Tag Archives: Contra Costa County CA

Contra Costa is 3rd Bay Area county to order fines for violating COVID health orders

$100 for not wearing a mask? Contra Costa approves fines for health order violators

San Francisco Chronicle, by Catherine Ho, July 28, 2020
Bar manager Marc Pontavella wears a mask and gloves while making a cocktail for a customer at Teleferic Barcelona in Walnut Creek, Calif. Tuesday, June 9, 2020. They Bay Area is opening at a fairly fast pace, with Contra Costa County announcing plans this week to reopen indoor dining and hair salons soon, while it reports near-record new cases.
Bar manager Marc Pontavella wears a mask and gloves while making a cocktail for a customer at Teleferic Barcelona in Walnut Creek, Calif. Tuesday, June 9, 2020. They Bay Area is opening at a fairly fast pace, with Contra Costa County announcing plans this week to reopen indoor dining and hair salons soon, while it reports near-record new cases. Photo: Jessica Christian / The Chronicle

Contra Costa County on Tuesday approved fines for individuals and businesses that violate coronavirus health orders, including not wearing a mask.

The county’s board of supervisors passed an urgency ordinance establishing fines for individuals starting at $100 for the first violation, $200 for the second and $500 for each additional violation within one year of the initial violation.

Fines for businesses will start at $250 for the first violation, $500 for the second and $1,000 for each additional violation within one year of the initial violation.

“Some people are just defiant,” said Supervisor Diane Burgis. “We’re trying to get COVID under control and we need people to put on their masks. … We’re not doing it to make money, to try to control people. We’re trying to get control over this disease and get our economy back so we need people to cooperate, put on their mask.”

Contra Costa is the third Bay Area county, and the largest, to pass administrative fines for not following health measures. Napa and Marin counties this month enacted similar fines of up to $5,000 and $10,000, respectively, for businesses.

Officers designated by the director of Health Services, the director of Conservation and Development, and the Sheriff’s Office will enforce the ordinance. The county has received about 200 complaints from residents reporting businesses and individuals that allegedly broke health order rules.

Individuals and businesses that are fined will have the option to appeal the fine within 10 days.

Officials have said they are focusing more on businesses than individuals — such as if businesses are open when health orders require that they shut down, or if business owners are not enforcing mask-wearing among their workers or customers.

Several members of the public called into the virtual meeting to oppose the ordinance, saying it would curtail their individual liberties and that mask-wearing should be voluntary. Supervisors said voluntary compliance and education have not worked to keep infection rates down. Ample research shows that widespread mask-wearing significantly reduces transmission.

Sonoma County and the city of Berkeley are also considering fines for individuals and businesses that do not comply with COVID-19 safety measures.

Comparing Solano to neighboring counties: COVID-19 Cases, Deaths and Fatality Rate

By Roger Straw, June 5, 2020

Solano County is bordered by 5 other Counties: Contra Costa, Napa, Sonoma, Sacramento and Yolo.  I was curious how Solano compares with its neighbors in its containment of the coronavirus.

Below you will find my spreadsheet comparisons showing detailed data on each of these counties.  (Source: Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center.)

FINDINGS: Solano County ranks second from highest among its neighbors in cases per 1000, deaths per 1000 and fatality rate.  …ALSO: there’s something serious going on in Yolo County.

After the tables, you will find my County snapshots for this data from Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center.

COUNTY DATA ON JUNE 5, 2020

Counties by Coronavirus Cases per 1000

COUNTY POPULATION CASES CASES PER 1000 DEATHS DEATHS PER 1000 FATALITY RATE (Deaths/Cases)
Contra Costa 1,133,247 1,547 1.37 38 0.03 2.46
Solano 438,530 559 1.27 22 0.05 3.94
Sonoma 501,317 593 1.18 4 0.01 0.67
Yolo 214,977 216 1.00 24 0.11 11.11
Sacramento 1,510,023 1,490 0.99 58 0.04 3.89
Napa 140,530 126 0.90 3 0.02 2.38

Counties by Coronavirus Deaths per 1000

COUNTY POPULATION CASES CASES PER 1000 DEATHS DEATHS PER 1000 FATALITY RATE (Deaths/Cases)
Yolo 214,977 216 1.00 24 0.11 11.11
Solano 438,530 559 1.27 22 0.05 3.94
Sacramento 1,510,023 1,490 0.99 58 0.04 3.89
Contra Costa 1,133,247 1,547 1.37 38 0.03 2.46
Napa 140,530 126 0.90 3 0.02 2.38
Sonoma 501,317 593 1.18 4 0.01 0.67

Counties by Fatality Rate (deaths/cases)

COUNTY POPULATION CASES CASES PER 1000 DEATHS DEATHS PER 1000 FATALITY RATE (Deaths/Cases)
Yolo 214,977 216 1.00 24 0.11 11.11
Solano 438,530 559 1.27 22 0.05 3.94
Sacramento 1,510,023 1,490 0.99 58 0.04 3.89
Contra Costa 1,133,247 1,547 1.37 38 0.03 2.46
Napa 140,530 126 0.90 3 0.02 2.38
Sonoma 501,317 593 1.18 4 0.01 0.67

County snapshots from Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center

SNAPSHOT ON JUNE 5, 2020: SOLANO COUNTY

Solano County COVID-19 Status Report on June 5, 2020 (Click on the image to open interactive chart on Johns Hopkins website.)

