— from Michael Johnson —
In a recent online conversation about the legitimacy of both non-essential travel, and people not staying local during SJCs current Phase 2 re-opening under Gov. Inslee’s Stay Safe Stay Local Plan, the following was said,
Comment: “…the repeal (by Dr. Frank James) of the orders that limit hosting of only essential workers opened us up to non essential travel.”
My reply: Though related the above is apples and oranges. Dr. James’ recent repeals may have “opened up” local transient lodging establishments to guests, but keep in mind that even though San Juan County can adopt stricter health guideline criteria than the state, (i.e., Dr. James’ recent-past transient lodging shutdown), we cannot adopt looser guidelines than the state, (i.e. Gov. Inslee’s Stay local, non-essential travel only restrictions). It’s worth noting too that the state never adopted lodging restrictions… the state adopted a Stay Local non-essential travel restriction which continues to be in effect today, (until we reach Phase 4). Dr. James’ lifting of the lodging restrictions in SJC is not relative to, nor does it override the state’s Stay local, non-essential travel restrictions. Comparing the two is comparing apples and oranges.
It’s interesting and worth noting (it’s complex) that it was not illegal for someone to advertise their Airbnb during the initial SJC lodging shutdown (this came directly from Randy Gaylord). And, as Dr. James basically said in his original travel restriction press release from 4/03, (see below), once people are here we don’t have the authority to evict them. In line with this our Pros. Attny.’s office interpreted Gov. Inslee’s original Stay Home Stay Safe order as a “Stay in place” order. The bottom line is– that if a visitor comes here from the mainland on non-essential business, or if one of us goes to the mainland for non-essential business… we’re clearly in violation of the Governor’s current statewide travel restrictions by conducting non-essential travel outside of our local areas. Whether it’s the eleven 20 yr. olds from the same family whooping it up on the beach around the campfire at one of our local resorts, or the quiet, respectful couple staying at one of the neighbor’s vacation rentals with their dogs… it may not be illegal for them to be here, but it WAS illegal for them to travel here. “Skirting the law” is the phrase that comes to mind… what a legal conundrum.
“Nothing in this order requires the removal of persons who are already staying in transient accommodations, campground and camping facilities, or overnight moorage at the time this order is made or at the time the County moves between phases under the Safe Start Plan.” Dr. Frank James.
The irony is that we’re in a modified Phase 2 that allows local lodging, including camping facilities to re-open to 50% capacity (with “the onus for enforcement rests on the visitors, not the county or the lodging establishment”), as per the Pros. Attny’s. Off., while at the same time the state law limits non-essential, and non-local travel… go figure.
Which came first… the chicken or the egg? Opening lodging to tourists, some of whom were already here, many more of whom were expected to come, and all of whom SJC (via their Visitors Bureau, Chambers of Commerce, the Fri. Har. City Council, and new online capabilities) were then, and are now actively soliciting for, hoped would come. I guess opening up lodging to tourists now circumvents the need for the county to have to keep defending the embarrassing position of not having enforced all of the illegally operating vacation rentals, (and other lodging establishments), during the lengthy shutdown.
SJC’s (Dr. Frank James’) limited re-opening of local transient lodging does not mean that the state-issued Stay local non-essential travel restriction has been lifted. The latter being a state-wide law is still part of Gov. Inslee’s Four Phase Safe Start Plan. Though it is a law, that admittedly, the governor has said the state cannot enforce, and SJC is unwilling to enforce… it’s still the law.
You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time. What has been transpiring in front of our eyes is not representative of a health first approach; it’s not a conservative approach, and it is definitely not an approach based on the best available science (as is continually touted by Rick Hughes). The acts of wearing masks, social distancing, and washing hands (though important, and the least we can do), seems somewhat miniscule in the face of all else that’s going down around us… for if we were to admit it to ourselves, as a county “We are NOT preparing for the worst while hoping for the best”.
