Could A Stay-at-Home Order Like Bay Area’s Happen Here?

The San Francisco Bay Area is in virtual lockdown, its streets all but empty of traffic and pedestrians, many stores closed and some 7 million people under orders to leave home only for “essential” reasons, such as food and medicine, for the next three weeks.

In a desperate effort to limit the spread of the coronavirus, six Bay Area counties this week enacted the toughest, most wide-ranging restrictions in the U.S.

Now the question is, could Southern California, or L.A. County, or even a single city such as Pasadena, follow the Bay Area’s lead and order people to stay home for some prolonged length of time?

That question was discussed at some length, and with some meandering detours, at Tuesday’s special session of the Pasadena City Council.

And the answer to emerge seemed to be that, yes, it could happen here – but that no shutdown on the scale of the Bay Area appears to be on the table in SoCal, at least not yet; and that any such move would most likely have to be done on a regional basis, rather than be enacted by one or even a few cities, to have any effect.

For now, Pasadena has banned sit-down service at restaurants, shuttered bars and gyms, closed many city offices and urged residents to follow social-distancing precautions, among other strategies.

Still, the concept of a Bay Area-like shutdown in Southern California, or perhaps in Pasadena alone, was discussed by the City Council on Tuesday, with Council Member Margaret McAustin of District 2 initiating the narrative.

“I fear that we will be too timid and that our failure will be that we are too timid rather than being too aggressive,’’ McAustin said during an open-ended discussion among council members and City Manager Steve Mermell about possible strategies to combat the COVID-19 crisis.

“My belief is, if we could work with our partners and the other cities in the county to do a shorter, more progressive, more intensive stay-home type order for 14 to 21 days … that theoretically, we might be able to save a significant number of lives,” McAustin said.

Initially, McAustin’s comments were perceived by other council members and by Mermell as a motion to impose a Bay Area-like, stay-at-home order in Pasadena, perhaps soon, and separate from any actions the county or state might or might not take. But in fact, McAustin’s comments never received a second, so never officially made it to the “motion” stage.

Indeed, other council members pushed back against the idea of Pasadena acting unilaterally in issuing a stay-at-home plan – questioning how effective it would be against the spread of the virus, and expressing concern about the impact such an order would have on businesses already hammered by coronavirus fallout.

“I personally would not support this (Pasadena acting alone and now),’’ Councilman Steve Madison of District 6 said. “We have over 100,000 jobs in Pasadena, a number of those come from outside the city. As a practical matter, we wouldn’t have the ability to enforce this. And frankly our staff and our own city public health department are not asking for this action.’’

Madison later said, “I just think that should come from the federal, state or county government.’’

Councilman John J. Kennedy agreed, saying, “I think if we move too hastily in that direction, in terms of (McAustin’s) motion, it could have unintended consequences … related to the economic well-being of the individual members of our community.’’

Kennedy went on to say, “I would invite us to, if at all possible, reconvene as early as Friday to further (discuss) issues, and this could be one of them. At this point, I’m not prepared to support the action contemplated, but within day or two, with further information that would be provided by staff …. that may change.’’

Councilmember Victor Gordo of District 5, a candidate for mayor, echoed Kennedy’s comments, saying, “We want to be careful of unintended consequences, and so I would ask that maybe (Mermell) check in with our county partners (as to their thinking regarding a regional shutdown).’’

“Enforcement is an issue, unintended consequences to our business community – we are an employment center, already people are suffering, and in terms of effectiveness, I don’t know how effective it would be if it’s just Pasadena giving that order because people outside of Pasadena are going to continue to visit our city,’’ Gordo said.

For his part, Mermell said, “I haven’t heard anything from the county, (though) we do have a call scheduled (for Wednesday), and I would certainly make the appropriate inquiries. But I haven’t heard anything as of this date.’’

“The question is whether it’s effective for us (meaning, the city) to do it – I do not think it would be effective if only the city of Pasadena were to do it,’’ Mermell said at an earlier point in the dialogue.

“I would think it’s something that would need to be done, at a minimum, across Los Angeles County and hopefully a broader region, which is what we saw in the Bay Area.’’

As the council’s discussion evolved, so apparently did McAustin’s line of thinking. Eventually, McAustin suggested that Mermell get a resolution for a stay-at-home-order in the city “teed up” — focusing on the resolution’s wording and specific directions to city residents, should it eventually be decided, by the city or county, to order a wider lockdown.

“I would like to direct staff to, as soon as possible, consider and evaluate issuing, the city issuing, a stay-at-home order, which would be effective as soon as possible, within a couple of days thereafter, which would effectively require people to stay at home except to go out and receive essential services and would leave essential services available to stay open,’’ McAustin said.

“I would suggest that the order be kind of modeled on the San Francisco action, which allows for essential services like gas stations, pharmacies, food, restaurants for pickup orders, banks, etc., to be able to remain open.

“Because we need to give this direction in a very proactive and strong way to our community to stay home for 21 days, because this will be, of all the actions we can take, this’ll be the most effective we can take at stopping the virus.

“I think it’s essential that we act more aggressively and more quickly.’’

Council Member Andy Wilson of District 7 agreed with McAustin’s aggressive approach, urging the city to have a stay-at-home plan in place … in case.

“This is not a linear progression, this is an exponential progression and we’re operating at linear speed,’’ Wilson said. “I think, like Council Member McAustin, it (a stay-at-home order, from some level of government) is going to be an inevitability, and rather than hope it goes away, I think we need to be proactive.

“I think we need to show leadership, and I think we need to be prepared and have done the homework, because I think it’s going to be on a very short fuse that we’re likely to have to take this action. So, anything we can do to line up our ducks beforehand, I think will pay off in a big way,’’ Wilson added.

Mermell, meanwhile, said that with the city now operating under an official local emergency, he has the authority to issue a stay-at-home order without first consulting the council – though it’s highly unlikely he would do so without first receiving a directive from the county or from health officials.

Any such move by Mermell would last for seven days before the council would have to ratify it, and perhaps extend it.

Dr. Ying-Ying Goh, Pasadena’s public health officer, has not issued any such widespread shutdown plans for the city, but did say, “These are exactly the types of questions that we are struggling with, with always a weighing of the benefits versus the risks, because we know of all the negative consequences that come from, for example, a shelter-in-place order.’’

“It’s hard to say at this point, if we were to take a step like that, would the benefits outweigh the risks? These are tough decisions that, with the state and with all our partners, we will consider – that’s why we are watching the progress of the illness so closely, and consider what measures need to be taken.’’

With most government meetings in the city canceled, the council as of Wednesday had not yet scheduled another session.