SNAPSHOT ON JUNE 5, 2020: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY

Contra Costa County COVID-19 Status Report on June 5, 2020 (Click on the image to open interactive chart on Johns Hopkins website.)

SNAPSHOT ON JUNE 5, 2020: NAPA COUNTY

Napa County COVID-19 Status Report on June 5, 2020 (Click on the image to open interactive chart on Johns Hopkins website.)

SNAPSHOT ON JUNE 5, 2020: SONOMA COUNTY

Sonoma County COVID-19 Status Report on June 5, 2020 (Click on the image to open interactive chart on Johns Hopkins website.)

SNAPSHOT ON JUNE 5, 2020: SACRAMENTO COUNTY

Sacramento County COVID-19 Status Report on June 5, 2020 (Click on the image to open interactive chart on Johns Hopkins website.)

SNAPSHOT ON JUNE 5, 2020: YOLO COUNTY

Yolo County COVID-19 Status Report on June 5, 2020 (Click on the image to open interactive chart on Johns Hopkins website.)

Vallejo and Solano County: COVID-19 is bad, but not as bad as the 1918 flu pandemic

Brendan Riley’s Solano Chronicles: Old reports show pandemic impact in Solano County

Spanish Flu victims were treated at the Navy’s hospital on Mare Island and at other facilities on the island and in nearby Vallejo. (Vallejo Naval and Historical Museum files)
Vallejo Times-Herald, by Brendan Riley, May 10, 2020

My recent column on the Spanish Flu of 1918 outlined its deadly impact on Vallejo and Mare Island. After the column was published, I was able to locate two century-old state reports that have a lot more information about the pandemic, one of the worst in history, including details on influenza-related deaths throughout Solano County.

According to the old California Board of Health reports, the Spanish Flu killed 341 people in Solano County between 1918 and 1920 – more than half of them in the first wave to hit our area, between late September and early December 1918. Another 169 deaths in the 1918-20 period were caused by pneumonia, probably linked to the influenza in most cases. Three-quarters of all the known victims were from Vallejo and Mare Island while the rest were from smaller communities.

After the first cases of Spanish Flu were reported, Mare Island and Vallejo responded by banning large gatherings, barring liberty for sailors in Vallejo, shutting down theaters, dance halls, libraries, schools, churches and other sites used for “public assembly.” Emergency hospitals also were opened and face masks were mandated. Restrictions also were imposed in other towns in the county.

The 1918 flu deaths totaled 163 in the Vallejo area and 53 elsewhere in Solano County. Victims included Marian Turner, a nurse in charge of one of the Navy’s influenza wards on Mare Island; and Adolph Widenmann, member of a well-known Vallejo family. Other victims included Morris Buck of Vacaville and Dan O’Connell of Benicia, prominent farmers in Solano County; and three daughters and one son of Mr. and Mrs. Bert Evins, Dixon farmers.

By early December the crisis seemed to be ending and restrictions were lifted. But a second wave of influenza developed in January 1919 and the restrictions had to be imposed again, lasting in Vallejo until the end of the month. The 1919 total of flu deaths was 35 in Vallejo and 18 in the rest of the county. The victims who died during January included B.F. Griffin, president of the First National Bank of Vallejo – whose daughter-in-law, Mrs. Roscoe Griffin, had died from the virus a few months earlier.

The state Board of Health reports, published in 1921 and 1923, show that the third wave hit in early 1920, with 58 flu deaths in Vallejo and another 14 deaths elsewhere in Solano County. A ban on indoor public meetings and other restrictions were imposed again, remaining in place in Vallejo and on Mare Island until mid-February. A week later, similar restrictions were ordered in Vacaville. The 1920 victims included a Navy doctor, Lt. Edward McColl.

The state reports give a Solano County breakdown only for Vallejo. With a 1918 population of about 14,145, it was well above the 5,000-population cutoff for California towns and cities listed in the documents. Fairfield, Vacaville, Benicia and other communities in Solano County were all under 5,000 residents per town at the time. Their combined population totaled 16,251.

In addition to the total of 341 flu-related deaths in Solano County, the state reports also provide the totals for neighboring counties in the 1918-20 time frame: Marin, 135; Napa, 159; Sonoma, 317; and Contra Costa, 453.

Those numbers were dwarfed by the number of influenza deaths from 1918 to 1920 in the Bay Area’s most populous counties, Alameda with 2,004 and San Francisco with 3,829. The Spanish Flu death total for the entire state of California in the 1918-20 period was 20,801.

