latimes--2020-05-19--Photos: Stadiums and lots overflow with cars as coronavirus takes an economic toll

As Major League Baseball struggles to begin the 2020 season , stadiums remain empty .
Throughout the U.S. , rental car companies have parked hundreds of thousands of unused cars as COVID-19 runs its methodical course , sickening Americans and grinding the economy to a halt .
Particularly decimated is the travel industry .
People aren ’ t traveling through airports , so no one is renting cars .
Seen from above , places such as Dodger Stadium and Santa Anita racetrack look as if it ’ s a big day at the yard , when , in fact , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sales are down too , creating a glut of vehicles that Americans suddenly have little desire to purchase as they confront the coronavirus crisis .
That excess has led to choked L.A.-area ports .
For example , Toyota Logistics Services at the Port of Long Beach is normally a beehive of activity as new cars are off loaded from ships , parked and prepped at the yard , and sent off quickly to dealerships throughout the Southland .
Now , Toyota Motor Corp. has leased additional storage space at a sports venue in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of vehicle-packed parking lots across Southern California , an illustration of the economic toll wrought by the coronavirus on the automobile industry .

As Major League Baseball struggles to begin the 2020 season, stadiums remain empty.
But their parking lots aren’t.
Throughout the U.S., rental car companies have parked hundreds of thousands of unused cars as COVID-19 runs its methodical course, sickening Americans and grinding the economy to a halt. Particularly decimated is the travel industry. People aren’t traveling through airports, so no one is renting cars.
Seen from above, places such as Dodger Stadium and Santa Anita racetrack look as if it’s a big day at the yard, when, in fact, the stands are empty.
New cars sales are down too, creating a glut of vehicles that Americans suddenly have little desire to purchase as they confront the coronavirus crisis.
Advertisement
That excess has led to choked L.A.-area ports. For example, Toyota Logistics Services at the Port of Long Beach is normally a beehive of activity as new cars are off-loaded from ships, parked and prepped at the yard, and sent off quickly to dealerships throughout the Southland. Now, Toyota Motor Corp. has leased additional storage space at a sports venue in California.
Here are some views of vehicle-packed parking lots across Southern California, an illustration of the economic toll wrought by the coronavirus on the automobile industry.
Dodger Stadium
Thousands of rental cars, framed by the Los Angeles skyline, are stored at Dodger Stadium. (Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)
A drone takes a bird’s-eye view of the cars stored at Dodger Stadium. (Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)
Santa Anita Park
Thousands of cars are stored at the Santa Anita racetrack parking lot. (Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)
Advertisement
Rows of vehicles fill the Santa Anita racetrack parking lot. (Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)
Angel Stadium of Anaheim
Rental vehicles are stored at Angel Stadium of Anaheim. (Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)
Rental cars sit idle at Angel Stadium. (Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)
Port of Long Beach
New cars sit in storage at Toyota Logistics Services yard at the Port of Long Beach. (Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)
Myriad stored new vehicles form patterns when viewed from above at the Toyota Logistics Services yard. (Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)


latimes--2020-05-20--Listen to the new L.A. Times podcast 'It was Simple: The Betty Broderick Murders'

The Los Angeles Times is launching a new podcast called “ It was Simple : The Betty Broderick Murders , ” written and hosted by me , Patt Morrison , a columnist and reporter .
It ’ s amazing , really , the events of our shared history that we forget… and those that we remember .
Even people who weren ’ t alive 30 years ago know and care about the case of Betty Broderick , the La Jolla , Calif. , woman who seemed to have everything in the world going for her , until her husband decided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dan Broderick split up , they stayed locked together in a way , pushing each other ’ s buttons , until there were two bodies and one killer – the ex-husband , his new wife Linda , and an angry , left-behind Betty .
Beyond the seamy aspects that you ’ d find in any crime story , you find something else – things that fascinate us because something in these stories IS us .
We may not be rich , or live in La Jolla , but we test ourselves against these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our relationship split up like this ?
Is there anything that would drive us to murder ?
For more than 30 years , there have been Betty Broderick TV movies , and books , and now Facebook pages , where some people say that they sympathized with her up until she pulled the trigger , and some , fewer , who had terrible divorces themselves and said , “ Atta girl , Betty – what took you so long ?
” In my new podcast , we ’ ll hear from her divorce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ foreman of the jury that convicted her , among other voices that capture the significance of events surrounding the murders .
Plus , we speak with one of Linda ’ s best friends , who spent time with the couple the day before they died .
We explore what makes this one case still so engrossing 30 years later … and maybe learn something about ourselves along the way .
“ It was Simple : The Betty Broderick Murders , ” is a four-part podcast that premieres May 26 .
Subscribe today , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It Was Simple : The Betty Broderick Murders ” is written and reported by Patt Morrison .
It ’ s produced by the Los Angeles Times with support from L.A. Times Studios and Spoke Media .
Our Producers are Paige Hymson , Jenna Hannum and Carson McCain .
Our Audio Engineer is Will Short , and our editor is Steve Clow .
We got production help from Kelly Kolff and Aleisha Force .
Our original music is composed by Will Short from Spoke Media .
Our theme Song is by Hayley Lynn and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came from FirstCom .
Special thanks to Julia Turner , Shelby Grad , Clint Schaff , Jeff Glasser , Mary Kate Metivier , Justin L. Abrotsky , Christian Orozco and Lora Victorio .
And thanks to everyone who granted us access to their archives .
“ It Was Simple ” is executive produced by Abbie Fentress Swanson for the L.A. Times , Keith Reynolds and Alia Tavakolian for Spoke Media .

The Los Angeles Times is launching a new podcast called “It Was Simple: The Betty Broderick Murders,” written and hosted by me, Patt Morrison, a columnist and reporter. It’s amazing, really, the events of our shared history that we forget … and those that we remember.
Even people who weren’t alive 30 years ago know and care about the case of Betty Broderick, the La Jolla woman who seemed to have everything in the world going for her, until her husband decided to leave. Even though Betty and Dan Broderick split up, they stayed locked together in a way, pushing each other’s buttons, until there were two bodies and one killer — the ex-husband, his new wife, Linda, and an angry, left-behind Betty. Beyond the seamy aspects that you’d find in any crime story, you find something else — things that fascinate us because something in these stories IS us. We may not be rich, or live in La Jolla, but we test ourselves against these stories. How would WE react if our relationship split up like this? Is there anything that would drive us to murder?
1 / 16 Elisabeth “Betty” Broderick is led by marshals through the hallways of the downtown San Diego County Courthouse on her way to a holding cell after being convicted of the murder of her ex-husband, Dan, and his new wife, Linda, on Dec. 10, 1991. (Don Kohlbauer / San Diego Union-Tribune) 2 / 16 Linda and Dan Broderick, right, some months before their marriage, are shown with San Diego attorney Vincent Bartolotta Jr. (File photo) 3 / 16 Broderick cries while testifying in her own defense Nov. 5, 1991. (Michael Darden / San Diego Union-Tribune) 4 / 16 Daniel and Linda Broderick’s house on Aug. 17, 1990. (Lillian Kossacoff / San Diego Union-Tribune) 5 / 16 The weapon used to kill Dan and Linda Broderick, photographed during the trial of Betty Broderick on Nov. 14, 1991. (Michael Franklin / San Diego Union-Tribune) 6 / 16 Broderick pleads not guilty on Nov. 15, 1989. With her is attorney Mark Wolf. (Jerry McClard / San Diego Union-Tribune) 7 / 16 Broderick on Nov. 14, 1991, during her trial. (Michael Franklin / San Diego Union-Tribune) 8 / 16 Broderick looks across the courtroom on Nov. 13, 1991, at the downtown San Diego County Courthouse. (Jack Yon / San Diego Union-Tribune) 9 / 16 Prosecutor Kerry Wells holds a photograph during the trial on Oct. 15, 1991. (Michael Darden / San Diego Union-Tribune) 10 / 16 Medical Examiner Christopher Swalwell, left, shows the path of bullets that killed Linda Broderick as prosecutor Paul Burakoff looks on in Betty Broderick’s retrial on Oct. 16, 1991. (Michael Darden / San Diego Union-Tribune) 11 / 16 Broderick fights back tears while answering questions from defense attorney Jack Earley on Oct. 30, 1990. (Jack Yon / San Diego Union-Tribune) 12 / 16 Betty Broderick during her trial. (San Diego Union-Tribune) 13 / 16 Jack Earley, one of the top criminal defense attorneys in Orange County, is shown in his Irvine law library. Among his high-profile clients is Betty Broderick. (Don Bartletti / Los Angeles Times) 14 / 16 Dan Broderick in an undated photo. (San Diego Union-Tribune) 15 / 16 Betty Broderick smiles as the jury reads its verdict on Dec. 10, 1991. Her attorney, Jack Earley, reacts differently. (J.T. MacMillan / San Diego Union-Tribune) 16 / 16 Betty Broderick serves her sentence at the California Institution for Women in Chino. (K.C. Alfred / San Diego Union-Tribune)
Advertisement
For more than 30 years, there have been Betty Broderick TV movies, and books, and now Facebook pages, where some people say that they sympathized with her up until she pulled the trigger, and some, fewer, who had terrible divorces themselves and said, “Atta girl, Betty — what took you so long?”
In my new podcast, we’ll hear from her divorce attorney, her defense attorney and the foreman of the jury that convicted her, among other voices that capture the significance of events surrounding the murders. Plus, we speak with one of Linda’s best friends, who spent time with the couple the day before they died. We explore what makes this one case still so engrossing 30 years later … and maybe learn something about ourselves along the way. “It Was Simple: The Betty Broderick Murders” is a four-part podcast that premieres May 26. Subscribe today, wherever you get your podcasts.


