‘IT HAS ITS SUPPORTERS, IT HAS ITS DETRACTORS’

-County Board Chair Jeff Holst on how supervisors view the proposed health ordinance

The meeting last Tuesday night of the Pierce County Board was moved to the River Falls High School auditorium to handle an expected large crowd wishing to give input on a proposed ordinance that those oppose feel strongly gives too much power to the county’s Public Health Officer AZ Snyder.

In a meeting that was sometimes tense with County Board Chair Jeff Holst having to cut off speakers due to a twominute time limit and other times having to gavel the crowd to order, the county board – seated at social distance along tables on the auditorium stage – certainly got plenty of input. The vast majority of the hundreds of people attending oppose the ordinance change, though probably one in 10 speakers over two hours of public comment were in favor of the ordinance change.

To start the meeting, County Clerk Jamie Feuerhelm was directed to read the ordinance. The meeting was a first meeting of the proposed “Ordinance No. 20-01 To Amend Ch. 1, Art. IV Sections 1-29 & 1-31 of, and to Create Ch. 120 ‘Communicable Diseases – Authority and Duties of Local Health Officer’ in the Pierce County Code, according to the agenda.

At its meeting next week, Tuesday, July 28, the board is expected to vote on the contentious item after a second reading of the ordinance. The county board will gather at the Law Enforcement Facility, 555 Overlook Dr. Public media and county staff will view the proceedings via video at the Seyforth Building, located on the Pierce County Fairgrounds, 364 N. Maple St.

The item is the final business matter of the evening. The meeting starts at 7 p.m.

The county board was sent the proposed ordinance from the Pierce County Public Health Committee, which forwarded the recommendation at its June meeting.

A memo to the county board for its meeting last week said that the ordinance at the county level is needed after the Supreme Court ruled that the “State Department of Health Serv-

Photos by John McLoone. ices did not have authority to issue the Stay at Home Order. This meant the State DHS was not able to issue any order relating to the COVID-19 pandemic without going through a rulemaking procedure and working with the legislature. This did not occur, and therefore it was up to each local health department to deal with the situation in their jurisdiction.”

Public Health Director AZ Snyder has said that the ordinance for Pierce County mirrors language already in place in state law. However, it allows for a civil forfeiture for infractions instead of criminal prosecution.

“One of the primary concerns of the Supreme Court decision was with the criminal penalty involved. Therefore, it is recommended to have a civil penalty, not a criminal penalty, with any local ordinance. To have an applicable civil penalty, Pierce County needs to adopt a local ordinance,” the staff memo to the county board states.

The memo states, “Absent having an ordinance in place with the civil penalty, there has been no local health order in place, but rather, a health advisory.

“A public health order would not be issued without fully considering all of the issues and existing circumstances, only after consulting with necessary individuals and entities and would be utilized only is specific circumstances warrant it. Should the need arise to issue a public health order, it is necessary to have a civil penalty, which provides the basis for enforcement of the health order. Without the ability to enforce, a public health order is meaningless.”

The ordinance has plenty of checks and balances, the memo states, as the Public Health officer is overseen by the Public Health Committee and is hired by the county board. Also, any citations issued under the proposed ordinance would be at the discretion of the county corporation counsel’s office and would have to be decided in Pierce County Circuit Court.

As Feuerhelm started to read the ordinance, it was difficult to hear in the large auditorium, and the crowd let him know. He started over with a microphone closer.

The ordinance states that “The Pierce County health officer shall promptly take all measures necessary to prevent, suppress and control communicable diseases, and shall report to the appropriate governing body the progress of the communicable diseases and the measures used against them” and “The Pierce County health officer may do what is reasonable and necessary for the prevention and suppression of disease; may forbid public gathering when deemed necessary to control outbreaks or epidemics.” Violation of the ordinance carries a fine of up to $500.

The public comment was a mix of citizens fighting government control with constitution- based messages and many references to the Bible.

Tim O’Malley summed up a lot of what those against the ordinance were thinking: “My biggest fear used to be the federal government. Now my biggest fear is you people,” he said.

Often times, the crowd broke into raucous applause or shouted at the board and Holst. There were a few people in the audience wearing masks for the meeting. They were offered to everyone at the door.

The board was challenged that if they vote for the ordinance, it will awaken voters.

“If you vote for this, you’ll never have another job in this county,” one Bay City resident said.

Many who spoke in favor were health care workers in some capacity, such as Alison Paige, of River Falls, CEO of Western Wisconsin Health. Said Steve Anderson of River Falls, “Thanks for what you’re trying to do.”

One row had people right next to each other with signs, one reading, “My freedom does not end where fear begins.”

Two tavern owners from Ellsworth said the health department will force businesses to close if they are shut down again. Jason Marks of Broz Bar said that people who had COVID-19 and had been in taverns in River Falls also had been in many other local businesses.

“They were in the bank. They were in the grocery store. But all you hear about is the bar,” he said. “We need to be transparent, not just against the bar industry.”

“Press pause. Do not press go on this ordinance,” said Rachel McCardle.

One man urged civil disobedience if the measure passes.

“You’re assuming people are going to obey. I’m going to say don’t.”

On the county board, he said the measure “has its supporters and its detractors. It’’s not going to pass or fail unanimously.”

He said he favors it for the reason that it changes it from a criminal to a civic matter “if we ever write a ticket.”

“The vast majority of our departments have the authority to write a ticket, and we hardly ever do.”

He said he is surprised by the opposition to the ordinance.

“I am surprised. I really am, but there’s a lot of misinformation. She (the Public Health officer) can’t go into your house. That’s on private property. If you had a large gathering at the gun story, she can’t go and shut the gun store down. As long as there isn’t a license on the facility, she can’t go in there without a court order,” he said. “I never dreamed this would go this way.”

The Pierce County Public Health COVID-19 dashboard on the Pierce County website. Last week, there were 110 confirmed cases.