5 21-0877 Subject: Proof Of Vaccination Emergency Ordinance
From: Councilmember Kalb
Recommendation: Adopt An Emergency Ordinance Adding Oakland Municipal Code Chapter 8.68 To Require Proof Of A Covid-19 Vaccination For Patrons At The Following Indoor Public Locations: (1) Establishments Or Events Where Food Or Drink Is Served Including Restaurants, Bars, Coffee Houses, Clubs, And Banquet Halls; (2) Entertainment Venues, Theaters, Concert Venues, Museums, And Recreation Facilities; (3) Gyms, Fitness Centers And Yoga Studios; (4) Senior Adult Care Facilities And City Senior Center Programs; (5) Dental Offices; (6) Public Libraries; (7) City Hall; And (8) Large Indoor Events At City And Privately-Owned Facilities
On agenda item 5. I have lived in Oakland twice, for a total of five years, but moved due to the high rents in Oakland. My grandson attends school in Oakland. I continue to shop frequently, at gas stations, convenience stores, coffee shops, Whole Foods, Sprouts, use three libraries, and at one of my favorite stores in Temescal, Sagrada. I cannot be vaccinated because of health conditions. But you intend to exclude my entry to many establishments. Where is the justice in that? Where is the ADA? Do not pass this unnecessary ordinance or I will not spend one more dime in your city.
The fact that dental offices are being separated from other medical offices is concerning. Patients should be able to be seen for dental care without the added steps especially if testing is not easily accessible to everyone in a timely fashion and with no added costs.
Doesn’t stop spread. Stop prevent illness. Measure such as these are wholly unnecessary and only serve to “other” individuals who are likely to be already marginalized. Shocking the City of Oakland would even consider this means of excessive discrimination, and for what!?
“Testing is not readily available due to the global supply shortage for dentists to be able to administer tests to all patients. Additionally, we would want to make sure if testing is required, it would be 1) required in all healthcare settings (not just dental) and that 2) the tests should not be an additional financial cost to dentists or patients.
Ideally should be given through readily available community testing sites for free”
I strongly oppose this proposition which not only makes no sense, but I would argue borders on unethical and immoral. We already know, based on the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials, that their covid shots do not prevent covid transmission nor protect one from getting covid, which has proven out to be the case. So then, what would be the point of attempting to segregate the vaccinated from unvaccinated by imposing a vaccine passport as permission to enter into civic and public life? If the idea is to "save lives" and avoid covid death- then at a bare minimum there should be well established, documented, robust true and good science and data that proves the benefit of this approach- of which there is none. This appears to be a punitive, punishing tactic for those who've already made decisions to remain unvaccinated (for likely very well educated, personal, researched reasons) by restricting access to normal life activities and even basic healthcare (dentistry). At a time when we have early covid treatments to prevent hospitalization and death, this draconian passport approach would only further divide the city and instill an oppressive environment of medical discrimination and coercion. I urge you to do the right thing for Oakland and humanity and vote NO.
If this measure would keep people safe, I'd vote for it, but it will make no difference, as vaccinated people are protected against severe disease, and unvaccinated people spread Covid at similar levels to vaccinated people. I have read numerous studies on this, most recently out of Israel and Denmark. What this measure will definitely do is cause unnecessary bureacracy, exclusion, and anger within public life. I am strongly opposed.
My name is Kathryn Sterbenc. I’m president of the Friends of the Oakland Public Library and a member of the OPL Advocates coalition. I’m speaking about Agenda Item 5. The sentiment is a good one – but it does not work for libraries. We ask that you exclude libraries from the proposal. Library advocates are concerned about who would be turned away. Even the modified version of this proposal goes against the whole idea of what a public library is. Inevitably, it would disproportionately impact persons of color. Unhoused persons face an endless struggle to keep IDs, library cards, any paperwork. This would block unhoused persons from entering libraries. Oaklanders who come to libraries to get shelter from the weather, or who have nowhere else to charge devices they depend on, would be blocked from entry. This proposal would violate several aspects of the American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights, specifically the right to privacy and confidentiality in their library use, and availability to all patrons regardless of beliefs or affiliations. These concerns were shared with us by library employees, the ones who would be responsible for enforcement. When employees are trying to maintain distance for everyone’s safety, this would require them to get face to face with every person trying to enter. It also would require a library employee at every entrance when adequate staffing is already a struggle to maintain. Please amend or reject. Thank you.