latimes--2020-05-20--L.A. Surge Hospital for COVID-19 patients to close by the end of June

The state-funded Los Angeles Surge Hospital , which has seen relatively few patients since it opened five weeks ago to treat an anticipated overflow of COVID-19 cases , will close at the end of June , a source in Gov .
Gavin Newsom ’ s administration said Tuesday .
The hospital , located on the grounds of the shuttered St. Vincent Medical Center near downtown Los Angeles , was set up to handle as many as 270 patients a day .
But the hospital has never had more than 25 patients at a time , officials said .
When the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be overrun by patients , the state signed a six-month , $ 16-million lease with Verity Health System , which owned St. Vincent and had declared bankruptcy .
The state also paid healthcare companies Kaiser Permanente and Dignity Health a monthly management fee of $ 500,000 each to oversee the Los Angeles hospital .
“ At the beginning of this crisis , we didn ’ t know what the challenges would be , ” said Dr. Jamie Taylor , who ran the surge hospital ’ s intensive care unit .
“ So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be done .
But now the smart thing to do is to adapt , based on what the community needs.
” Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong , who owns The Times , purchased St. Vincent for $ 135 million in a deal that was finalized in early April .
His global health firm NantWorks is a creditor in Verity ’ s bankruptcy proceedings .
The state ’ s lease was transferred to Soon-Shiong , but he was not involved in the operation of the surge hospital .
The state had initially anticipated needing 50,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ began to execute “ surge plans ” that would add 30,000 beds to their count .
The rest would come from medical centers like St. Vincent and Seton Medical Center in the Bay Area , as well as field medical stations set up at convention centers and fairgrounds , and the U.S. Navy ’ s Mercy hospital ship .
After two months docked in San Pedro , the Mercy returned to its home port of San Diego last week .
At its peak , the Los Angeles Surge Hospital employed nearly 500 personnel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and support staff .
Many worked at the hospital while continuing to serve patients in other facilities throughout Southern California .
Soon-Shiong said at the time he purchased St. Vincent Medical Center that he planned to use buildings on the 10-acre campus for COVID-19 research .
Seton Medical Center , which has been exclusively treating COVID-19 patients , is also ending its agreement with the state .
Times staff writer Taryn Luna , in Sacramento , contributed to this report .

The Los Angeles Surge Hospital opened in April on the grounds of the shuttered St. Vincent Medical Center to treat COVID-19 patients.
The state-funded Los Angeles Surge Hospital, which has seen relatively few patients since it opened five weeks ago to treat an anticipated overflow of COVID-19 cases, will close by June 30, officials said Wednesday.
In addition, emergency medical facilities that had been set up throughout the state will begin reducing operations, according to the California Health and Human Services Agency and Governor’s Office of Emergency Services.
The Los Angeles Surge Hospital, located on the grounds of the shuttered St. Vincent Medical Center near downtown Los Angeles, was set up to handle as many as 270 patients a day. But the hospital has never had more than 25 patients at a time, officials said.
When the coronavirus crisis began and officials feared hospitals would be overrun, the state signed a six-month, $16-million lease with Verity Health System, which owned St. Vincent and had declared bankruptcy.
Advertisement
The state also paid healthcare companies Kaiser Permanente and Dignity Health a monthly management fee of $500,000 each to oversee the hospital.
“At the beginning of this crisis, we didn’t know what the challenges would be,” said Dr. Jamie Taylor, who ran the surge hospital’s intensive care unit. “So creating this hospital was something that had to be done. But now the smart thing to do is to adapt, based on what the community needs.”
Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, who owns The Times, purchased St. Vincent for $135 million in a deal that was finalized in early April. His global health firm NantWorks is a creditor in Verity’s bankruptcy proceedings.
The state’s lease was transferred to Soon-Shiong, but he was not involved in the operation of the surge hospital.
The state had initially anticipated needing 50,000 hospital beds for COVID-19 patients. Hospitals began to execute “surge plans” that would add 30,000 beds to their count. The rest would come from medical centers like St. Vincent, as well as field medical stations set up at convention centers and fairgrounds, and the U.S. Navy’s Mercy hospital ship.
As part of the winding down of emergency medical sites throughout the state, the Mercy, which had been docked in San Pedro since March 27, returned to its home port in San Diego on Friday.
The former oil tanker-turned-hospital ship had capacity for treating about 500 patients. In Los Angeles, its mission was to treat patients from local hospitals who had tested negative for COVID-19, though some crew members were taken off the ship after testing positive for the coronavirus, a Navy spokesperson confirmed.
Advertisement
By the time the Mercy sailed home, medical staff had cared for 77 patients for gunshot and stab wounds, injuries sustained in a traffic accident and a surgery to replace a pacemaker. Some Navy medical personnel from the ship will remain in the Los Angeles region to provide support as needed.
In Costa Mesa, the Fairview Developmental Center, which also provided medical support to residents of Orange County, will begin scaling back operations on July 1.
Elsewhere throughout the state, medical stations, set up by the Department of Health and Human Services, will continue to be maintained by local administrators as operations conclude.
At its peak, the Los Angeles Surge Hospital employed nearly 500 personnel, from doctors and nurses to administrators and support staff. Many worked at the hospital while continuing to serve patients in other facilities throughout Southern California.
Soon-Shiong said at the time he purchased St. Vincent Medical Center that he planned to use buildings on the 10-acre campus for COVID-19 research.
Times staff writer Taryn Luna, in Sacramento, contributed to this report.


latimes--2020-05-19--Celebrity tattoo artist charged with YouTube star's death in crash

Los Angeles County prosecutors Tuesday charged a tattoo artist with the murder of Corey La Barrie , a YouTube personality @ @ @ @ @ earlier this month in Valley Village .
The Los Angeles Police Department said Daniel Joseph @ @ @ @ @ featured on the “ Ink Master ” reality television show , was driving “ at @ @ @ @ @ ” with La Barrie in a McLaren 600LT when he lost control of the high-powered @ @ @ @ @ May 10 .
Silva drove the car off the road , hitting a stop sign @ @ @ @ @ intersection of Huston Street and Carpenter Avenue in Valley Village , the LAPD said .
@ @ @ @ @ was stopped by people who came to help , according to the police .
La @ @ @ @ @ .
It was his 25th birthday .
Silva , a 26-year-old resident of North Hollywood @ @ @ @ @ the crash and remains in custody on a $ 2-million bond , booking records show @

Los Angeles County prosecutors Tuesday charged a tattoo artist with the murder of Corey La Barrie, a YouTube personality who died in a crash earlier this month in Valley Village.
The Los Angeles Police Department said Daniel Joseph Silva, who has been featured on the “Ink Master” reality television show, was driving “at a high rate of speed” with La Barrie in a McLaren 600LT when he lost control of the high-powered sports car the night of May 10.
Silva drove the car off the road, hitting a stop sign and a tree at the intersection of Huston Street and Carpenter Avenue in Valley Village, the LAPD said. He tried to flee but was stopped by people who came to help, according to the police.
Advertisement
La Barrie died at a hospital. It was his 25th birthday.
Silva, a 26-year-old resident of North Hollywood, was arrested shortly after the crash and remains in custody on a $2-million bond, booking records show.


latimes--2020-05-19--L.A. pet grooming services, car washes can reopen, Garcetti says

L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti announced that pet grooming and training services as well as all car washes would be allowed to open immediately .
Customers can drop off and pick up their pets outside the store , but like other retail shops only employees will be allowed to enter the building , Garcetti said .
Mobile pet grooming services must follow physical distancing protocol , he added .
The mayor reiterated the importance of staying home , practicing social distancing , hand washing and wearing face coverings .
“ The more that you keep your physical distance , the quicker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to even more spaces , ” he said , adding that studies indicate that the virus ’ spread could be slowed just from people covering their faces in public .
On average , he said , the city has had about 740 cases each day for the last seven days .
But while the number of cases is staying steady , Tuesday marked “ the second-highest number of deaths that we have seen.
” “ So anybody who thinks we are out of the woods we are not , ” Garcetti said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is to more fully reopen the economy by July 4 , officials said Tuesday .
The mission is to safely reopen retail businesses , restaurants and malls .
But getting there will be slow going .
“ We have to do a lot of things right so we can actually get to that date , ” L.A. County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer said .
“ I think the reality is that we are going to really aim together to get there as quickly as possible , but we ’ re going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
”

Hertz and Enterprise are both cutting back on the water used to wash their rental fleets.
L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti announced that pet grooming and training services as well as all car washes would be allowed to open immediately.
Customers can drop off and pick up their pets outside the store, but like other retail shops only employees will be allowed to enter the building, Garcetti said.
Mobile pet grooming services must follow physical distancing protocol, he added. The mayor reiterated the importance of staying home, practicing social distancing, hand washing and wearing face coverings.
Advertisement
“The more that you keep your physical distance, the quicker we’ll be able to return to even more spaces,” he said, adding that studies indicate that the virus’ spread could be slowed just from people covering their faces in public.
On average, he said, the city has had about 940 cases each day for the last seven days.
But while the number of cases is staying steady, Tuesday marked “the second-highest number of deaths that we have seen.”
“So anybody who thinks we are out of the woods we are not,” Garcetti said.
Los Angeles County officials’ newest goal is to more fully reopen the economy by July 4, officials said Tuesday.
The mission is to safely reopen retail businesses, restaurants and malls. But getting there will be slow going.
“We have to do a lot of things right so we can actually get to that date,” L.A. County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer said. “I think the reality is that we are going to really aim together to get there as quickly as possible, but we’re going to pay attention to the data and science.”


