by July.
As of Monday’s update to the state’s dashboard, Franklin County had 11.53% of the population having received at least one dose compared to 12.41% for the state, which is close to the national average.
Bill Miller, epidemiologist and dean for research for Ohio State’s school of public health, said it’s not completely in society’s control that stadiums can be at full capacity by July, but people can follow guidelines and get vaccinated when it’s their turn.
“Is it outrageous to even be thinking about going to full capacity in the summer? No, I don’t think it’s outrageous,” Miller said. “Is it difficult? Absolutely.”
Lyons echoed Roberts in saying masking won’t go away anytime soon.
Some type of proper celebration for a new stadium seems more possible, yet equally unknown.
“We’re opening the doors of our new, innovative, iconic Downtown stadium,” Lyons said. “It’s something this community has envisioned, the Crew has envisioned, our ownership has envisioned since they purchased the team. While we won’t necessarily say it’s exactly the way we envisioned it, just opening up the new stadium with a Crew SC win I think will be something that we can all celebrate together.” jmyers@dispatch.com @_jcmyers
WASHINGTON – Arthur Lange was 100 feet from his driveway when the California Highway Patrol officer behind him flipped on his flashing lights. Rather than stop, Lange turned toward his Sonoma County home, pulled into his garage and closed the door.
What happened over the next few seconds prompted years of litigation and a case to be argued Wednesday at the Supreme Court with sweeping implications for police power.
As Lange’s garage door descended on that night in October 2016, officer Aaron Weikert got out of his car and stuck his foot under it, triggering a sensor that sent it back up.
“Did you not see me behind you?” the officer asked Lange, who said he had not. As Lange spoke, Weikert smelled alcohol on his breath. A test revealed Lange’s blood-alcohol content was three times the legal limit, and he was charged with DUI.
The question at the heart of the exchange: whether Weikert was on constitutionally shaky ground when he entered Lange’s garage without a warrant.
Police are generally required to have a warrant to enter someone’s home under the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on “unreasonable searches.” Courts have allowed exceptions when an officer is in “hot pursuit” of a suspect believed to have committed a felony. In Lange’s case, police could point only to his failure to stop, a misdemeanor.
Though the difference may seem academic, civil liberty groups say the case
could vastly expand police powers because of the breadth of misdemeanor charges. Misdemeanor crimes can be serious, but they also include littering, jaywalking and defacing dollar bills.
Five state supreme courts have held a misdemeanor pursuit justifies a warrantless home entry, according to Lange’s lawyers, and three state courts and two federal appeals courts said the issue must be reviewed on a case-bycase basis.
“The courts are all over the place on this,” said Larry James, general counsel for the National Fraternal Order of Police, who filed a brief in the case supporting Weikert. “The question is, should the U.S. Supreme Court lay down the law of the land.”
Fourth Amendment questions have divided the Supreme Court in unusual ways. Liberal Justice Stephen Breyer has joined conservatives. Last fall, Justice Neil Gorsuch called a ruling in Vermont allowing game wardens to peer inside a garage without a warrant an “error.” Gorsuch, appointed by President
Donald Trump, was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, both appointed by President Barack Obama.
Lange’s case comes to the court at a moment of tension between police and communities of color after the death last year of George Floyd, a 46-year-old Black man who was pinned under an officer’s knee. The officer, Derek Chauvin, is charged with second-degree murder and manslaughter. The incident, and others like it, prompted nationwide protests and some riots over the summer, forcing a national discussion about racism and police use of force.
One of those incidents was the shooting death of Breonna Taylor, 26, after police entered her apartment in Louisville, Kentucky, during a drug investigation last March. Police had obtained a “no-knock” warrant, allowing them to conduct a search without notification. The city subsequently banned no-knock warrants.
Some observers said expanding the circumstances under which a police officer may enter a home without a warrant could exacerbate the fraught relationship.
“It wouldn’t open the door, it would open the floodgates to police entry into a home,” said Alexandra Natapoff, a Harvard Law professor. “It would seem to be exactly the backward response to everything we have learned from George Floyd and Black Lives Matter.”
On the other hand, some advocates say allowing a suspect to dart into a home to avoid possible arrest creates another set of problems for police. Officers can’t always immediately determine whether a suspected drunken driver may be committing a felony or a misdemeanor, for instance, a distinction that can turn on factors such as blood-alcohol level, prior convictions or whether a child is in the car.
“Time degrades evidence,” said Alex Otte, president of Mothers Against Drunk Driving. “Even if it is a true misdemeanor, they should still be forced to face the consequences of their potential deadly choice.”
The case came to the U.S. Supreme Court after the California Supreme Court declined to hear it, allowing a lower court’s ruling that sided with police to stand.
Though the state appeals court ruling created the broad warrant exception for misdemeanor pursuit, California isn’t defending that power for police in the high court. Attorneys for California argued that Weikert’s actions represented a good faith effort to adhere to law.
Instead, the Supreme Court appointed attorney Amanda Rice to defend the misdemeanor exception.
“There is nothing reasonable about allowing an offender to defeat a lawful public arrest by fleeing into a home,” Rice told the court. “That is true regardless of whether the underlying crime happens to be classified as a felony or a misdemeanor.”