Extending Emergency Declarations
The issue that has garnered the most discussion is the future of mask mandates for our children. Members of our community are divided and conversation has been robust about the most prudent path forward as we continue to move out of the pandemic. I have heard from both those opposed to any mask requirement, as well as those who are concerned about not having a mask requirement for unvaccinated individuals. I reached out to public health officials as well as leaders at the Yale School of Public Health. I listened to constituents who had divergent perspectives, and I listened to the debate on the floor.
Today’s vote was not a vote to require masks in schools. It was a vote to allow the Governor, the Department of Public Health (DPH) and the team who has worked effectively for the past year plus, to make the most up to date, data driven decisions possible – decisions based on the CDC’s updated guidance, which at this point does suggest masking indoors for those who are not vaccinated.
The emergency declaration has allowed Connecticut to respond to the pandemic quickly and efficiently. With emerging variants and questions still left to be answered, continuation of this authority will allow the State to remain responsive and ensure that resources are available. The extension is temporary and ends September 30th.
Connecticut, including all of you, has done a tremendous job in the fight against COVID. To date, almost 62% of our population is fully vaccinated, and today during the debate, members from both sides of the aisle were complimentary of the Governor’s leadership during the pandemic. It has been a team effort. We are not quite at herd immunity, but getting close. This extension will help our state effectively and efficiently continue to vaccinate those who are eligible and be prepared when vaccines do become available for the under 12 population, which is expected in early Fall.
Additionally, extending the emergency declaration is critical to making sure Connecticut continues to receive every dollar of federal funding available. Several federal funding sources are contingent on the continuance of the emergency declarations and the executive orders.
You can read Special Act 21-5, referenced in the resolution itself, as well as the text of the Governor’s time limited renewal, at the hyperlinks above. As the Governor notes in his communication, it is his intention to extend perhaps eleven of what was at one point hundreds of executive orders. Special Act 21-5 allows the six legislative leaders to disapprove any executive orders issued under this extension. This new authority, passed by the legislature this year, is essentially a veto power, related only to the COVID declarations. The Governor’s narrative explains some of the orders that could be considered. They include use of state commuter parking lots for vaccines, flexibility for procurement for hospitals and health care providers, housing of homeless individuals and victims of domestic violence, and allowing the DPH Commissioner to follow the CDC’s lead regarding mask guidance in public places.
During this year’s legislative session, I had the opportunity to work on two bills in Planning and Development that were executive orders the legislature wanted to codify. That means taking something that was designed to be temporary and time limited and making it permanent. I can share, as can the team who worked to help make that happen for outdoor dining and remote access to public meetings, that the process is not nearly as simple as many had hoped it would be. Executive Orders provide the flexibility and responsiveness needed to help us transition out of the pandemic.
Because so many questions remain about where we stand with regards to the pandemic and what the guidance and need is for masks, I have asked leadership at the Yale School of Public Health to join me for an online forum, which will be scheduled in the weeks ahead. I will share details with you as soon as I have them and hope you will join me for the conversation.
|
|