latimes--2020-05-19--Justice Department warns California coronavirus rules may violate religious freedoms

The measures Gov .
Gavin Newsom enacted to slow the spread of the coronavirus and his plans to unwind them may discriminate against religious groups and violate their constitutional rights , the U.S. Justice Department warned in a letter Tuesday .
In a three-page letter to the governor , Eric S. Dreiband , an assistant attorney general and the head of the Justice Department ’ s civil rights division , said Newsom had shown “ unequal treatment of faith communities ” in restricting their abilities to gather and ultimately reopen .
“ Simply put , there is no pandemic exception @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Rights , ” Dreiband wrote .
Newsom ’ s office had no comment beyond confirming that it had received the letter .
Dreiband raised issues both with California ’ s stay-at-home order and Newsom ’ s plan to roll it back .
While worshipers can not gather in person , even while following social distancing protocols , California has deemed employees in the entertainment and e-commerce industries essential and allowed them to continue working in person , “ regardless of whether the product they are selling and shipping are life-preserving products or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This facially discriminates against religious exercise , ” he said .
Moreover , Dreiband wrote , the governor has permitted restaurants , shopping malls and offices to resume operations in the second phase of his plan to reopen California ’ s economy , but houses of worship can not hold in-person services until its third , later phase .
“ The Constitution calls for California to do more to accommodate religious worship , including in stage 2 of the reopening plan , ” Dreiband said .
In April , the Justice Department intervened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the city of Greenville , whose police officers had broken up a service held in the church ’ s parking lot .
At the time , Atty .
Gen. William Barr said religious groups “ must not be singled out for special burdens.
” For the most part , religious institutions in California have followed the state ’ s stay-at-home rules , canceling services and curtailing in-person contact .
A handful of churches , however , have flouted these rules .
In Butte County , public health officials upbraided a congregation for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Day , defying county orders .
One churchgoer has since tested positive for COVID-19 , potentially exposing 180 other attendees to the virus , according to county officials , who have since tried to track down every attendee and instruct them to self-quarantine .
“ For 7 weeks we have been kept out of our church and away from our church family , ” the church ’ s pastor , Mike Jacobsen , wrote on Facebook .
“ I am fully aware that some people may not understand that for our church @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fellowship.
” Several churches and parishioners have asked federal judges to keep Newsom from enforcing the restrictions on worship .
None so far have been successful .
Wendy Gish , a parishioner at the Shield of Faith Family Church in Fontana , had asked a judge in Los Angeles to strike down the prohibition .
“ My sincerely held religious belief is that God commands me , and other believers , to regularly come together to worship him , ” Gish said in a declaration .
U.S. District Judge Jesus G. Bernal ruled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gathering is not analogous to picking up groceries , food or medicine , where people enter a building quickly , do not engage directly with others except at points of sale , and leave once the task is complete , ” he wrote .
“ Instead , it is more analogous to attending school or a concert — activities where people sit together in an enclosed space to share a communal experience.
” In Sacramento , a federal judge denied a similar request from Cross Culture Christian Center , a church in Lodi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , government officials must often strike the delicate balance between ensuring public safety and preserving the Constitution ’ s fundamental guarantees , ” U.S. District Judge John A. Mendez wrote .
“ But during public health crises , new considerations come to bear , and government officials must ask whether even fundamental rights must give way to a deeper need to control the spread of infectious disease and protect the lives of society ’ s most vulnerable .
”

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office had no immediate comment on the letter.
The measures Gov. Gavin Newsom enacted to slow the spread of the coronavirus and his plans to unwind them may discriminate against religious groups and violate their constitutional rights, the U.S. Justice Department warned in a letter Tuesday.
In a three-page letter to the governor, Eric S. Dreiband, an assistant attorney general and the head of the Justice Department’s civil rights division, said Newsom had shown “unequal treatment of faith communities” in restricting their abilities to gather and ultimately reopen.
“Simply put, there is no pandemic exception to the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights,” Dreiband wrote.
Advertisement
Newsom’s office had no comment beyond confirming that it had received the letter.
Dreiband raised issues both with California’s stay-at-home order and Newsom’s plan to roll it back. While worshipers cannot gather in person, even while following social distancing protocols, California has deemed employees in the entertainment and e-commerce industries essential and allowed them to continue working in person, “regardless of whether the product they are selling and shipping are life-preserving products or not,” Dreiband said.
“This facially discriminates against religious exercise,” he said.
Moreover, Dreiband wrote, the governor has permitted restaurants, shopping malls and offices to resume operations in the second phase of his plan to reopen California’s economy, but houses of worship cannot hold in-person services until its third, later phase.
“The Constitution calls for California to do more to accommodate religious worship, including in stage 2 of the reopening plan,” Dreiband said.
In April, the Justice Department intervened in a dispute between a Mississippi church and the city of Greenville, whose police officers had broken up a service held in the church’s parking lot. At the time, Atty. Gen. William Barr said religious groups “must not be singled out for special burdens.”
Advertisement
For the most part, religious institutions in California have followed the state’s stay-at-home rules, canceling services and curtailing in-person contact.
A handful of churches, however, have flouted these rules. In Butte County, public health officials upbraided a congregation for holding an in-person service for Mother’s Day, defying county orders. One churchgoer has since tested positive for COVID-19, potentially exposing 180 other attendees to the virus, according to county officials, who have since tried to track down every attendee and instruct them to self-quarantine.
“For 7 weeks we have been kept out of our church and away from our church family,” the church’s pastor, Mike Jacobsen, wrote on Facebook. “I am fully aware that some people may not understand that for our church it is essential to be together in fellowship.”
Several churches and parishioners have asked federal judges to keep Newsom from enforcing the restrictions on worship. None so far have been successful.
Wendy Gish, a parishioner at the Shield of Faith Family Church in Fontana, had asked a judge in Los Angeles to strike down the prohibition. “My sincerely held religious belief is that God commands me, and other believers, to regularly come together to worship him,” Gish said in a declaration.
U.S. District Judge Jesus G. Bernal ruled against her.
“An in-person religious gathering is not analogous to picking up groceries, food or medicine, where people enter a building quickly, do not engage directly with others except at points of sale, and leave once the task is complete,” he wrote. “Instead, it is more analogous to attending school or a concert — activities where people sit together in an enclosed space to share a communal experience.”
In Sacramento, a federal judge denied a similar request from Cross Culture Christian Center, a church in Lodi.
“Even in times of health, government officials must often strike the delicate balance between ensuring public safety and preserving the Constitution’s fundamental guarantees,” U.S. District Judge John A. Mendez wrote. “But during public health crises, new considerations come to bear, and government officials must ask whether even fundamental rights must give way to a deeper need to control the spread of infectious disease and protect the lives of society’s most vulnerable.”


latimes--2020-05-19--Junior lifeguard programs canceled in Los Angeles County, Seal Beach

A generation of junior lifeguards may lose out on their California birthright because of the COVID-19 pandemic .
The Los Angeles County Fire Department and the city of Seal Beach have canceled their junior lifeguard programs , citing concerns about the coronavirus .
“ We waited as long as possible to make this decision in the hopes things would change , ” Seal Beach Marine Safety Chief Joe Bailey said in a statement .
“ It was a difficult decision and we wanted to give participants and their families as much notice as possible .
Our goal is to remain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and to ensure the safety , security , health for all in Seal Beach.
” Some coastal cities , including Long Beach , Huntington Beach , Newport Beach and San Clemente , as well as the state ’ s parks are waiting to see whether the program is still feasible this summer , holding off on swim tryouts .
“ At this time , we are cautiously optimistic that the 2020 Long Beach Junior Lifeguard Summer Program will take place , ” according to a city website .
“ As you know , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about summer camps and children ’ s outdoor activities are still pending.
” The Junior Lifeguard Program is a summer tradition for many who live near the coast .
In order to participate , students must pass a swim test that includes treading water for five minutes and swimming 10 yards underwater without coming up for a breath .
The program helps students navigate the ever-changing ocean environment , perform lifesaving skills such as CPR and tests their physical fitness .

