Shifting rules frustrate Bay Area
Officials, businesses criticize conflicting shutdown orders
The Bay Area’s coronavirus response, once a model of regional coordination whose aggressiveness against the virus outpaced California’s, has devolved into a patchwork of competing and at times conflicting rules, leaving business owners and elected officials frustrated and confused nearly four months after the lockdown orders first went into effect.
Outdoor dining, for weeks allowed in all of the Bay Area, is now banned in Alameda County, while indoor dining can continue in San Mateo County.
In Contra Costa County, which has allowed hair salons to be open since mid-june, outdoor diners will have to wear a mask at all times except when they have a fork or spoon in their mouths.
Santa Clara County, which recently had to temporarily stop outdoor dining, is now poised to open gyms and barbershops. And in San Francisco, the zoo is reopening this week while the Oakland Zoo less than 30 miles away stays closed, teetering on bankruptcy.
For Union City Mayor Carol Dutra-vernaci, the inconsistency in rules county to county is a reflection of the unequal response nationwide, where some states have refused to issue mask ordinances that have been commonplace in California for weeks. That poses a challenge for city officials in the Bay Area, where people regularly cross county lines to work, shop, and visit friends and relatives.
“It is frustrating and a concern,” Dutra-vernaci said. “With areas that have opened up more than Alameda County, as people come back into the county and into their own city, you don’t know if they’ve been exposed because other locations have a higher level of legal contact.”
The latest sign of trouble emerged Friday night when Alameda County, which had allowed outdoor dining since June 19, announced that state orders allowed only takeout and delivery services because the county had not received a variance from the state, which would give it more leeway in reopening. Dutra-vernaci said the announcement came via a late-night email from the county.
“I can’t help feeling sometimes that our residents wonder what in the world we’re doing, and this is a good example when we don’t always have the information either,” she said.
For some businesses, the discrepancies among counties could have serious financial implications. While the San Francisco Zoo prepares to open its doors to the public Wednesday, the Oakland Zoo is still closed after announcing early this month that it might have to close forever if it can’t reopen soon.
“The county had sent a letter already asking to classify us as an outdoor museum, and we’re hopeful and optimistic they will also apply for a variance soon as well,” Erin Harrison, vice president of marketing and communication
at the zoo, said in a text message.
Others were more critical of the county, including Billy Agan, co-owner of the bar Eli’s Mile High Club in Oakland. He said the county seemed to be hinting that businesses should reopen in defiance of the state order, and he criticized Alameda County for not seeking a variance from the state before telling business owners that it was safe to reopen.
“There’s no real guideline at all in terms of enforcement or anything,” Agan said.
If he has to close, he said, that means money he spent on bringing back employees, paying back vendors and buying perishables would go to waste.
Glenn Kaplan, owner of Make Westing bar in Oakland, said the county should have known it was in violation of the state’s order long before. He also criticized the city for encouraging bar owners as recently as Friday to serve alcohol on the sidewalk, saying many bars couldn’t do so without a permit the state wasn’t issuing to counties without a variance. Oakland’s website says bars applying for that permit “may experience delays.”
Kaplan, who has kept his bar closed during the entire lockdown, said his plan is to minimize costs and hang on at least through September, but his costs are still $20,000 to $40,000 a month.
“It’s an absolute disaster,” he said. “Bars and restaurants are ready to take pitchforks and charge the city.”
Even business owners in counties with more permissive rules say the lack of regional consistency has been a problem. Erin Caltabiano, owner of MESH Salon in San Jose’s Willow Glen neighborhood, has been busy preparing to reopen for clients desperate to touch up their roots and cut their unruly quarantine manes.
For weeks, she’s been anxiously awaiting word from the county even as other hairdressers opened in Contra Costa and San Mateo counties.
“It’s very contradicting, it’s very unclear,” Caltabiano said. “I can drive to Santa Cruz and all the salons are open — so why does it make a difference in terms of exposure? That’s been a frustration.”
In San Mateo County, the YMCA of Silicon Valley has had two gyms open since the beginning of July, which served as a trial run for its eight other locations in Santa Clara County, according to marketing director Joey Sanchez. Those openings prompted an influx of calls from members asking why the other gyms remained closed.
But when Santa Clara County released its order reopening gyms last week, it included a host of rules, such as banning cardio machines indoors, that don’t apply just up the road in San Mateo County. The YMCA will stagger reopening its South Bay gyms over the coming weeks as it works out which classes are safe to host in hot weather and how many facilities have shady outdoor spots.
“It is difficult, just the whole logistics of everything, and managing the number of people that are inbound,” Sanchez said. “There’s a lot of footnotes that we have to put in all of our information — ‘Santa Clara only, San Mateo only.’ ”