By San Francisco Police Department

On Thursday, March 11, 2021, at approximately 4:58 PM officers from Richmond Police Station responded to an attempted carjacking that just occurred at ‘Safeway’ on the 700 block of 7th Avenue. Officers arrived on scene and met with the 75-year-old female victim who was suffering from injuries sustained during the incident. Officers summoned medics who treated the victim for non-life-threatening injuries.

The victim told the officers she drove into the ‘Safeway’ parking lot. After the victim parked her car an unknown female approached her and asked to borrow her cell phone to call a family member. The victim handed the female her cell phone and was suddenly attacked by the female and two additional suspects. The victim was assaulted and dragged while being robbed of her wallet and keys. After obtaining the victim’s keys the suspects jumped into the victim’s car. A male bystander saw the commotion in the parking lot and came to the victim’s aid. The suspects then backed the car into the bystander while trying to steal the car. The bystander hit the rear window of the victim’s car, which shattered upon impact with his bare hand and sustained non-life-threatening injuries. When the rear window shattered the suspects exited the car and jumped into an awaiting vehicle that fled the scene. Additional witnesses recorded portions of the incident and along with the Good Samaritan provided officers information that assisted in identifying the suspect vehicle. A felony want was placed on the suspect vehicle.

The SFPD Robbery Unit who investigates carjacking incidents took over the investigation.

On Friday, March 12, 2021, at approximately 5:09 PM the SFPD was notified that the Antioch Police Department located the suspect vehicle and detained three occupants. One of the occupants was identified as one of the suspects in the carjacking. Officers from Richmond Police Station responded to Antioch, placed the suspect under arrest, and had the vehicle towed to San Francisco. The suspect is a 16-year-old female from San Leandro, California. The female was transported and booked into San Francisco’s Juvenile Justice Center for felony charges of Carjacking (215 PC), Robbery (211 PC), Aggravated Assault (245(a)(1) PC), Elder Abuse (368(b)(1) PC), and Conspiracy (182PC).

The investigation on the identities of the three other suspects remains open and active.

The victim and the Good Samaritan are recovering from their injuries and are cooperating with the investigation. The victim was very appreciative of the swift response and kindness of the Good Samaritan, witnesses, and police officers.

Anyone with information regarding this investigation is asked to call the SFPD Tip Line at 1-415- 575-4444 or Text a Tip to TIP411 and begin the text message with SFPD. You may remain anonymous.

 

“More contagious than others and possibly more deadly”

Laboratory results have revealed the first two known cases of the highly infectious U.K. variant (B.1.117) in Contra Costa County. The B.1.117 variant, dubbed the U.K. variant because it is believed to have originated in the United Kingdom, is more contagious than others and possibly more deadly.

“This is a reminder that even though COVID numbers are falling, we need to continue using all our tools to prevent another surge: wear masks in public, continue to physically distance, avoid both indoor and large gatherings, and get vaccinated when it’s your turn,” said Dr. Chris Farnitano, the county’s health officer.

Initial studies suggest the three COVID vaccines in the United State provide strong protection against the U.K. variant and others.

While these are the first confirmed cases of the U.K. variant in Contra Costa, Dr. Chris Farnitano, the county’s health officer, said there are likely many more in the community that have not been detected.

“We can’t say how widespread it is in Contra Costa, but it’s concerning,” Dr. Farnitano said.

The South African variant, another COVID variant of concern, has yet to be detected in Contra Costa, although Dr. Farnitano said we should assume it also circulating in California.

The presence of the U.K. variants were discovered as part of laboratory surveillance work during the pandemic. One local person infected with the U.K. variant began displaying common COVID-19 symptoms such as cough and muscles aches and was able to isolate at home. The other Contra Costa resident reported having multiple symptoms, including runny nose, cough, headache and loss of smell and taste.

For Contra Costa data and COVID-19 health information, visit cchealth.org/coronavirus.

 

Tenants and Landlords – application period opened yesterday

(Martinez, CA) – Starting March 15, 2021, Contra Costa County tenants and landlords impacted by COVID-19 can apply for assistance from the COVID-19 Rent Relief program. Over $75 million is Contra Costa County’s allocation of federal Emergency Rental Assistance Program funds from the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, which allocated $2.6 billion to Californians in need of rental relief.