A San Diego Junior Lifeguard jumps off the Ocean Beach Municipal Pier in August 2018. Coastal cities across California are determining whether to cancel the summer program amid to the coronavirus pandemic.
A generation of junior lifeguards may lose out on their California birthright because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Los Angeles County Fire Department and the city of Seal Beach have canceled their junior lifeguard programs, citing concerns about the coronavirus.
“We waited as long as possible to make this decision in the hopes things would change,” Seal Beach Marine Safety Chief Joe Bailey said in a statement. “It was a difficult decision and we wanted to give participants and their families as much notice as possible. Our goal is to remain responsive to the community’s needs and to ensure the safety, security, health for all in Seal Beach.”
Some coastal cities, including Long Beach, Huntington Beach, Newport Beach and San Clemente, as well as the state’s parks are waiting to see whether the program is still feasible this summer, holding off on swim tryouts.
“At this time, we are cautiously optimistic that the 2020 Long Beach Junior Lifeguard Summer Program will take place,” according to a city website. “As you know, this is a dynamic situation and decisions about summer camps and children’s outdoor activities are still pending.”
Advertisement
The Junior Lifeguard Program is a summer tradition for many who live near the coast. In order to participate, students must pass a swim test that includes treading water for five minutes and swimming 10 yards underwater without coming up for a breath. The program helps students navigate the ever-changing ocean environment, perform lifesaving skills such as CPR and tests their physical fitness.


latimes--2020-05-19--Immigrants who lack legal status can begin applying for state coronavirus relief

Californians living in the U.S. illegally may begin applying for disaster assistance payments of $ 500 per person and up to $ 1,000 per household .
The state government has made available $ 75 million to help a projected 150,000 immigrants without legal status weather the coronavirus crisis .
To qualify , applicants must show that they are ineligible for federal assistance programs stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic , such as the CARES Act or federal unemployment benefits , and that they have endured a hardship from the pandemic .
Only adults may apply .
A state guide to common @ @ @ @ @ @ @ posted online .
Twelve nonprofit groups are working with the state government to disburse the aid .
The groups help applicants determine if they ’ re eligible for the assistance , apply for it and deliver payment cards to those who receive it .
Applicants must contact the group administering the assistance in their home county .
In Los Angeles County , three groups are administering the relief : the Central American Resource Center , which can be reached at ( 213 ) 315-2659 ; the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights , ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 395-9547 ; and Asian Americans Advancing Justice , ( 213 ) 241-8880 .
The funds are available on a first-come , first-served basis until they are spent or June 30 at the latest .
In what the state calls a “ separate but complementary effort , ” nonprofit groups have launched a “ California Immigrant Resilience Fund ” that aims to raise $ 50 million .
These funds will be distributed in cash payments to immigrants without legal status who qualify for neither federal nor state relief .
A conservative group , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Gavin Newsom over his plan to offer relief to those immigrants .
The group ’ s attorney said the $ 75 million represented taxpayer money to be disbursed as the Legislature decides , “ not a slush fund for the governor to spend as he sees fit .
”

Gov. Gavin Newsom has made available disaster assistance payments for Californians living in the U.S. illegally.
Californians living in the U.S. illegally may begin applying for disaster assistance payments of $500 per person and up to $1,000 per household.
The state government has made available $75 million to help a projected 150,000 immigrants without legal status weather the coronavirus crisis.
To qualify, applicants must show that they are ineligible for federal assistance programs stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic, such as the CARES Act or federal unemployment benefits, and that they have endured a hardship from the pandemic. Only adults may apply. A state guide to common questions and answers about the program is posted online.
Twelve nonprofit groups are working with the state government to disburse the aid. The groups help applicants determine if they’re eligible for the assistance, apply for it and deliver payment cards to those who receive it. Applicants must contact the group administering the assistance in their home county.
Advertisement
In Los Angeles County, three groups are administering the relief: the Central American Resource Center, which can be reached at (213) 315-2659; the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, (213) 201-8700 or (213) 395-9547; and Asian Americans Advancing Justice, (213) 241-8880.
The funds are available on a first-come, first-served basis until they are spent or June 30 at the latest.
In what the state calls a “separate but complementary effort,” nonprofit groups have launched a “California Immigrant Resilience Fund” that aims to raise $50 million. These funds will be distributed in cash payments to immigrants without legal status who qualify for neither federal nor state relief.
A conservative group, the Center for American Liberty, sued Gov. Gavin Newsom over his plan to offer relief to those immigrants. The group’s attorney said the $75 million represented taxpayer money to be disbursed as the Legislature decides, “not a slush fund for the governor to spend as he sees fit.”


latimes--2020-05-20--LAPD names officers who fatally shot man in Harbor Gateway area

The Los Angeles Police Department on Wednesday identified three officers involved in the fatal shooting of a man in the city ’ s Harbor Gateway area last week who allegedly fired a gun at his family ’ s home following a dispute .
Anthony Ysaac , 26 , died from multiple gunshot wounds after the officers opened fire shortly before 1 p.m. in the 700 block of West 123rd Street .
None of the officers involved — David Orozco , David Torres and Brandon Prisk of Southeast division — were injured .
Police alleged Ysaac was armed with a revolver @ @ @ @ @ @ @ block after firing a round into a door , threatening his sister and refusing to allow her to exit the home .
Police said they had been in touch with Ysaac on the phone prior to his exiting the home .
The incident remains under investigation by the department ’ s Force Investigation Division , with monitoring by prosecutors and the police inspector general .
The findings of the review will be reviewed by Police Chief Michel Moore and the civilian Police Commission .
Ysaac was the fourth person to be killed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 12 fatal shootings by police in 2019 .

The Los Angeles Police Department on Wednesday identified three officers involved in the fatal shooting of a man in the city’s Harbor Gateway area last week who allegedly fired a gun at his family’s home following a dispute.
Anthony Ysaac, 26, died from multiple gunshot wounds after the officers opened fire shortly before 1 p.m. in the 700 block of West 123rd Street. None of the officers involved — David Orozco, David Torres and Brandon Prisk of Southeast division — were injured.
Police alleged Ysaac was armed with a revolver when he exited a home on the block after firing a round into a door, threatening his sister and refusing to allow her to exit the home.
Advertisement
Police said they had been in touch with Ysaac on the phone prior to his exiting the home.
The incident remains under investigation by the department’s Force Investigation Division, with monitoring by prosecutors and the police inspector general.
The findings of the review will be reviewed by Police Chief Michel Moore and the civilian Police Commission.
Ysaac was the fourth person to be killed by LAPD officers this year. There were 12 fatal shootings by police in 2019.


latimes--2020-05-20--As California beaches reopen, seawall construction becomes legislative battleground

California ’ s beaches may feel off-limits right now , but the coronavirus has not stopped the sea from rising .
With every tide and storm , this slow-moving disaster continues to creep closer to shore — toppling bluffs , eroding our beaches and threatening homes and major infrastructure .
Also on the rise is a heated battle over what gets saved — and who actually benefits — along the California coast .
In a move this month that outraged environmentalists and caught coastal regulators off guard , a Republican senator pushed forward legislation that would revise a key section @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Act and allow homeowners in San Diego and Orange counties to build seawalls by right .
These changes would set a precedent of sidestepping the required ( and often tough ) oversight of the California Coastal Commission , which for decades has walked the contentious line between protecting private property and preserving the very beaches that make California , well , California .
Seawalls , while effective in protecting beachfront homes and infrastructure in the short term , are controversial because they disrupt the erosion and natural replenishment of sand — stripping away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For every new seawall protecting a home or road , a beach for the people is sacrificed .
Homeowners fighting sea level rise say going to the Coastal Commission for any form of protection has increasingly become a non-starter .
This new legislation , supporters say , would streamline a frustrating permitting process that could ultimately save lives .
They point to the bluff collapse in Encinitas last summer that killed three women .
“ Make Southern California ’ s Coastal Bluffs & Beaches Safe Again , ” supporters of the bill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The California Coastal Commission is failing us.
” Opponents call the bill a thinly veiled attempt by the author , Sen. Patricia Bates ( R-Laguna Niguel ) , to allow wealthy coastal enclaves to finally get away with armoring their own properties without considering the broader consequences .
If public safety was truly the concern , there would be a number of other options on the table — such as moving the structures themselves out of harm ’ s way , they said .
Only an unimaginably massive seawall , one that no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a total cliff collapse like the one in Encinitas .
“ It ’ s an outrageous and reckless proposal that would destroy Orange County ’ s public beaches for private benefit , ” said Denise Erkeneff , who has lived in Dana Point for 25 years and coordinates the Surfrider Foundation ’ s South Orange County chapter .
“ Efforts to protect public access to the coast will be for nothing if there is no coast or beaches left to visit.
” The stakes are high as this controversial legislation makes its way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have noted in recent weeks how the emotional reactions to COVID-19 beach closures make it clear just how devastating it would be if California permanently lost its beaches .
As Bates and her supporters worked on SB 1090 during the pandemic , other officials across the state have been holding virtual workshops and joining forces to confront the social , economic and environmental catastrophe of sea level rise .
More than a dozen key agencies recently agreed , in a set of targets guided by Gov .
Gavin Newsom ’ s administration , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feet of sea level rise by 2050 .
Homes are already flooding , and critical roads and infrastructure are already mere feet from toppling into the sea , they said .
In Southern California alone , two-thirds of beaches could vanish , and seaside cliffs could erode 130 feet farther inland .
Legislative analysts , in an unprecedented report , made the case that any action — or lack of action — within the next 10 years could determine the fate of the California coast .
But what exactly this action looks like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — remains a tough balancing act as California moves toward a more cohesive approach to sea level rise .
Across a state whose coastline spans 1,200 miles , every community faces slightly different challenges and often fights for its own priorities .
In Orange and San Diego counties , where train tracks run precariously close to the edge of collapsing cliffs in Del Mar and storms last winter eroded Capistrano Beach so much that a boardwalk collapsed , Bates said she hears of her constituents getting stymied by the permitting process .
She @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Act has become too closed-minded in the face of sea level rise .
Charlie McDermott , who lives in Encinitas and has watched this stretch of coast erode for the past 26 years , said the bluff collapse last summer still haunts him .
He and his daughter watched first responders frantically digging through the rubble , trying to save three women who ultimately lost their lives .
This tragedy followed similar preventable deaths in past years , he said , and he has been frustrated that “ the current coastal management strategy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Instead it is deliberately enabling bluff slides , failures , erosion and collapses that will continue to kill people on our beaches and block public access , ” said McDermott , who said he values beaches and respects the intent of the Coastal Act , but couldn ’ t help but feel that the commission now seems to be creating “ hazards with the hope of condemning public and private structures in order to ‘ re-wild the coast ’ in urban areas.
” SB 1090 seeks to reestablish a balance and trust that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bates , who visited McDermott ’ s home last year and has been working with him and others on the details of the legislation .
“ It ’ s something that we need to start talking about , and I thought this was a good way to start.
” The bill would require coastal officials to approve permits for construction , repair and maintenance of erosion protective devices in all beach areas in the two counties — unless a finding is made that the project would be a substantial threat to health or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ required , Bates noted , to pay a fee of $ 25,000 or 1 % of the assessed value of the private property , whichever is less , to help replenish sand to the beach .
The Coastal Commission was appalled last week when they heard about these provisions and questioned their true intent , before voting unanimously to oppose the legislation .
The bill would grant special privileges to oceanfront owners , they said , and set an adverse precedent for other communities grappling with their own erosion problems .
“ This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Orange or San Diego counties to construct a seawall regardless of the impacts to habitat , access , public recreation , scenic viewsheds or impacts to neighboring properties — so long as it meets current building codes and they could afford it , ” Sarah Christie , the agency ’ s legislative director , reported to commissioners .
“ With no ability to hear these projects on appeal , the bill essentially exempts seawalls from the Coastal Act.
” More than 30 % of the Orange County and San Diego coast is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And the beach mitigation fee is “ woefully insufficient , ” Christie said , when compared to how much it actually costs to truck sand in to rebuild a vanishing beach .
“ While it is completely understandable that property owners want to build seawalls to protect their properties , this bill doesn ’ t take into account all that we ’ ve learned about the inevitable consequences of coastal armoring , ” she said .
This approach to sea level rise would “ exacerbate the already accelerated loss of public beach space @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and inundation.
” Mark Gold , the governor ’ s deputy secretary for coast and ocean policy , did not comment on the bill but said that it was important for California to work together on balanced and equitable solutions .
Momentum across the state has been moving toward one of coordination and collaboration , he said , and making sure everyone remains on the same page is absolutely necessary when confronting everything that ’ s at stake .
“ The beaches that all of us grew up on and love so much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if we don ’ t do anything to protect our coast , ” he said .
“ Climate change isn ’ t taking a holiday and is still posing major problems globally and right here in California .
”