Does the emperor wear no clothes? While most of the rest of the whole world, including the USA, as well as Washington State, and San Juan County are currently in the midst of a COVID-19 surge… SJC continues to open their arms to visitors. At the same time, at the most recent county council meeting Dr. James painted a bleak picture of SJC’s current medical response capabilities indicating that we, and all of our affiliated regional county’s (some of which we are relying on to airlift CV-19 patients too as a part of meeting the state’s criteria for intensive care beds) response capabilities are currently, as a result of the current surge, “strained”. Perhaps the council members should have thought of this before offering early retirements to those members of SJC’s critical emergency response staff who are no longer with us.
The question we should be asking is, “Why does SJC continue to promote that (tourism) which engages in non-local, non-essential travel, which is in violation of a state emergency order designed to protect communities like ours?”
Is it time we write a letter to the state attorney general’s office?
“When you plan, you want to plan for the worst-case, not for the average or best-case,” said Natalie Dean, an assistant professor of biostatistics at University of Florida. “Because the risk is not proportional.”
What is essential travel?. A take out hamburger from the Tavern is allowed as an “essential” service so by inference travel to and from is “essential”.
So if I have a “Big Mac Attack” travel to Anacortes, ferry trip and all, to pick one up at our nearest Micky D’s is arguably equally “essential”.
Just a recurring thought I’ve been having. Personally I prefer the Taverns Not Yet Famous Lower Burger with fries to go and believe we should shop local to help our businesses stay afloat.
But it seems that “essential” is in the eye of the beholder.
Michael,
I presume your question (“Why does SJC continue to promote that *tourism* which engages in non-local, non-essential travel, which is in violation of a state emergency order designed to protect communities like ours?”) is merely rhetorical, yes?
Phil– What’s considered “essential travel”, and a variety of activities that would include local non-essential travel is clearly spelled out in the details pertaining to each different Phase. This has not been any kind of well-kept secret.
Steve– Yes.
Kudos and Amen! How this has been handled is shameful and not defendable. The honorable islanders who have stayed home for the last four months in order to keep the island safe are owed more than betrayal.
Phase 2 guidance on allowed travel has been updated and omits restrictions on travel based on your geographic location.
Old verbiage: Limited non-essential travel within proximity of your home.
Updated and current verbiage: Limited non-essential travel for Phase I & II permissible activities.
Sharon– all charts and literature from the official Wa. St. website supports the fact that the governor’s non-essential travel restrictions (except for limited non-essential activities listed for each Phase) will remain in place until at least Phase 3.
You said, “Updated and current verbiage: Limited non-essential travel for Phase I & II permissible activities.”
And, it means just that. Non-essential travel restrictions are still in place except for the limited non-essential activities that are outlined and allowed under each Phase.
San Juan County requests Phase 3 approval from State
— from Brendan Cowan, Department of Emergency Management —
This modified form of Phase 3 would newly allow the following activities:
Hi Michael, thanks as always for your thoughtful attention to these challenging issues. A few thoughts:
San Juan County does not have an active application with State to move to Phase 3. This was a decision strongly supported by County Council, Dr. James, and State DOH/Governor. There is no date in sight for when/if San Juan County might move forward. It will depend very much on the status of cases in WA. At the moment the trend is concerning. A roll back to Phase 1 is possible.
As you highlight, enforcement and interpretation of the Governor’s travel restrictions are an ongoing challenge. The language is vague at times (likely intentionally so). Rest assured that we’re wrestling with these issues just like everyone us.
Perhaps most importantly, while the focus of your piece is on tourism, and that is a major concern, nearly all cases so far are from islanders traveling, or islanders socializing indoors with friends and family who are visiting. We all must be safe and thoughtful.
Brendan–
First of all let me say “thank you” to the emergency response team… I separate their commitment to their communities during the response to the pandemic from the politics of the day.
You said, “San Juan County does not have an active application with State to move to Phase 3. This was a decision strongly supported by County Council, Dr. James, and State DOH/Governor.”