“This funding for COVID-19 relief cannot come any sooner to help provide the hardest hit individuals and families in Contra Costa with financial assistance with rent and utilities payments and help them gain back financial and housing stability,” said Board Chair, Supervisor Diane Burgis. “My colleagues on the Board and I remain committed to helping residents get back on their feet, especially now that we have safe, effective vaccines that will help end this pandemic.”

The program assists income-qualified renters impacted by COVID-19 who need help to pay for rent or utilities. Eligible household income may not exceed 80% of the local median income. Eligible renters whose landlords do not participate in the program can still receive 25% of unpaid rent accrued between April 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021. Eligible renters can also receive future rent assistance equal to 25% of their monthly rent. The program also provides up to 80% rent reimbursement to landlords for unpaid rent accrued between April 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021.

“I am appreciative of the partnership with local governments like Contra Costa for their vote of confidence in our rent relief program,” said Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency Secretary Lourdes Castro Ramirez. “We have been closely working together to ensure we provide rent relief and support to those communities hardest hit by the pandemic.”

Check eligibility and apply online for COVID-19 Rent Relief and in Spanish Ayuda con la Renta. Tenants and landlords can contact the CA COVID-19 Rent Relief Call Center at 1-833-430-2122 for assistance to apply. To learn more and find state resources, visit Housingiskey.com.

For information on Contra Costa County’s Ordinance on Eviction Protection and Rent Freeze, see FAQs on the County website. For additional resources, call 211 or 800-833-2900, text HOPE to 20121, or visit www.contracosta.ca.gov.

Information on the vaccines not approved by FDA

On Monday, March 15, 2021, Contra Costa County Health Officer Dr. Chris Farnitano in coordination with other health officers in the Bay Area and Santa Cruz County issued the following statement:

“As local health officers, we fully support all three currently available vaccines for COVID-19. All three vaccines are safe and have been shown to be highly effective at preventing symptomatic illness and hospitalization. The clinical trials for all three vaccines demonstrated that they were 100 percent effective in preventing deaths from COVID-19. There is also growing evidence that all three vaccines help prevent asymptomatic illness, too. This means that people who have been vaccinated are not likely to spread of COVID-19 to others who are not vaccinated.

There has been much debate about the advantages of one brand of vaccine over the other, but it’s difficult to compare their efficacy. The different brands of COVID-19 vaccines have not been studied in head-to-head comparisons. The vaccines have each been studied in slightly different groups of people and tested at different phases of the pandemic. The rates of community transmission and presence or absence of COVID-19 variants differed across studies.

What we can say with certainty is that all three vaccines provide levels of protection that are comparable to some of the best vaccines we have for other serious infectious diseases for which we routinely vaccinate people.

With COVID-19 continuing to circulate as we work toward community immunity, our collective medical advice is this: the best vaccine is the one you can get the soonest. The different vaccines have different storage requirements and with supplies of vaccine currently limited, the same brand may not be available at each vaccine site consistently.

If you have questions about vaccine, speak to your medical provider if you have one. You can also learn more about vaccines on the state’s COVID-19 website.

This statement has been approved by health officers representing the city of Berkeley and the counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano and Sonoma.”

Pfizer-BioNTech Vaccine

According to the CDC’s website, the side effects of taking the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine include redness, swelling and pain at the injection site, as well as fever, fatigue, chills, vomiting, diarrhea and new or worsening joint and muscle pain. According to the company’s Feb. 12th press release, “The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine has not been approved or licensed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but has been authorized for emergency use by FDA under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to prevent Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) for use in individuals 16 years of age and older.”

According to a March 15the report on MedicalXpress.com, the “Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine is 97% effective in preventing symptomatic disease in actual use” and that “a previous real-world study revealed that the vaccine was 94 percent effective against symptomatic disease and 92 percent effective against asymptomatic disease, CBS News reported.”

Moderna Vaccine

According to the CDC’s website, the common side effects of taking the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine include pain, redness and swelling in the arm where you got the shot; and tiredness, headache, muscle pain, chills, fever and nausea throughout the rest of your body. According to the company’s Feb. 16th press release, “Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine is authorized for use under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for active immunization to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in individuals 18 years of age and older. Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine is investigational and not approved by FDA.”