Before there was a time change for this meeting, every single comment at the time (21 out of 21) were in strong opposition. This was brought to your attention about one week ago where you were asked to transfer the comments over and they are still not visible. Why? Those voices need to be heard.
I strongly oppose this proposed ordinance. I was born here and have been living here my entire life. Oakland is a city that has prided itself on equality, inclusion, and diversity.
To now force the showing of papers for basic healthcare like dental work, or basic public building access, among others, goes against all the principles of this city, would render it unrecognizable, and would cause inequality, division, and segregation. I would no longer want to be a part and would have no other choice but to move.
I prefer not to move, but there are still cities all around this nation that are abiding by the constitution while doing great health-wise, and my family and I need to be where those rights are still protected and honored.
There is no reason whatsoever to justify such actions, but certainly not for something that poses very little serious threat for almost the entire population and for which the current treatments which are still in trials through 2023, have had millions of reported adverse effects, serious injuries, and a substantial number of deaths. And do very little to stop transmission, which all of this is based on.
Thanks for your time, consideration, and humanity.
I have lived in Oakland for 11 years. The diversity and texture is what gives this city its life and vibrancy. I strongly oppose the proposed ordinance to require proof of Covid-19 vaccination. It is unconstitutional, discriminatory and divisive. Besides the fact that all of the vaccines have been proven to not prevent transmission or illness, this ordinance will annihilate small businesses. A significant portion of Oakland residents have made the informed decision to remain unvaccinated, and without their patronage, Oakland businesses will be unable to sustain themselves economically. Unvaccinated residents will spend their incomes in counties and cities that are not under threat of tyranny. Is the legacy that Mayor Schaaf and the Oakland City Council want to be remembered for? If this ordinance passes, Mayor Schaaf and the elected members of the Oakland City Council will be held responsible for failing their oaths to uphold constitutional rights, and will be liable for the economic losses to Oakland businesses.
Please vote NO!!!
This ordinance makes no sense, as there is more and more evidence to show the vaccines do not stop people from getting and transmitting COVID.
Even public health officials and the CDC are saying this.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7050e1.htm
Do any of you voting watch and follow sports and see how decimated some teams are with positive tests, and of course all fully vaccinated?
And follow what’s going on across the world…….
South Africa, where Omichrin surfaced, is seeing its hospital plunge.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-17/s-africa-says-hospitalizations-in-omicron-wave-much-lower
So much so they aren’t even recommending testing and tracing……..
https://www.news24.com/news24/southafrica/news/covid-19-stop-tracing-and-quarantining-of-contacts-says-ministerial-advisory-committee-20211219
Please don’t continue to divide the people of this great city and state and force people out of all these places and potentially hurt all these businesses as well.
Please uphold our basic civil liberties set forth in the constitution as this is no longer about public health to mandate this vaccine.
VOTE NO!!!!!!!!
This will further marginalize people in the flatlands who have the lowest % of vaccinations. They are being coerced to the point that they can’t even go to a gym or a dentist if they don’t comply (on top of having to deal with the highest crime rates in Oakland).
Is the goal to fuel an uprising or to expand possible $62 M shortfall that City of Oakland faces by settling new lawsuits? I hope not and I urge you not to pass the proposed ordinance.
Oakland is already a divided city of haves and have-nots. We’ve had 129 homicides to date this year. Thousands are sleeping outside in the freezing cold without access to toilets or showers while unregulated speculative investors drive up our housing prices to where working-class people can no longer afford to live here. Children are selling their bodies up and down International Blvd while our schools fail to serve large swaths of our students. Many of our businesses have gone under due to last year’s lockdowns. We have terrible air pollution in the flatlands. We have ISSUES. In the middle of all this, the City wants to exclude “the unvaccinated” from libraries? From dentists? From City Hall? From the supports they receive at senior centers? At what cost? Will we pay OPD to monitor every business for compliance?