“Does not” conveys a sense of “never did”, or the likes). This was not the case until recently. I don’t know where you get the term “strongly supported by the council”… listening to the meetings this is not what I glean from it. The county council is constantly being pulled (“being dragged kicking and screaming” might be a better phrasing), by Dr. James towards a more health-first approach. Let us not forget that SJC did have an active application for Phase 3 on file… until it didn’t. The governor was wise to revoke all attempts at Phase upgrades… Dr. James has been saying this for some time.
Brendan–
You said, “Perhaps most importantly, while the focus of your piece is on tourism, and that is a major concern, nearly all cases so far are from islanders traveling, or islanders socializing indoors with friends and family who are visiting.”
You overemphasize a part of the picture (I covered all the ground on this one)… whether it’s “us going there”, or “them coming here”. SJC has been actively promoting travel (especially the, “them coming here” part). It’s only a “major concern” because the political will to limit it is not there. This is not an enforcement issue… it’s a political issue.
“We all must be safe and thoughtful.”
Yeah… we have to be because thousands of tourists are converging on us… because the political will is not there to limit it.
“nearly all cases so far…” Yeah, “So far.” Let’s not limit our thinking… “so far”.
My discernment, for my own safety (and others after I would have returned) led me to cancel a Friday medical appointment I ultimately deemed non-essential.
Meanwhile, yesterday I again observed why our parks need new signs to educate all users about rules and etiquette, (maybe including the non-emergency # for the Sheriff?). I was surprised at the number of mask-free, non social-distancing, guests congregating and dominating outdoor common spaces yesterday (for example a group of 13 occupying benches and tables, another smaller group filling the park seating) such that local, vulnerable populations just go back home.
Obviously we have a complex regional multi-systemic interdependence. The impact of future fundamental decision(s) concerning these elements (travel and tourism) on that larger system, will either lean into the current reality of ‘not knowing’ to take advantage of the opportunities that seem apparent to some of us, or ‘grasp backwards’ for handholds based on old assumptions
Thank you Michael! The limit on non essential travel has been misunderstood and misinterpreted so good to add some clarification. There really needs to be a very clear definition of limits and there should significant signage at the Anacortes ferry terminal explaining non local non essential travel is in violation of the governors order.
San Juan County may have 50% lodging ban in effect on paper but on the ground my experience is vastly different. The transient rentals I am familiar with are experiencing a huge influx of guests and are maxed out. I checked a couple on-line reservation calendars and they were full all of July through the middle of August. There is no enforcement of the 50% lodging ban and it is almost impossible to enforce with the transient rentals business. The Home Stay owners are able to educate their guests with the proper behavior to protect us all but the corporate rentals only look at the bottom line.
Michael Johnson, I believe you and others who have replied have missed the important point I made in my reply. There no longer exists a “stay local” mandate with the updated verbiage of the Phased Approach. So long as the activities are permissible within a Phase, people may travel as far a distance as they desire from their homes for that activity. The point you are making in your piece regarding people illegally “not staying local” is outdated and incorrect.
Limited non-essential travel–
PHASE 1
PHASE 2All activities in previous phases are allowed in addition to the following:
https://coronavirus.wa.gov/what-you-need-know/safe-start/whats-open-each-phase
Michael Johnson, thank you for posting that. It clarifies my point that people travelling to your county are not breaking any laws. San Juan County is in Phase 2 (not 3 or 4), meaning that anybody can travel there for permissible activities regardless of where they live.
And what is your county Sharon?
Sharon, you said, “San Juan County is in Phase 2 (not 3 or 4), meaning that anybody can travel there for permissible activities regardless of where they live.”
Travel to counties in Phase 3 or Phase 4 to participate in non-essential activities not allowed in your county of residence is not allowed. Examples include sports tournaments, large group events or dining
You may be correct… it is (IMO) tough to gage. We had another positive confirmation here on Orcas today (a local who went off-island to party)… when people start to die, and the lawsuits begin we can parse thru this with a fine-tooh comb. A one-size-fits-all mainland approach dictating travel restrictions for all counties in Wa. St. leaves the issue of “mass tourism” hanging… IMO
“This decision was strongly supported by the County Council …” Come on Brendan! You know better and so do we.