Those in the 25-to-34 age group suffered more than any other age group in the state. “In 1917 the average Californian died at the age of 52 years,” the 1921 Board of Health report stated. “In 1918 this dropped to 40.6 years, showing clearly the ravages of influenza among the young.”

“As in all other parts of the country, a feeling of impotence in the face of a rapidly spreading infection on the part of the health officers (in California) was responsible for much confusion and lack of proper utilization of what scanty means of control were available,” the report said. Adding to the problem was “the invocation of many peculiar and useless measures that were intended to check the epidemic,” the report added.

Around the U.S., many doctors prescribed whiskey for people sickened by influenza. Dubious tonics, promising protection or relief from the flu, included Dr. Pierce’s Pleasant Pellets, Dr. Bell’s Pine Tar Honey, Schenck’s Mandrake Pills, Beecham’s Pills, Pepto-Mangan and Miller’s Antiseptic Snake Oil. There were accounts of mothers telling their children to stuff salt up their noses and wear bags of camphor around their necks. A four-year-old girl from Portland, Ore. was said to have recovered from the flu after her mother dosed her with onion syrup and covered her with raw onions for three days.

“Back in 1918, the basic treatments that were offered were enemas, whiskey, and bloodletting,” Dr. Jeremy Brown, director of emergency care research at the National Institutes of Health, said during a recent CBS interview.

The Spanish Flu killed an estimated 675,000 people in the U.S. and as many as 50 million people worldwide. Now the world is threatened by the COVID-19 pandemic, but because of the advances in science Dr. Brown argues that 2020 won’t be another 1918.

“Hospitals as we know them today were quite different,” Brown said. “There were no intensive care doctors who really understand how to treat the very sickest patients. There were no antibiotics to treat any secondary infection. So, it was a very, very different time, and a very different way of practicing medicine back then.”


— Vallejo and other Solano County communities are treasure troves of early-day California history. The “Solano Chronicles” columns, running every other Sunday in the Times-Herald and on my Facebook page, highlight various aspects of that history. Source references are available upon request. If you have local stories or photos to share, email me at genoans@hotmail.com. You also can send any material care of the Times-Herald, 420 Virginia St.; or the Vallejo Naval and Historical Museum, 734 Marin St., Vallejo.

Coronavirus: New Death At Orinda Nursing Home; Outbreak Worsens At Pleasant Hill Senior Center

[BenIndy Editor: I can find no reports of coronavirus infections in Solano County senior facilities.  Hope and pray for our elders in this pandemic!  – R.S.]

.      .

KPIX5 CBS SF Bay Area, April 10, 2020

PLEASANT HILL (CBS SF) — Contra Costa health officials reported Friday another resident death amid a growing outbreak of coronavirus at two senior care facilities.

The county reported 21 people have been infected at Carlton Senior Living at 175 Cleaveland Road in downtown Pleasant Hill. Eight of those confirmed positive are residents and 13 are staff members, according to Contra Costa Health Services.

In addition, CCHS said a second person has died at Orinda Care Center, where earlier this week 50 people had tested positive for COVID-19.

CCHS said it was working closely with management of the senior living facilities to contain the spread of the virus.  The county said both CCHS and John Muir Health have provided infection control guidance as well as PPE supplies for residents and staff, and was working to offer COVID-19 testing.

As of Friday morning, county health officials reported 511 total cases of coronavirus in Contra Costa, including people who have recovered. There have been nine deaths in the county because of the illness.

Gov. Gavin Newsom said Friday the state has identified seven sites with hundreds beds to take care of senior care residents who are forced from their current facilities, including the USNS Mercy hospital ship.

There are 1,224 major senior care facilities statewide; of those, 191 were being monitored by state health officials where there have been 1,266 individuals and staff members who have contracted the virus, Newsom said.

There are also 7,464 smaller care facilities statewide, Newsom said, where 94 are being monitored with outbreaks that have 370 residents and staffers ill with the coronavirus.

“You may consider those numbers and say that sounds relatively modest,” said Newsom of the numbers of infections in senior care facilities. “That doesn’t show the entire picture. There have been some appropriate headlines about certain areas of the state of  California and specific facilities that have become hot spots, where we have seen a disproportionate number of people contracting the disease and number of people tragically passing away. What we have done is … put in new guidelines that have been backed up by staff, what I would refer to as SWAT Teams, of infectious disease control professionals, working with the CDC and others, to saturate those areas of concern and focus.”

Newsom added the additional staff focusing on senior centers was working to “quickly identify those individuals, isolate, quarantine, and ultimately trace and track the pattern of the infection.”

“We are making calls in an unprecedented way,” said Newsom. “It’s not an exaggeration, 1,500 field offices every single day, calling every single nursing facility in the state.”

The governor also said “SWAT teams” of infectious disease specialists will be dispatched to the most serious outbreaks and deals had been made to temporary staffing agencies to fill in when a facilities caregivers are sidelined by positive coronavirus results.