And who are “the unvaccinated?” Many of us are essential workers you praised as heroes for working thru the lockdown. Now you want to exclude us. Many of us have already recovered from Covid and carry natural immunity far more durable than immunity from vaccination. Some of us have had nightmarish reactions to vaccines or have family members who have. Many of us have darn good reasons to distrust government public health agencies and the pharmaceutical industry. Many of us are low-income folks who are struggling just to get by. Now you want to disenfranchise us further.
This ordinance will not keep anyone safer; it will only deepen our divide. Vote “No!”
The Covid vaccines don't work, but DO cause injuries and deaths.
These vaccines do not provide sterilizing immunity – which means that they do not prevent infection or transmission. They are designed merely to reduce symptoms in those who become infected.
Therefore, requiring them is of no potential benefit to anyone; those who wish to take them are already free to do so. But requiring these shots of people who wish to preserve their dental health, while avoiding unnecessary risk of injury or death, seems cruel and indefensible.
I strongly oppose this ordinance. I work in a hospital and am committed to the health of our community. From my experience working with patients during this time, I've learned that deciding whether or not to get the vaccine can be complicated and nuanced. Some people have chosen to not get it due to their own autoimmune conditions. Others have had negative reactions to other vaccines. Some people have had negative experiences with our medical system and are mistrustful. Still others have personal religious beliefs that lead them to not get vaccines and some other forms of medical services. These are just a few of the complex reasons people may choose to be unvaccinated.
Many of these people are very careful, limit contact with others, and wear a mask. They wish to stay healthy, as we all do.
To deny individuals the ability to see a dentist, complete transactions at city hall, visit the library, or otherwise participate in our community is unfair and discriminatory.
I strongly urge City Council to oppose this agenda item and keep our community equally accessible to everyone.
Thank you.
Cornell University's vaccination rate is 97% ,but they just reported 903 cases from 12/7 to 12/13, and a very high percentage of them are the Omicorn variant, according to CNN on 12/14. South Africa hospitalization rate plunges to only 1.7% in Omicron wave, compared with 19% in previous "Delta-driven" wave. Only 26% of the population in South Africa is fully vaccinated, according to Bloomberg on 12/16. This clearly proves that the vaccine is not able to prevent transmission, and the Omicorn variant is not that severe. So this Ordinance is not helping the "public safety" but dividing our city. Taking the vaccine or not should be a personal choice based on personal and religious beliefs. Taking away their freedom of living like a normal human by forcing them to take the vaccine violates that personal choice.
Everyone's health and medical conditions are personal and private and nobody should be permitted to violate that. The status of vaccination is a personal medical record, and should only be requested or reviewed by medical physician or healthcare professionals. Not the bouncer at the club, nor the servers in the restaurant, nor the worker at the gym.
According to FDA website, there are four vaccines listed which are Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, Comirnaty, Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine and Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine, only Comirnaty is fully approved by FDA, but is not yet available. The rest are still under EUA only. The law is clear. An experimental vaccine cannot be mandated.
I oppose the proof of vaccination in Oakland, my husband has an autoimmune disease that was caused by the vaccine, it has been 3.5 years now living with this disease not knowing if the next day will be good or bad. I am heartbroken to see my husband suffering, from a strong, active and healthy person he became not able to work physically anymore. If this can knock down a strong man, just imagine what it can do to a child or baby. This current vaccine is even worse than the previous ones, after doing my extensive research, I found out many things wrong with this one. This is not about health but fear, control, obedience, segregation, genocide. Those who participate in this act will be judged on every level, please come to your senses before it's too late and VOTE NO ON VACCINE PASSPORT/PROOF OF VACCINATION.
I oppose proof of vaccination in Oakland. I have an autoimmune disease and will not inject the vaccine into my body due to health reasons. I also likely already had the coronavirus earlier this year and likely already have antibodies. Please do not discriminate against those of us to choose what drugs go in our bodies.