High surf near homes along Faria Beach in Ventura County. Seawalls disrupt the natural replenishment of sand, squeezing away beaches until they narrow or vanish altogether.
California’s beaches may feel off-limits right now, but the coronavirus has not stopped the sea from rising. With every tide and storm, this slow-moving disaster continues to creep closer to shore — toppling bluffs, eroding our beaches and threatening homes and major infrastructure.
Also on the rise is a heated battle over what gets saved — and who actually benefits — along the California coast.
In a move this month that outraged environmentalists and caught coastal regulators off guard, a Republican senator pushed forward legislation that would revise a key section in the state’s landmark Coastal Act and allow homeowners in San Diego and Orange counties to build seawalls by right. These changes would set a precedent of sidestepping the required (and often tough) oversight of the California Coastal Commission, which for decades has walked the contentious line between protecting private property and preserving the very beaches that make California, well, California.
Advertisement
Seawalls, while effective in protecting beachfront homes and infrastructure in the short term, are controversial because they disrupt the erosion and natural replenishment of sand — stripping away beaches until they narrow or vanish altogether. For every new seawall protecting a home or road, a beach for the people is sacrificed.
Homeowners fighting sea level rise say going to the Coastal Commission for any form of protection has increasingly become a non-starter. This new legislation, supporters say, would streamline a frustrating permitting process that could ultimately save lives. They point to the bluff collapse in Encinitas last summer that killed three women.
“Make Southern California’s Coastal Bluffs & Beaches Safe Again,” supporters of the bill, SB 1090, declared. “The California Coastal Commission is failing us.”
Opponents call the bill a thinly veiled attempt by the author, Sen. Patricia Bates (R-Laguna Niguel), to allow wealthy coastal enclaves to finally get away with armoring their own properties without considering the broader consequences. If public safety was truly the concern, there would be a number of other options on the table — such as moving the structures themselves out of harm’s way, they said. Only an unimaginably massive seawall, one that no homeowner would ever propose, could prevent a total cliff collapse like the one in Encinitas.
“It’s an outrageous and reckless proposal that would destroy Orange County’s public beaches for private benefit,” said Denise Erkeneff, who has lived in Dana Point for 25 years and coordinates the Surfrider Foundation’s South Orange County chapter. “Efforts to protect public access to the coast will be for nothing if there is no coast or beaches left to visit.”
The stakes are high as this controversial legislation makes its way Tuesday to a senate committee. Many have noted in recent weeks how the emotional reactions to COVID-19 beach closures make it clear just how devastating it would be if California permanently lost its beaches.
Advertisement
Sources: Gary Griggs, UC Santa Cruz Institute of Marine Sciences, Kiki Patsch, Cal State Channel Islands
(Lorena Elebee / Los Angeles Times)
As Bates and her supporters worked on SB 1090 during the pandemic, other officials across the state have been holding virtual workshops and joining forces to confront the social, economic and environmental catastrophe of sea level rise. More than a dozen key agencies recently agreed, in a set of targets guided by Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration, to prepare California for at least 3.5 feet of sea level rise by 2050.
Homes are already flooding, and critical roads and infrastructure are already mere feet from toppling into the sea, they said. In Southern California alone, two-thirds of beaches could vanish, and seaside cliffs could erode 130 feet farther inland. Legislative analysts, in an unprecedented report, made the case that any action — or lack of action — within the next 10 years could determine the fate of the California coast.
But what exactly this action looks like — and who pays and who benefits — remains a tough balancing act as California moves toward a more cohesive approach to sea level rise. Across a state whose coastline spans 1,200 miles, every community faces slightly different challenges and often fights for its own priorities.
In Orange and San Diego counties, where train tracks run precariously close to the edge of collapsing cliffs in Del Mar and storms last winter eroded Capistrano Beach so much that a boardwalk collapsed, Bates said she hears of her constituents getting stymied by the permitting process. She wonders if the enforcement of the Coastal Act has become too closed-minded in the face of sea level rise.
Charlie McDermott, who lives in Encinitas and has watched this stretch of coast erode for the past 26 years, said the bluff collapse last summer still haunts him. He and his daughter watched first responders frantically digging through the rubble, trying to save three women who ultimately lost their lives. This tragedy followed similar preventable deaths in past years, he said, and he has been frustrated that “the current coastal management strategy does not prioritize erosion mitigation.”
A man looks at looks at the debris left from the fatal bluff collapse last August at Grandview Beach in Encinitas. (Hayne Palmour IV / San Diego Union-Tribune)
“Instead it is deliberately enabling bluff slides, failures, erosion and collapses that will continue to kill people on our beaches and block public access,” said McDermott, who said he values beaches and respects the intent of the Coastal Act, but couldn’t help but feel that the commission now seems to be creating “hazards with the hope of condemning public and private structures in order to ‘re-wild the coast’ in urban areas.”
SB 1090 seeks to reestablish a balance and trust that residents feel no longer exists, said Bates, who visited McDermott’s home last year and has been working with him and others on the details of the legislation. “It’s something that we need to start talking about, and I thought this was a good way to start.”
The bill would require coastal officials to approve permits for construction, repair and maintenance of erosion protective devices in all beach areas in the two counties — unless a finding is made that the project would be a substantial threat to health or safety.
The applicant would also be required, Bates noted, to pay a fee of $25,000 or 1% of the assessed value of the private property, whichever is less, to help replenish sand to the beach.
Orange County Public Works crews remove a boardwalk that was damaged in a storm at Capistrano Beach in Dana Point. (Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)
The Coastal Commission was appalled last week when they heard about these provisions and questioned their true intent, before voting unanimously to oppose the legislation. The bill would grant special privileges to oceanfront owners, they said, and set an adverse precedent for other communities grappling with their own erosion problems.
“This bill would essentially allow any property owner in Orange or San Diego counties to construct a seawall regardless of the impacts to habitat, access, public recreation, scenic viewsheds or impacts to neighboring properties — so long as it meets current building codes and they could afford it,” Sarah Christie, the agency’s legislative director, reported to commissioners. “With no ability to hear these projects on appeal, the bill essentially exempts seawalls from the Coastal Act.”
More than 30% of the Orange County and San Diego coast is already behind some form of seawall. And the beach mitigation fee is “woefully insufficient,” Christie said, when compared to how much it actually costs to truck sand in to rebuild a vanishing beach.
“While it is completely understandable that property owners want to build seawalls to protect their properties, this bill doesn’t take into account all that we’ve learned about the inevitable consequences of coastal armoring,” she said. This approach to sea level rise would “exacerbate the already accelerated loss of public beach space in Southern California due to coastal erosion and inundation.”
Mark Gold, the governor’s deputy secretary for coast and ocean policy, did not comment on the bill but said that it was important for California to work together on balanced and equitable solutions. Momentum across the state has been moving toward one of coordination and collaboration, he said, and making sure everyone remains on the same page is absolutely necessary when confronting everything that’s at stake.
“The beaches that all of us grew up on and love so much — many of those are in jeopardy if we don’t do anything to protect our coast,” he said. “Climate change isn’t taking a holiday and is still posing major problems globally and right here in California.”


latimes--2020-05-20--Irvine police arrest former Marine on weapons charges

A 24-year-old former U.S. Marine was arrested on suspicion of possessing illegal firearms by Irvine police after an FBI SWAT @ @ @ @ @ on his home Wednesday morning as part of a federal investigation , officials said Wednesday @ @ @ @ @ the FBI as Jason Fong was led away from his home in the 5300 block @ @ @ @ @ wearing a surgical mask and placed into an Irvine Police car .
FBI agents assisted @ @ @ @ @ an extensive search of the large bungalow , focusing a considerable amount of the time @ @ @ @ @ garage Wednesday morning .
Fong was taken into custody by Irvine Police officers .

