Oroville — In a largely symbolic move, the divided Butte County Board of Supervisors voted to keep a local emergency statement related to COVID-19.
The vote took place after a long list of speakers urged the board to revoke the resolution, although it would not change any existing rules regarding masks or vaccines or any other provisions regarding the response to the pandemic.
County Chief Administrative Officer Andy Pickett explained before the public comment that the county does not have any mask or vaccine regulations, nor can it control schools or private companies that implement these regulations.
However, in the next hour and a half, the spokesperson stepped forward to plead with the supervisor-and at some point threatened them-to cancel the measure.
Speakers believe that the death rate is not very high, and even these figures are exaggerated. They said the virus detection was inaccurate.
They said the vaccine did not help, and more than one million people had adverse side effects, including death. “They are going to kill us, which seems to me to be the case,” one person said. More than one person called these shots “experimental gene therapy.”
They criticized hospital care, saying that they were just making money. They said that doctors were prevented from providing certain types of care, and given positive drugs when symptoms appeared were withheld.
Some people say that this is a government conspiracy based on lies and false narratives. The emergency declaration is illegal and unconstitutional. Others claimed that the mask and vaccine requirements violated their rights.
But when Chico director Tami Ritter asked what would happen if the resolution was revoked. Pickett replied, “Nothing.”
He earlier described the emergency declaration as “a management tool that provides the resources we need.”
These resources are funds from the state and federal governments, and the county uses them for rent assistance and food assistance.
Usually in an emergency, the county government will spend money on necessary things and then seek reimbursement. This time, the county doesn’t need to ask. “They just pushed it there.” It’s still coming.
This may be the only disadvantage to the repeal of the regulation. At a later point in time, the auditor will discover that the county has collected disaster relief funds without announcing the disaster and demanded repayment. It may reach hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Pickett said the danger is small, but said: “We have never been here before. We don’t know how it will turn out.”
After the public comment, Chico Director Debra Lucero asked whether the ongoing disaster solutions for the Camp Fire and North Complex fires would also be cancelled.
“It’s either against the Constitution or it’s not. Will we be consistent?”
Oroville’s chairman of the board, Bill Connery, pointed out that this is not on the agenda, and county counselor Bruce Alpert (remote attending) explained some of the differences between COVID and the fire situation.
He added that there is a state disaster statement for COVID. “Whether this measure is cancelled has no actual impact on Butte County.”
Doug Teeter, director of Paradise, stated that he believes the government has abused the disaster declaration process and requested that a letter be sent to the state legislature stating this.
He said that the government made some wrong decisions early on, “We need funds to solve the things that the government messed up.”
Durham director Tod Kimmelshue told the audience that the announcement has nothing to do with their choice.
He added: “This is no longer an emergency. This is the new normal and will last for several years.”
Connery agrees that this is not an emergency. He described this situation as “exaggeration, exaggeration, and error.”
He said he remained silent about this, “because we need a way to pay for things that are forced into the throat.”
“I will abolish (the resolution), but I don’t have the right to vote.”
He is right. The disaster resolution was retained by a 3-2 vote, and Lucero, Ritter and Tite voted in favor.
Actions include reviewing the matter within 60 days and sending the letter to the legislature.