The director of the CDC and Anthony Fauci have both publicly confirmed that the currently approved COVID-19 vaccines DO NOT STOP TRANSMISSION. Furthermore, breakthrough cases in VACCINATED individuals currently lead the number of confirmed Omicron COVID-19 cases in the United States. In light of these verifiable facts, please clarify exactly what safety outcomes the city of Oakland would expect from implementing a proof of vaccination program? And, what metrics would the city use to measure the success of this program?
On agenda item 5. I have lived in Oakland twice, for a total of five years, but moved due to the high rents in Oakland. My grandson attends school in Oakland. I continue to shop frequently, at gas stations, convenience stores, coffee shops, Whole Foods, Sprouts, use three libraries, and at one of my favorite stores in Temescal, Sagrada. I cannot be vaccinated because of health conditions. But you intend to exclude my entry to many establishments. Where is the justice in that? Where is the ADA? Do not pass this unnecessary ordinance or I will not spend one more dime in your city.
The fact that dental offices are being separated from other medical offices is concerning. Patients should be able to be seen for dental care without the added steps especially if testing is not easily accessible to everyone in a timely fashion and with no added costs.
Doesn’t stop spread. Stop prevent illness. Measure such as these are wholly unnecessary and only serve to “other” individuals who are likely to be already marginalized. Shocking the City of Oakland would even consider this means of excessive discrimination, and for what!?
I couldn’t have said it better
“Testing is not readily available due to the global supply shortage for dentists to be able to administer tests to all patients. Additionally, we would want to make sure if testing is required, it would be 1) required in all healthcare settings (not just dental) and that 2) the tests should not be an additional financial cost to dentists or patients.
Ideally should be given through readily available community testing sites for free”
I strongly oppose this proposition which not only makes no sense, but I would argue borders on unethical and immoral. We already know, based on the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials, that their covid shots do not prevent covid transmission nor protect one from getting covid, which has proven out to be the case. So then, what would be the point of attempting to segregate the vaccinated from unvaccinated by imposing a vaccine passport as permission to enter into civic and public life? If the idea is to "save lives" and avoid covid death- then at a bare minimum there should be well established, documented, robust true and good science and data that proves the benefit of this approach- of which there is none. This appears to be a punitive, punishing tactic for those who've already made decisions to remain unvaccinated (for likely very well educated, personal, researched reasons) by restricting access to normal life activities and even basic healthcare (dentistry). At a time when we have early covid treatments to prevent hospitalization and death, this draconian passport approach would only further divide the city and instill an oppressive environment of medical discrimination and coercion. I urge you to do the right thing for Oakland and humanity and vote NO.
This further adds a financial burden to providing dental care towards the practice as well as the patients.
Medical apartheid and tyranny. Never.
If this measure would keep people safe, I'd vote for it, but it will make no difference, as vaccinated people are protected against severe disease, and unvaccinated people spread Covid at similar levels to vaccinated people. I have read numerous studies on this, most recently out of Israel and Denmark. What this measure will definitely do is cause unnecessary bureacracy, exclusion, and anger within public life. I am strongly opposed.
My name is Kathryn Sterbenc. I’m president of the Friends of the Oakland Public Library and a member of the OPL Advocates coalition. I’m speaking about Agenda Item 5. The sentiment is a good one – but it does not work for libraries. We ask that you exclude libraries from the proposal. Library advocates are concerned about who would be turned away. Even the modified version of this proposal goes against the whole idea of what a public library is. Inevitably, it would disproportionately impact persons of color. Unhoused persons face an endless struggle to keep IDs, library cards, any paperwork. This would block unhoused persons from entering libraries. Oaklanders who come to libraries to get shelter from the weather, or who have nowhere else to charge devices they depend on, would be blocked from entry. This proposal would violate several aspects of the American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights, specifically the right to privacy and confidentiality in their library use, and availability to all patrons regardless of beliefs or affiliations. These concerns were shared with us by library employees, the ones who would be responsible for enforcement. When employees are trying to maintain distance for everyone’s safety, this would require them to get face to face with every person trying to enter. It also would require a library employee at every entrance when adequate staffing is already a struggle to maintain. Please amend or reject. Thank you.