A 24-year-old former U.S. Marine was arrested on suspicion of possessing illegal firearms by Irvine police after an FBI SWAT team served a search warrant on his home Wednesday morning as part of a federal investigation, officials said Wednesday.
A man identified by the FBI as Jason Fong was led away from his home in the 5300 block of Royale Avenue in handcuffs wearing a surgical mask and placed into an Irvine Police car.
FBI agents assisted by a SWAT team began an extensive search of the large bungalow, focusing a considerable amount of the time on the property’s garage Wednesday morning.
Advertisement
Fong was taken into custody by Irvine Police officers.


latimes--2020-05-20--California's coronavirus relief program for unemployed immigrant workers gets off to a rocky start

Locked out of state unemployment benefits , hundreds of thousands of out-of-work immigrants are facing additional hurdles to tap into a new California program offering a $ 500 one-time payment during the COVID-19 pandemic to those without legal status .
Struggling to pay living expenses , immigrant workers are finding jammed phone lines and overwhelmed staff at the nonprofits tasked with distributing the funds as they compete for a dwindling pot of money that state officials acknowledge isn ’ t enough to help all who need it .
Efforts to rally private contributions to supplement the $ 75 million in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Gov .
Gavin Newsom have so far fallen short of meeting a $ 50-million goal .
Now , amid the problems , a group of legislators including state Sen. Maria Elena Durazo ( D-Los Angeles ) have called for an expansion of the program to better address the needs of underemployed and unemployed immigrants , proposing an additional $ 400 per week for eight weeks .
“ Phone lines and websites across the state crashed due to the volume of calls and inquiries , ” Durazo said Tuesday , the second day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ residents , who comprise as much as 10 % of the state workforce , are hurting for any type of assistance , being that they do not qualify for state unemployment or federal stimulus money.
” A dozen California nonprofits , including the Los Angeles-based Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights and Central American Resource Center , were selected by state officials in the last month to administer the program .
With many immigrants concerned about their personal information ending up with federal immigration authorities , the state is sending the money through nonprofits @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — not even sharing them with the state .
The state website that provides information on the program , including the names of nonprofits accepting applications , crashed and was unavailable for two and a half hours Monday morning , said Scott Murray , a spokesman for the state Department of Social Services .
He noted that “ despite the initial technical challenges ... over 6,500 applications have been opened statewide.
” The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights received more than 1 million phone calls , forcing it to add a second line @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
On the first day of the program , Salas ’ nonprofit and two others serving Los Angeles and Orange counties processed applications from 1,644 immigrant families and workers who are eligible to receive as much as $ 822,500 in one-time grants .
Those who applied the first day include a couple in which the husband is a permanent resident and the wife is undocumented , Salas said .
They work as street vendors selling corn on the cob but have been unable to work in three months , she added .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2.4 million undocumented Californians , response to the … program has been unprecedented , ” Salas said .
In a Facebook post urging patience with the process , The Central American Resource Center said it received more than 50,000 phone calls Monday “ that completely saturated our lines , ” and noted that staff members understand the community ’ s frustration and “ are doing the best we can.
” Similar problems exist elsewhere in the state , said Carole Vigne , senior staff attorney at Legal Aid at Work , a nonprofit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Word about the program has gotten out to immigrants in California without legal status “ but the demand is too great , and the organizations can not handle the volume , ” Vigne said .
“ I have heard from several clients that they were not able to reach the local organization here in the Bay Area.
” A recent study by the UC Merced Community and Labor Center estimates that some 289,000 immigrants without legal status have lost their employment in California .
Newsom announced a month ago that emergency assistance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 75 million in taxpayer funds .
He said that amount would be supplemented by $ 50 million from private sources — including nonprofits founded by Laurene Powell Jobs , the widow of Apple co-founder Steve Jobs , and by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife , Dr. Priscilla Chan Zuckerberg .
A month later , the private effort by the nonprofit Grantmakers Concerned with Immigrants and Refugees has still not found all of the promised private money .
The effort has raised just $ 38 million of the $ 50 million initially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state officials .
To be eligible for a $ 500 payment , individuals must provide information that shows they are an adult immigrant without legal status , not eligible for federal COVID-19-related assistance and have experienced hardship as a result of the pandemic .
Families can receive up to $ 1,000 .
Once approved , an individual can expect to receive the one-time assistance within approximately five business days , depending on the mode of delivery , Murray said .
But some Democratic lawmakers say the initial allocation of money , while welcome @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needs of immigrant families who have lost income because of the stay-at-home order .
As a result , 14 state legislators have written Newsom a letter asking him to provide an additional $ 400 per week for eight weeks to immigrant workers in the country illegally , noting that while the initial grants made California the first state in the nation to provide financial support for immigrant workers affected by the pandemic , additional steps should be taken .
“ We need to , and we must do more , ” the lawmakers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to work together to address the void created by the lack of action by the federal administration that has left our undocumented worker population in the cold ; without any semblance of support or gratitude for the work they do on a daily basis.
” The letter was signed by Democratic lawmakers including state Sen. Connie Leyva ( D-Chino ) and Durazo , who noted that undocumented workers play a large role in the food-service and hospitality industries , key parts of the state economy .
The lawmakers estimate the proposed program would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needs to stand up and help our most vulnerable members of society , many of which are essential workers and are most at risk of contracting COVID-19 , ” Durazo said .
“ A $ 500 state contribution will maybe provide food on the table for a few weeks .
What we need is stability in the absence of traditional work pay.
” The governor ’ s office , which has begun private negotiations with lawmakers over next year ’ s budget , declined to comment on the legislators ’ proposal .
Conservative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dhillon , a state representative on the Republican National Committee , have voiced their opposition to the program .
Dhillon represented Republican clients who sued Newsom to challenge the current Disaster Relief Assistance for Immigrants program , but the state Supreme Court denied the petition to block the program .
She said the proposed expansion is also objectionable .
“ The reality is we are going to be at over 20 % unemployment in California and the government ’ s first duty is to its citizens and its legal residents , ” Dhillon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of benefits to people who are here illegally and now competing for the same jobs that American citizens and legal residents will be competing for in California , I think this is immoral .
”

Gov. Gavin Newsom announced last month that the state would provide financial help to immigrants without legal status, but the program has gotten off to a rough start.
Locked out of state unemployment benefits, hundreds of thousands of out-of-work immigrants are facing additional hurdles to tap into a new California program offering a $500 one-time payment during the COVID-19 pandemic to those without legal status.
Struggling to pay living expenses, immigrant workers are finding jammed phone lines and overwhelmed staff at the nonprofits tasked with distributing the funds as they compete for a dwindling pot of money that state officials acknowledge isn’t enough to help all who need it.
Efforts to rally private contributions to supplement the $75 million in taxpayer money set aside for the program by Gov. Gavin Newsom have so far fallen short of meeting a $50-million goal.
Now, amid the problems, a group of legislators including state Sen. Maria Elena Durazo (D-Los Angeles) has called for an expansion of the program to better address the needs of underemployed and unemployed immigrants, proposing an additional $400 per week for eight weeks.
“Phone lines and websites across the state crashed due to the volume of calls and inquiries,” Durazo said Tuesday, the second day of the program. “These undocumented residents, who comprise as much as 10% of the state workforce, are hurting for any type of assistance, being that they do not qualify for state unemployment or federal stimulus money.”
Advertisement
A dozen California nonprofits, including the Los Angeles-based Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights and Central American Resource Center, were selected by state officials in the last month to administer the program. With many immigrants concerned about their personal information ending up with federal immigration authorities, the state is sending the money through nonprofits to keep the identities of recipients confidential — not even sharing them with the state.
The state website that provides information on the program, including the names of nonprofits accepting applications, crashed and was unavailable for two and a half hours Monday morning, said Scott Murray, a spokesman for the state Department of Social Services.
He noted that “despite the initial technical challenges,” more than 15,000 applications have been opened statewide by late Thursday.
The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights received more than 1 million phone calls, forcing it to add a second line, executive director Angelica Salas said.
On the first day of the program, Salas’ nonprofit and two others serving Los Angeles and Orange counties processed applications from 1,644 immigrant families and workers who are eligible to receive as much as $822,500 in one-time grants.
Those who applied the first day include a couple in which the husband is a permanent resident and the wife is undocumented, Salas said. They work as street vendors selling corn on the cob but have been unable to work in three months, she added.
“We know that, with at least 2.4 million undocumented Californians, response to the … program has been unprecedented,” Salas said.
In a Facebook post urging patience with the process, The Central American Resource Center said it received more than 50,000 phone calls Monday “that completely saturated our lines,” and noted that staff members understand the community’s frustration and “are doing the best we can.”
Similar problems exist elsewhere in the state, said Carole Vigne, senior staff attorney at Legal Aid at Work, a nonprofit helping immigrants and others with employment issues.
Advertisement
Word about the program has gotten out to immigrants in California without legal status “but the demand is too great, and the organizations cannot handle the volume,” Vigne said.
“I have heard from several clients that they were not able to reach the local organization here in the Bay Area.”
A recent study by the UC Merced Community and Labor Center estimates that some 289,000 immigrants without legal status have lost their employment in California.
Newsom announced a month ago that emergency assistance for 150,000 immigrants would come from $75 million in taxpayer funds. He said that amount would be supplemented by $50 million from private sources — including charitable groups founded by Laurene Powell Jobs, the widow of Apple co-founder Steve Jobs, and by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Dr. Priscilla Chan Zuckerberg.
A month later, the private effort by the nonprofit Grantmakers Concerned with Immigrants and Refugees has still not found all of the promised private money. The effort has raised just about $39 million of the $50 million initially announced by the governor, state officials said Thursday.
To be eligible for a $500 payment, individuals must provide information that shows they are an adult immigrant without legal status, not eligible for federal COVID-19-related assistance and have experienced hardship as a result of the pandemic. Families can receive up to $1,000.
Once approved, an individual can expect to receive the one-time assistance within about five business days, depending on the mode of delivery, Murray said.
But some Democratic lawmakers say the initial allocation of money, while welcome, is not sufficient to meet the needs of immigrant families who have lost income because of the stay-at-home order. As a result, 14 state legislators have written Newsom a letter asking him to provide an additional $400 per week for eight weeks to immigrant workers in the country illegally, noting that while the initial grants made California the first state in the nation to provide financial support for immigrant workers affected by the pandemic, additional steps should be taken.
“We need to, and we must do more,” the lawmakers said. “We need to continue to work together to address the void created by the lack of action by the federal administration that has left our undocumented worker population in the cold; without any semblance of support or gratitude for the work they do on a daily basis.”
The letter was signed by Democratic lawmakers including state Sen. Connie Leyva (D-Chino) and Durazo, who noted that undocumented workers play a large role in the food-service and hospitality industries, key parts of the state economy.
The lawmakers estimate the proposed program would help about 216,499 people.
“California needs to stand up and help our most vulnerable members of society, many of which are essential workers and are most at risk of contracting COVID-19,” Durazo said. “A $500 state contribution will maybe provide food on the table for a few weeks. What we need is stability in the absence of traditional work pay.”
On Thursday, a state Assembly committee heard pleas for the expansion of payments from dozens of immigrants and activists. Elly Matsumura, California director of the Partnership for Working Families, told lawmakers the proposed weekly wage replacement payments are “essential,” saying it would “show California’s strong commitment to immigrant workers during this crisis.”
The governor’s office, which has begun private negotiations with lawmakers over next year’s budget, declined to comment on the legislators’ proposal.
Conservative activists, including San Francisco attorney Harmeet Dhillon, a state representative on the Republican National Committee, have voiced their opposition to the program.
Dhillon represented Republican clients who sued Newsom to challenge the current Disaster Relief Assistance for Immigrants program, but the state Supreme Court denied the petition to block the program.
She said the proposed expansion is also objectionable.
“The reality is we are going to be at over 20% unemployment in California and the government’s first duty is to its citizens and its legal residents,” Dhillon said. “By subsidizing these types of benefits to people who are here illegally and now competing for the same jobs that American citizens and legal residents will be competing for in California, I think this is immoral.”


