(12-04-2020, 04:28 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Y'all should watch this. There are even questions answered about sports in the reporter Q&A. Really insightful and makes me appreciate the hell out of our public health leaders. They show compassion, are honest, and are willing to make very tough decisions to protect us. Dr. Cody even provides context for why Santa Clara County has taken sports off the table while other counties haven't. A mystery why San Mateo hasn't joined in as yet.
I'll post on the Covid board too...
[tweet]https://twitter.com/BrooksKTVU/status/1334970818913189888[/tweet]
1. They really are in a tough position, inasmuch as they are flying blind on what really limits transmission and what doesn't. They know they need to do something, so they take some wide swings.
2. The one thing semi-disingenous from SCC Health Officer: "we're really aligning with the State's guidelines, and we're acting as a region because we're not islands . . ." Sounds good, but SCC is not aligning with state on sports, and San Mateo has not joined in the fun, as you note.
3. As for sports, the Health Officer's justification in SCC was that "we're seeing spike more than other counties - so we have to be more restrictive." Um . . . except on retail, where SCC is following state capacity guidelines and not restricting "non-essential retail" any more than essential retail. Moreover, SCC says other counties will see similar spikes soon enough, which is why acting in unison. Putting aside that SCC's raw numbers are going to be higher based on population alone, SCC's extra restrictions kind of undercut other counties' rationale for allowing sports where "the teams have testing and other protocols in place that we review and approve." There is no question the 'Niners (and Stanford) have very legit protocols for their teams - football team has had, what? 1 positive test all fall? - that I'm sure are as strict as Warriors or Cal or what have you. I presume SJSU and Santa Clara are also putting athletes through strict protocols. Thus, what SCC is really saying - at least implicitly - is this: we're right and our fellow regional Health Officers are wrong. Aren't they?
4. This leads my jaded self to believe that something else is motivating SCC. And here's my cynical theory: (i) the 'Niners and the county have been fighting over $$ since the 'Niners moved into Levi's (hell, probably before they moved in), (ii) this was a way for the county to inflict some pain on the 'Niners at no incremental cost to other SCC residents (no fans allowed to attend games anyway - and they'll be able to watch games on TV no matter where they're played), and (iii) to make it look like SCC wasn't singling out 'Niners for punitive treatment, SCC Health Officer rolled Santa Clara, SJSU and Stanford (oh yeah, and youth sports) into the prohibition.
5. My alternative jaded theory: the County Health Officer knows that spread risk in county is San Jose and south; thus, if they were being targeted in their regulations, then they would only restrict SJSU and youth sports in South San Jose and further south county. That, of course, would raise all kinds of general "unfairness" complaints by south county residents and probably invite the race card given profile of impacted communities. Thus, the easy out is to just ban 'em all. [I still think #4 is more the more likely of the admittedly jaded scenarios - I mean, didn't BC state that he thinks the SCC Health Officer doesn't appreciate 49ers' "values?"].
6. The most telling comment in the presser was by the Marin County Health Officer who, when responding to question about enforcement of new regulations, essentially admitted that this is an Honor Code thing. The County needs to rely on the citizenry to be smart, reasonable, and not engage in risky (let alone unduly risky) behavior. To the extent new lock downs "message" this point, there will be some incremental benefit to these regulations. But the truth remains that regardless of what is or is not formally prohibited or advised against, people need to be freaking smart!