Before there was a time change for this meeting, every single comment at the time (21 out of 21) were in strong opposition. This was brought to your attention about one week ago where you were asked to transfer the comments over and they are still not visible. Why? Those voices need to be heard.
I strongly oppose this proposed ordinance. I was born here and have been living here my entire life. Oakland is a city that has prided itself on equality, inclusion, and diversity.
To now force the showing of papers for basic healthcare like dental work, or basic public building access, among others, goes against all the principles of this city, would render it unrecognizable, and would cause inequality, division, and segregation. I would no longer want to be a part and would have no other choice but to move.
I prefer not to move, but there are still cities all around this nation that are abiding by the constitution while doing great health-wise, and my family and I need to be where those rights are still protected and honored.
There is no reason whatsoever to justify such actions, but certainly not for something that poses very little serious threat for almost the entire population and for which the current treatments which are still in trials through 2023, have had millions of reported adverse effects, serious injuries, and a substantial number of deaths. And do very little to stop transmission, which all of this is based on.
Thanks for your time, consideration, and humanity.
I have lived in Oakland for 11 years. The diversity and texture is what gives this city its life and vibrancy. I strongly oppose the proposed ordinance to require proof of Covid-19 vaccination. It is unconstitutional, discriminatory and divisive. Besides the fact that all of the vaccines have been proven to not prevent transmission or illness, this ordinance will annihilate small businesses. A significant portion of Oakland residents have made the informed decision to remain unvaccinated, and without their patronage, Oakland businesses will be unable to sustain themselves economically. Unvaccinated residents will spend their incomes in counties and cities that are not under threat of tyranny. Is the legacy that Mayor Schaaf and the Oakland City Council want to be remembered for? If this ordinance passes, Mayor Schaaf and the elected members of the Oakland City Council will be held responsible for failing their oaths to uphold constitutional rights, and will be liable for the economic losses to Oakland businesses.
Please vote NO!!!
This ordinance makes no sense, as there is more and more evidence to show the vaccines do not stop people from getting and transmitting COVID.
Even public health officials and the CDC are saying this.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7050e1.htm
Do any of you voting watch and follow sports and see how decimated some teams are with positive tests, and of course all fully vaccinated?
And follow what’s going on across the world…….
South Africa, where Omichrin surfaced, is seeing its hospital plunge.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-17/s-africa-says-hospitalizations-in-omicron-wave-much-lower
So much so they aren’t even recommending testing and tracing……..
https://www.news24.com/news24/southafrica/news/covid-19-stop-tracing-and-quarantining-of-contacts-says-ministerial-advisory-committee-20211219
Please don’t continue to divide the people of this great city and state and force people out of all these places and potentially hurt all these businesses as well.
Please uphold our basic civil liberties set forth in the constitution as this is no longer about public health to mandate this vaccine.
VOTE NO!!!!!!!!
This will further marginalize people in the flatlands who have the lowest % of vaccinations. They are being coerced to the point that they can’t even go to a gym or a dentist if they don’t comply (on top of having to deal with the highest crime rates in Oakland).
Is the goal to fuel an uprising or to expand possible $62 M shortfall that City of Oakland faces by settling new lawsuits? I hope not and I urge you not to pass the proposed ordinance.
Oakland is already a divided city of haves and have-nots. We’ve had 129 homicides to date this year. Thousands are sleeping outside in the freezing cold without access to toilets or showers while unregulated speculative investors drive up our housing prices to where working-class people can no longer afford to live here. Children are selling their bodies up and down International Blvd while our schools fail to serve large swaths of our students. Many of our businesses have gone under due to last year’s lockdowns. We have terrible air pollution in the flatlands. We have ISSUES. In the middle of all this, the City wants to exclude “the unvaccinated” from libraries? From dentists? From City Hall? From the supports they receive at senior centers? At what cost? Will we pay OPD to monitor every business for compliance?
And who are “the unvaccinated?” Many of us are essential workers you praised as heroes for working thru the lockdown. Now you want to exclude us. Many of us have already recovered from Covid and carry natural immunity far more durable than immunity from vaccination. Some of us have had nightmarish reactions to vaccines or have family members who have. Many of us have darn good reasons to distrust government public health agencies and the pharmaceutical industry. Many of us are low-income folks who are struggling just to get by. Now you want to disenfranchise us further.