latimes--2020-05-20--Many Napa Valley restaurants (but not French Laundry) reopen. Customers slow to return

Restaurants slowly reopened in Napa for in-house dining on Wednesday , but some restaurateurs worried that customers might still be too afraid to come back .
Mauro Pando , owner of Grace ’ s Table in downtown Napa , began offering customers the opportunity to dine inside in the morning , but only six patrons wanted to be seated at a table .
The restaurant is also doing takeout .
“ Confidence is something we need to build in the community , ” Pando said , wearing a mask and standing at the restaurant ’ s entrance .
“ It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keep patrons six feet apart , he removed 17 tables and their chairs .
They were loaded in the back of his navy blue pickup parked on the street .
He is using paper napkins and paper menus .
“ I am feeling healthy and strong , ” he said .
“ I feel safe , and I don ’ t feel nervous .
I am happy.
” But Johanna Hill , 45 , a waitress at the restaurant , confessed she was “ a little bit ” scared .
Many people out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ masks .
Napa County became the first region in the Bay Area to get approval from the state to reopen restaurants for full service with social distancing .
Some rural counties have already started this and are taking other steps in gradually reopening the economy .
Lauren Danza , 56 , wearing a mask while lining up at another downtown restaurant for takeout , said she was not ready for in-house dining .
“ I have an 85-year-old mother who lives with me , and my son is having a newborn baby today @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 31 , a masseuse waiting while wearing a mask near Danza , said she was heartbroken that many in town were still entering stores without masks .
At a small grocery store where she shops , the employees are all wearing protective gear and a plexiglass shield has been erected at the cash register , she said .
But when customers enter without masks , the store doesn ’ t object , she said .
“ I think it is because they don ’ t want to lose any customers , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Cole ’ s Chop House , was getting ready to open his downtown steakhouse at 4:30 p.m. “ We ’ ve been preparing for the changes for the last three weeks , ” he said .
He has lost about 40 % of his white-linen-covered tables to accommodate distancing , he said .
“ A few employees were concerned , but all of them did want to come back , ” he said .
In Yountville , where few people wore masks on the streets , there appeared little rush to reopen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the famed French Laundry , said , “ We aren ’ t reopening right away .
We haven ’ t even had that discussion.
” A sister restaurant in town was doing takeout and the Bouchon Bakery was open for business .
Rose Solis , 67 , a Yountville resident , had to close down her bar , Pancha ’ s , after St. Patrick ’ s Day .
“ We are the only bar in town , ” said Solis , who grew up in Yountville .
Her customers have been dropping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get her through the pandemic , she said .
“ Yesterday , it was a case of wine.
” She opened the bar with her nephew 38 years ago .
“ My customers are nagging me to open up , ” she said .
When she can , she plans to post balloons outside to celebrate .
“ We are just holding on , ” she said .
“ What can we do ?
We didn ’ t ask for any assistance.
” She said restaurants in town were planning to reopen for @ @ @ @ @

Restaurants slowly reopened in Napa for in-house dining on Wednesday, but some restaurateurs worried that customers might still be too afraid to come back.
Mauro Pando, owner of Grace’s Table in downtown Napa, began offering customers the opportunity to dine inside in the morning, but only six patrons wanted to be seated at a table. The restaurant is also doing takeout.
“Confidence is something we need to build in the community,” Pando said, wearing a mask and standing at the restaurant’s entrance. “It will be a slow return.”
Advertisement
To keep patrons six feet apart, he removed 17 tables and their chairs. They were loaded in the back of his navy blue pickup parked on the street.
He is using paper napkins and paper menus.
“I am feeling healthy and strong,” he said. “I feel safe, and I don’t feel nervous. I am happy.”
But Johanna Hill, 45, a waitress at the restaurant, confessed she was “a little bit” scared.
Many people out on the downtown sidewalks did not wear masks.
Napa County became the first region in the Bay Area to get approval from the state to reopen restaurants for full service with social distancing. Some rural counties have already started this and are taking other steps in gradually reopening the economy.
Lauren Danza, 56, wearing a mask while lining up at another downtown restaurant for takeout, said she was not ready for in-house dining.
Advertisement
“I have an 85-year-old mother who lives with me, and my son is having a newborn baby today,” she said.
Katie Barnes, 31, a masseuse waiting while wearing a mask near Danza, said she was heartbroken that many in town were still entering stores without masks. At a small grocery store where she shops, the employees are all wearing protective gear and a plexiglass shield has been erected at the cash register, she said.
But when customers enter without masks, the store doesn’t object, she said. “I think it is because they don’t want to lose any customers,” she said.
Eric Keffer, owner of Cole’s Chop House, was getting ready to open his downtown steakhouse at 4:30 p.m.
“We’ve been preparing for the changes for the last three weeks,” he said. He has lost about 40% of his white-linen-covered tables to accommodate distancing, he said.
“A few employees were concerned, but all of them did want to come back,” he said.
In Yountville, where few people wore masks on the streets, there appeared little rush to reopen.
Michael Minnillo, general manager of the famed French Laundry, said, “We aren’t reopening right away. We haven’t even had that discussion.” A sister restaurant in town was doing takeout and the Bouchon Bakery was open for business.
Rose Solis, 67, a Yountville resident, had to close down her bar, Pancha’s, after St. Patrick’s Day.
“We are the only bar in town,” said Solis, who grew up in Yountville.
Her customers have been dropping off boxes of vegetables and fruit to get her through the pandemic, she said. “Yesterday, it was a case of wine.”
She opened the bar with her nephew 38 years ago.
“My customers are nagging me to open up,” she said. When she can, she plans to post balloons outside to celebrate.
“We are just holding on,” she said. “What can we do? We didn’t ask for any assistance.”
She said restaurants in town were planning to reopen for in-house dining in June.


latimes--2020-05-20--L.A. moves to cap fees charged by Uber Eats, Postmates and other food delivery services

