Jessica Cejnar Andrews / Tuesday, Oct. 10, 2023 @ 3:57 p.m. / COVID-19, Health, Local Government
Del Norters Urge Supervisors to Reconsider Recent COVID Vaccine Vote; Darrin Short Says Rehashing Discussion 'Creates A Circus'
Del Norte Public Health volunteers deliver vaccines at a drive-through clinic at the Del Norte County Airport in this January 2021 photo. | Courtesy of Fly Crescent City
Previously:
###
Darrin Short defended his colleagues’ tacit decision to not allow the county to participate in a program offering free COVID-19 vaccines to those without insurance.
The Del Norte County Board of Supervisors chairman argued Tuesday that he and his colleagues had taken action on Sept. 26 by not offering a second to District 2 Supervisor Valerie Starkey’s motion to participate in the federal Bridge Access Program.
When Starkey attempted to bring the item back to her colleagues for reconsideration, Short said she’d have to make a motion to suspend the rules, but he still felt it was improper to rehash a previous discussion.
“I was trying to tell people how it worked and how there was a way to properly bring it back,” Short told the Wild Rivers Outpost. “If we kept bringing back things that we disagreed on our meetings would be days long. It just creates a circus. We had already argued this.”
Eleven Del Norte County residents urged supervisors to argue the matter again. They stated that refusing to participate in the Bridge Access Program denied those who were unable to afford paying for the shot and didn’t have health insurance the right to choose whether to get the jab.
Their ire came after District 5 Supervisor Dean Wilson pulled a proposed participation agreement in the program from the Sept. 26 consent agenda for discussion. Without offering evidence, Wilson called the vaccine an “experimental that has been proven to be ineffective as far as prevention.”
One resident, Helen DuVernay, told supervisors that in the 1970s she was a research technician in the laboratory working to isolate Messenger RNA, or mRNA from animal pancreas.
The lab she worked for lost funding after Genentech chemically synthesized DNA for human insulin through recombinant DNA technology and Genentech was eventually acquired by Pfizer-BioNTech, DuVernay said.
“Pfizer-BioNTech has had this technology and used it to create, quite easily and quickly because they have in-house experts for the last decades, a vaccine that is an mRNA vaccine that creates a very pure product that triggers the body to fight off the COVID-19 (virus),” DuVernay told supervisors. “Folks who don’t have the background are somewhat afraid of this. They’ve come up with their own various stories ‘cause they don’t understand. But most people don’t know this has been going on for the last 40 years.”
Another resident, Lupe Gutierrez, pointed out that the scientists whose discoveries led to the mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 — Drew Weissman and Katalin Karikó — received the 2023 Nobel Prize for medicine.
“Choice is a precious commodity these days and every person has the right to choose whether or not they want to be vaccinated,” Gutierrez said. “Where’s the justice when, as representatives, you are choosing for your constituents to deny them a vaccine? It just doesn’t seem fair, especially when that choice was made because of a personal opinion that came without evidence.”
Created by the Biden-Harris Administration, the Bridge Access Program is a public-private partnership to allow those without health insurance access to the vaccine at their local pharmacies and public health centers. The program is paid for through $1.1 billion in federally appropriated funds during the COVID-19 emergency and is managed by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
In California, the Bridge Access Program is administered through the state Department of Public Health.
The Bridge Access Program comes as COVID-19 vaccines are being commercialized for the first time, the health policy research, polling and news site KFF reported on Sept. 13. Though the average price the federal government paid for the most recent booster was about $29 per dose, vaccine manufacturers may charge between $110-130 per dose, KFF reported.
In Del Norte County, the Bridge Access Program would have provided access to the COVID shot for the roughly 2,200 residents who don’t have health insurance, Starkey said Tuesday.
Starkey said she has spoken with state representatives and local doctors, including Public Health Officer Dr. Aaron Stutz to try to help those folks get the vaccine if they want even though Del Norte isn’t participating in the program.
Following the Board’s public comment period, Short said bringing the item back for discussion requires a motion to suspend the rules, which requires a 4/5ths vote, and a motion to reconsider the matter.
Starkey asked County Counsel Jacqueline Roberts to confirm whether Short’s statement regarding the process was accurate. Starkey also attempted to make a motion to suspend the rules only for Short to stop her and ask if she was going to make that motion at a future Board of Supervisors meeting.
Short argued that the Bridge Access Program staff report and proposed participation agreement wasn’t on Tuesday’s agenda and the information wasn’t available for the Board to consider the item.
“The action to reconsider is supposed to be done at that meeting, before that meeting closes,” Short said. “It could be done by any of the board members that were in the affirmative. If we made a motion, it was seconded and it didn’t carry, the person that voted against it couldn’t bring it up for reconsideration because then we would be hashing it out again.”
Starkey again asked for clarification from county counsel.
“I did ask Supervisor Short to put this back on (the agenda). He told me no,” Starkey said. “I wish you would have explained that to me at the time that you said no you’re not going to put it back on. I wish that you would have said, ‘However, here’s this other route.’ You’re explaining that today, so what is the next step? When can I ask to have the rules suspended in order for us to clarify when we can put this back on?”
Starkey pointed out that the discussion had already happened.
“What more do we need?” She asked. “How many emails did we get and phone calls? We know the issue.”
Roberts stopped the back and forth between Starkey and Short, suggesting they “give some time for this to be looked into.”
“It seems a little ambiguous as to when it can be brought back, whether the second really is a motion by the board — there’s a lot of issues at play right here and I would suggest that you give it some time so it can be thoroughly analyzed,” Roberts said.
CLICK TO MANAGE