This ordinance will not keep anyone safer; it will only deepen our divide. Vote “No!”
The Covid vaccines don't work, but DO cause injuries and deaths.
These vaccines do not provide sterilizing immunity – which means that they do not prevent infection or transmission. They are designed merely to reduce symptoms in those who become infected.
Therefore, requiring them is of no potential benefit to anyone; those who wish to take them are already free to do so. But requiring these shots of people who wish to preserve their dental health, while avoiding unnecessary risk of injury or death, seems cruel and indefensible.
I strongly oppose this ordinance. I work in a hospital and am committed to the health of our community. From my experience working with patients during this time, I've learned that deciding whether or not to get the vaccine can be complicated and nuanced. Some people have chosen to not get it due to their own autoimmune conditions. Others have had negative reactions to other vaccines. Some people have had negative experiences with our medical system and are mistrustful. Still others have personal religious beliefs that lead them to not get vaccines and some other forms of medical services. These are just a few of the complex reasons people may choose to be unvaccinated.
Many of these people are very careful, limit contact with others, and wear a mask. They wish to stay healthy, as we all do.
To deny individuals the ability to see a dentist, complete transactions at city hall, visit the library, or otherwise participate in our community is unfair and discriminatory.
I strongly urge City Council to oppose this agenda item and keep our community equally accessible to everyone.
Thank you.
Cornell University's vaccination rate is 97% ,but they just reported 903 cases from 12/7 to 12/13, and a very high percentage of them are the Omicorn variant, according to CNN on 12/14. South Africa hospitalization rate plunges to only 1.7% in Omicron wave, compared with 19% in previous "Delta-driven" wave. Only 26% of the population in South Africa is fully vaccinated, according to Bloomberg on 12/16. This clearly proves that the vaccine is not able to prevent transmission, and the Omicorn variant is not that severe. So this Ordinance is not helping the "public safety" but dividing our city. Taking the vaccine or not should be a personal choice based on personal and religious beliefs. Taking away their freedom of living like a normal human by forcing them to take the vaccine violates that personal choice.
Everyone's health and medical conditions are personal and private and nobody should be permitted to violate that. The status of vaccination is a personal medical record, and should only be requested or reviewed by medical physician or healthcare professionals. Not the bouncer at the club, nor the servers in the restaurant, nor the worker at the gym.
According to FDA website, there are four vaccines listed which are Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, Comirnaty, Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine and Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine, only Comirnaty is fully approved by FDA, but is not yet available. The rest are still under EUA only. The law is clear. An experimental vaccine cannot be mandated.
I oppose the proof of vaccination in Oakland, my husband has an autoimmune disease that was caused by the vaccine, it has been 3.5 years now living with this disease not knowing if the next day will be good or bad. I am heartbroken to see my husband suffering, from a strong, active and healthy person he became not able to work physically anymore. If this can knock down a strong man, just imagine what it can do to a child or baby. This current vaccine is even worse than the previous ones, after doing my extensive research, I found out many things wrong with this one. This is not about health but fear, control, obedience, segregation, genocide. Those who participate in this act will be judged on every level, please come to your senses before it's too late and VOTE NO ON VACCINE PASSPORT/PROOF OF VACCINATION.
I oppose proof of vaccination in Oakland. I have an autoimmune disease and will not inject the vaccine into my body due to health reasons. I also likely already had the coronavirus earlier this year and likely already have antibodies. Please do not discriminate against those of us to choose what drugs go in our bodies.
The director of the CDC and Anthony Fauci have both publicly confirmed that the currently approved COVID-19 vaccines DO NOT STOP TRANSMISSION. Furthermore, breakthrough cases in VACCINATED individuals currently lead the number of confirmed Omicron COVID-19 cases in the United States. In light of these verifiable facts, please clarify exactly what safety outcomes the city of Oakland would expect from implementing a proof of vaccination program? And, what metrics would the city use to measure the success of this program?