Los Angeles is pushing forward with plans to limit how much delivery services such as Postmates , Grubhub and Uber Eats can charge restaurants , capping delivery fees at 15 % of the purchase price for orders during the COVID-19 crisis .
The City Council voted 14-0 Wednesday to ask city attorneys to draft such a law , following other cities including San Francisco and New York City .
Restaurants currently pay as much as 30 % in fees to third-party delivery apps , which Councilman Mitch O ’ Farrell denounced as exorbitant .
O ’ Farrell said that , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much more heavily on delivery sales and had become “ completely at the mercy of these third-party delivery apps.
” “ If we keep going down this road , restaurants will be forced to raise their prices and risk losing customers , ” the councilman said .
“ Why should restaurants , and their customers , be put in a position to subsidize delivery app companies ?
We need to level the playing field.
” The proposal passed Wednesday also would limit other fees charged by the delivery companies — those for services @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of 5 % of the purchase price of each order .
And it would require that 100 % of delivery tips from customers go to drivers .
The restrictions would end 90 days after L.A. lifts its ban on dining inside restaurants .
During the meeting , council members rejected a push by Councilman Bob Blumenfield to limit which restaurants were covered by the fee cap .
Blumenfield , who argued that bigger chains had enough leverage to negotiate for better fees for themselves , said the fee limits should apply only to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
O ’ Farrell countered that limiting the fee restrictions to smaller businesses might prod delivery apps to drop mom-and-pop restaurants in favor of bigger chains .
Blumenfield ’ s proposal failed on a 4-10 vote .
Many restaurant owners have complained that they have little choice but to fork over significant fees to keep ferrying meals to customers , since many diners don ’ t want to leave their homes during the coronavirus pandemic .
One restaurateur called the delivery services “ a necessary evil.
” “ Even before the madness , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matter how you slice it , ” Anca Caliman , co-owner of Lemon Poppy Kitchen in Glassell Park and Parsnip in Highland Park , told The Times .
Shawn Nee , owner of the Silver Lake restaurant Burgers Never Say Die , said his restaurant started using a delivery app during the pandemic and had to hike its prices on the app to avoid losing money .
Limiting the fees “ means more money in our pocket , ” Nee said .
“ I could potentially give some of my staff the salaries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cap was also backed by the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce and the labor unions Teamsters Local 396 and UFCW Local 700 , which represent workers in package delivery , grocery stores , healthcare and other industries .
Although many restaurant owners have enthusiastically backed the proposed law as a crucial lifeline to help them survive — and some have pressed for a lower cap of 10 % — others have signed a petition facilitated by Postmates that opposes the plan , arguing that caps would end up hurting restaurants .
Marc Canter , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ argued that capping fees at 15 % would be “ shooting yourself in the foot ” for restaurants that relied on delivery services to keep sales flowing during the COVID-19 pandemic .
“ I don ’ t think [ delivery services ] could survive on 15 % unless they could have a government supplement , ” Canter said .
Delivery drivers also warned that they could take a financial hit from the measure .
Several phoned into the meeting Wednesday , arguing the proposed law would reduce the work available for them during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , if the law passes , the company could end up halting delivery and other restaurant services in Los Angeles .
Postmates said in a statement following the Wednesday vote that “ government price setting ” threatened jobs and created “ a false choice between local restaurants and the delivery network companies that support them.
” The company has argued instead for a fee charged on delivery orders to assist restaurants , which council members are also exploring as an option .
City lawyers will now draft the proposed law , which will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before it can go into effect .

Los Angeles is pushing forward with plans to limit how much delivery services such as Postmates, Grubhub and Uber Eats can charge restaurants, capping delivery fees at 15% of the purchase price for orders during the COVID-19 crisis.
The City Council voted 14-0 Wednesday to ask city attorneys to draft such a law, following other cities including San Francisco and New York City. Restaurants currently pay as much as 30% in fees to third-party delivery apps, which Councilman Mitch O’Farrell denounced as exorbitant.
O’Farrell said that, during the pandemic, restaurants were relying much more heavily on delivery sales and had become “completely at the mercy of these third-party delivery apps.”
Advertisement
“If we keep going down this road, restaurants will be forced to raise their prices and risk losing customers,” the councilman said. “Why should restaurants, and their customers, be put in a position to subsidize delivery app companies? We need to level the playing field.”
The proposal passed Wednesday also would limit other fees charged by the delivery companies — those for services other than delivery — to a maximum of 5% of the purchase price of each order. And it would require that 100% of delivery tips from customers go to drivers. The restrictions would end 90 days after L.A. lifts its ban on dining inside restaurants.
During the meeting, council members rejected a push by Councilman Bob Blumenfield to limit which restaurants were covered by the fee cap. Blumenfield, who argued that bigger chains had enough leverage to negotiate for better fees for themselves, said the fee limits should apply only to restaurants that had five or fewer locations.
O’Farrell countered that limiting the fee restrictions to smaller businesses might prod delivery apps to drop mom-and-pop restaurants in favor of bigger chains. Blumenfield’s proposal failed on a 4-10 vote.
Many restaurant owners have complained that they have little choice but to fork over significant fees to keep ferrying meals to customers, since many diners don’t want to leave their homes during the coronavirus pandemic. One restaurateur called the delivery services “a necessary evil.”
“Even before the madness, it was just a terrible deal no matter how you slice it,” Anca Caliman, co-owner of Lemon Poppy Kitchen in Glassell Park and Parsnip in Highland Park, told The Times.
Advertisement
Shawn Nee, owner of the Silver Lake restaurant Burgers Never Say Die, said his restaurant started using a delivery app during the pandemic and had to hike its prices on the app to avoid losing money. Limiting the fees “means more money in our pocket,” Nee said. “I could potentially give some of my staff the salaries they were making before.”
The planned cap was also backed by the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce and the labor unions Teamsters Local 396 and UFCW Local 770, which represent workers in package delivery, grocery stores, healthcare and other industries.
Although many restaurant owners have enthusiastically backed the proposed law as a crucial lifeline to help them survive — and some have pressed for a lower cap of 10% — others have signed a petition facilitated by Postmates that opposes the plan, arguing that caps would end up hurting restaurants.
Marc Canter, owner of Canter’s Deli, argued that capping fees at 15% would be “shooting yourself in the foot” for restaurants that relied on delivery services to keep sales flowing during the COVID-19 pandemic.
“I don’t think [delivery services] could survive on 15% unless they could have a government supplement,” Canter said.
Delivery drivers also warned that they could take a financial hit from the measure. Several phoned into the meeting Wednesday, arguing the proposed law would reduce the work available for them during the pandemic. Postmates has warned that, if the law passes, the company could end up halting delivery and other restaurant services in Los Angeles.
Postmates said in a statement following the Wednesday vote that “government price setting” threatened jobs and created “a false choice between local restaurants and the delivery network companies that support them.” The company has argued instead for a fee charged on delivery orders to assist restaurants, which council members are also exploring as an option.
City lawyers will now draft the proposed law, which will return to the council for final approval before it can go into effect.
Times staff writer Jenn Harris contributed to this report.


latimes--2020-05-20--Orange County coronavirus fatalities nearing 100

Orange County health officials on Wednesday reported 249 new coronavirus cases , bringing the county ’ s overall total to @ @ @ @ @ 10 new coronavirus-related deaths .
Overall , 98 people have died of COVID-19 in the @ @ @ @ @ those being residents of skilled-nursing facilities .
Of the county ’ s overall number of @ @ @ @ @ from skilled-nursing facilities and 360 are Orange County jail inmates , according to the Orange @ @ @ @ @ are 253 people hospitalized , with 93 patients in intensive care , as of Wednesday @ @ @ @ @ have been administered , and 775 new tests were reported Wednesday .
Note : “ @ @ @ @ @ areas , as well as cases in the county ’ s jails .
Daily updates @ @ @ @ @ change as the county receives new information .

A group of women walk the San Clemente Pier on Monday, May 18th in San Clemente.
Orange County health officials on Wednesday reported 249 new coronavirus cases, bringing the county’s overall total to 4,742.
Officials also reported 10 new coronavirus-related deaths. Overall, 98 people have died of COVID-19 in the county, with 30 of those being residents of skilled-nursing facilities.
Of the county’s overall number of infections, 514 people are from skilled-nursing facilities and 360 are Orange County jail inmates, according to the Orange County Health Agency.
Advertisement
There are 253 people hospitalized, with 93 patients in intensive care, as of Wednesday.
Countywide, 86,694 tests have been administered, and 775 new tests were reported Wednesday.
Which California counties are reopening? To contain the spread of COVID-19, parks, restaurants and stores are slowly reopening.
Age breakdown of cases
0-17 — 154
18-24 — 468
25-34 — 850
35-44 — 701
45-54 — 840
55-64 — 747
65-74 — 452
75-84 — 309
85+ — 220
Age breakdown of deaths
25-34 — 2
35-44 — 4
45-54 — 9
55-64 — 14
65-74 — 16
75-84 — 28
85+ — 25
Tracking coronavirus in Orange County The latest maps and charts on the spread of COVID-19 in Orange County, including cases, deaths, closures and restrictions.
Advertisement
Cases by community
Aliso Viejo — 24
Anaheim — 751
Brea — 32
Buena Park — 145
Costa Mesa — 81
Coto de Caza — 6
Cypress — 60
Dana Point — 25
Fountain Valley — 50
Fullerton — 161
Garden Grove — 240
Huntington Beach — 301
Irvine — 162
La Habra — 82
La Palma — 18
Ladera Ranch — 13
Laguna Beach — 44
Laguna Hills — 27
Laguna Niguel — 36
Laguna Woods — 8
Lake Forest — 39
Los Alamitos — 63
Midway City — 11
Mission Viejo — 63
Newport Beach — 135
Orange — 220
Placentia — 89
Rancho Mission Viejo — 19
Rancho Santa Margarita — 19
San Clemente — 58
San Juan Capistrano — 46
Santa Ana — 833
Seal Beach — 15
Stanton — 51
Trabuco Canyon — 12
Tustin — 74
Villa Park — 6
Westminster — 82
Yorba Linda — 70
Other — 363
Unknown — 220
Note: “Other” category includes unincorporated areas, as well as cases in the county’s jails. Daily updates are preliminary and subject to change as the county receives new information.