Portland city councilors plan to talk soon about whether to continue an emergency order that has allowed them to meet remotely because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The order – enacted Aug. 2, shortly after Gov. Janet Mills let her statewide emergency declaration expire – has no set end date, but the City Council is expected to discuss it on Dec. 20. The issue is being raised as Maine is seeing record numbers of coronavirus cases and as hospitals are struggling to keep up.

The council also has to consider other factors, such as recent requests by residents that in-person meetings resume.

The scope of the current emergency order is limited, but revisiting it may bring up other issues, such as whether the city might take additional steps to respond to the pandemic, such as a mask mandate, which it has so far rejected. Keeping the emergency order in effect into the new year would trigger a new hazard pay provision on Jan. 1 requiring that employees in the city be paid 1.5 times the minimum wage for working during a city, county or state emergency.

Councilors on Friday offered a range of opinions on the emergency order, in-person meetings and whether to reconsider a mask mandate, which could only be implemented under an emergency order. Three of the council’s nine members are newly inaugurated so its stance could be different than it was the last time these issues came up.

The agenda for the Dec. 20 meeting hasn’t been released yet, but Mayor Kate Snyder said the city has been planning for some time to discuss the emergency order because of the requests for in-person meetings. She said the issue of whether to meet in person should be looked at separately from a mask mandate. The council also has a remote participation policy that could allow it to resume in-person meetings while keeping the flexibility to hold remote or hybrid meetings without the order, which Snyder said is an additional factor to consider.

Snyder said it was too far out from the meeting to comment on whether in-person meetings would make sense. “A few weeks ago people were really urging us to get back in person for the inaugural meeting, but given the surge in cases, people may be feeling differently right now,” she said.

HYBRID AN OPTION

Councilor April Fournier said she would be hesitant to lift the emergency order given the caseload the state is seeing, but she would support a hybrid meeting model in which the remote option would still exist and masks would be worn at in-person meetings. She also wants to talk about a mask mandate. “I absolutely would consider, if not actively advocate for, a mask mandate,” Fournier said. “Vaccination is great, but it’s a combination of risk mitigation strategies that is really what will lead to COVID going down.”

Councilor Pious Ali also is open to discussing a mask mandate. “Cumberland County may be safer than other counties in the state, but we don’t have a way of knowing where people are coming from,” Ali said. “Are they coming from Cumberland County or are they coming from other counties that aren’t doing good? And are these individuals vaccinated? Are they taking precautions?”

Councilor Roberto Rodriguez, who served on the school board before being elected to the council in November, believes a discussion on the emergency order also could be a good time to talk about a mask mandate. He also is open to finding ways for meetings to be held safely in person. “The school board is meeting in person – and so if the council can achieve the same objective, to have our council meetings in person … I’d like to explore that,” Rodriguez said.

The council considered a mask mandate in October but voted it down shortly after approving a resolution calling on the city to redouble its public education and outreach to try to stop the spread of the coronavirus.

“We have a lot to discuss when it comes to a potential mask mandate and navigating this pandemic, and with the number of cases rising, it’s our city’s responsibility to keep everyone as safe and healthy as possible,” newly seated Councilor Victoria Pelletier wrote in an email. “However, I also want to make sure we’re recognizing businesses who are implementing vaccine requirements for patrons – I look forward to discussing this further with the council, and I encourage everyone to reach out to their councilor and submit public comment so that all voices can be heard.”

‘A PERSISTENT CONDITION’

Some councilors said Friday that they are in favor of lifting the emergency order because more and more COVID is becoming a part of daily life.

“I think the virus or mutations of the virus will be a persistent condition for a long time to come,” Councilor Mark Dion said. “States of emergency are supposed to deal with a problem that has a certain immediacy to it. I don’t know if it’s an appropriate vehicle to manage something that goes from an immediate crisis to a persistent condition.”

Councilor Tae Chong raised questions about how the city would enforce a mask mandate, and said he wasn’t aware of any other cities or towns in Maine that are operating under emergency orders. “We’re the last city in the state, I think, to have a state of emergency,” Chong said. “I think we need to figure out how to lift that and move forward.”

If the emergency order stays in place, it would trigger implementation of a new hazard pay provision on Jan. 1 that would raise the minimum wage of $13 an hour to $19.50 an hour as long as the city remained under the order. Some councilors wanted to make it clear that hazard pay wouldn’t be their main consideration when they look at the emergency order.

“I think what we’re talking about is getting back to in-person meetings or not – and if the issue of a mask mandate comes before the council or not and is supported, then an emergency order would be put in place,” Snyder said. “I really don’t want to opine on the hazard pay piece of it because to me that’s really not what’s driving this conversation, and the community obviously is fully aware of the hazard pay issue approved by voters back in November 2020.”

HAZARD PAY ISN’T THE ISSUE

“I know a lot of folks are talking about the hazard pay component,” Councilor Andrew Zarro said. “But the way I’m looking at this right now, this is about public health. Yes, if the emergency order stays in effect, it will trigger hazard pay, but I would be surprised and upset if folks made decisions in that order. We shouldn’t decide if we’re in a state of emergency because we want to trigger hazard pay or not. It’s the other way around.”

Zarro said he has been hearing from residents in favor of a mask mandate as well as some who are hesitant, and it’s something he would consider supporting if it were to come back before the council. “Portland is doing a great job and Cumberland County is doing a great job with masks and vaccination rates, but we have to remember Portland is the biggest city in the state and people come here for work and to shop,” Zarro said. “Just because Portland is doing a great job, it doesn’t mean we don’t bear the brunt of the region.”

The Portland Regional Chamber of Commerce, which sued the city last year in an effort to overturn the hazard pay initiative, said in a newsletter this week that it felt the state of emergency was no longer needed, though some businesses have expressed support for both the emergency order and a mask mandate.

Erin Kiley, co-owner of the Portland Flea for All, a vintage, antiques and artisan market on Congress Street, posted on the store’s Instagram page Thursday urging the city to keep the emergency order. “The status quo is not working,” she wrote. “We need a mask mandate. We need real leadership and guidance. If I sound tired and frustrated, it’s because I am.”

In an interview Friday, Kiley said it has been difficult as a small-business owner to enforce mask rules and she’s heard from numerous customers visiting from other states or cities who don’t feel safe in Portland. “It shouldn’t be left to businesses to write the rules to protect public health and it shouldn’t be on businesses to be the bad guys,” she said. “There should be a support system from the government to make sure everyone is sort of equally protected.”

Copy the Story Link

« Previous

Part 2: Protests and Prayers

Next »

Toy Fund donors provide what children need right now: joy