Johnson & Johnson’s Jansen Vaccine

According to the CDC’s website, the side effects of the Johnson & Johnson Jansen COVID-19 Vaccine include pain, redness and swelling in the arm where you got the shot; and tiredness, headache, muscle pain, chills, fever and nausea throughout the rest of your body. It “is recommended for people aged 18 years and older.” Just like the other two vaccines, according to the Johnson & Johnson website, “The Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine has not been approved or licensed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but has been authorized by the FDA through an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). The FDA EUA Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine (Vaccination Providers) and full EUA Prescribing Information are available here.”

Allen Payton contributed to this report.

Second contract signed by city manager a month later similar to first but expands scope; city attorney claims he was unaware of it; city agreed to pay lead investigator $420 per hour, plus $180/hour for writer/editor’s time, $120/hour for intern’s time and other costs; no information on when or if the investigation has been concluded

By Allen Payton

On Friday, March 12, 2021, in response to a public records request by the Herald, Antioch City Attorney Thomas Smith released contracts with the outside investigator hired to investigate both the police officers’ incident with District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker’s sons on Dec. 29. She demanded an outside investigation be conducted. According to Smith, the second contract revised the scope of work included in the first. That allowed inclusion of the councilwoman’s conduct at the scene and comments in a later online video about it. (See related article)

First Contract Signed by Police Chief, City Attorney

As Antioch Police Chief T Brooks had shared previously, he hired the investigation firm, Oppenheimer Investigations Group, LLP (pronounced aw pin high mir), to investigate the conduct of his officers in the Dec. 29 incident. That was when they stopped Torres-Walker’s 13-year-old son who was riding a four-wheeled ATV “quad” motorbike and pursued her 20-year-old son who was riding a dirt bike but fled from the scene, both on city streets. According to a letter from an attorney for the Antioch Police Officers’ Association (APOA), Mike Rains, “the officers witnessed the subjects riding these vehicles in violation of several CVC sections, including riding on the wrong side of the road (CVC § 21650) and riding a motorcycle (the rider of the dirt bike) without a helmet (CVC § 27803).” (See related article)

The stop occurred on A Street in front of a home in the 1900 block near the intersection of Walter Way. As previously reported by this writer, who drove by the scene of the stop, both the police car and quad were facing south in the right, north bound lane.

Also, according to Rains’ letter, “Unbeknownst to the officers on scene, the second rider who fled was Ms. Torres-Walker’s adult son, who apparently fled to his home where he notified Ms. Torres-Walker about the incident and the officers’ contact with her other son.”

“Although the 13-year-old was wearing a helmet, the ATV was not street legal (CVC §§ 38010, 38012) and he did not possess a valid California Driver License (violation of CVC § 12500(a)). Due to his age and the fact that the ATV would be towed, as well concerns about the second rider who fled, officers asked the 13-year-old to contact a parent who could respond to the scene and pick him up. This was done to ensure a parent, in this case Ms. Torres-Walker, was aware of the incident and to ensure the officers knew the minor would be released to a responsible adult.

A short-time later, Ms. Torres-Walker, along with her adult son, arrived in another vehicle to the location where officers stopped her 13-year-old son. Ms. Torres-Walker immediately approached Officer Prieto and Officer Rodriguez in a hostile and threatening manner as she announced her position as a City Council member and made statements to the effect of ‘do you know who I am?,’ ‘I’ll have your badge,’ and ‘I’ll have your [expletive] job, do you know who I am?’ Eventually, Ms. Torres-Walker calmed down enough for the officers to complete the paperwork to tow the ATV and issue a citation to her son. The 13-year-old son was released to Ms. Torres-Walker at the scene without further incident.”

In both Rains’ letter and a second video posted on her council Facebook page on Feb. 16, Torres-Walker said she met with Vida Thomas, a partner in Oppenheimer, and informed the councilwoman of both the investigation into the police incident with her sons, as well as her conduct and comments to and about them.

First Contract Signed Jan. 14 Focused on Police Actions

The first contract was signed by both Brooks and Smith on Jan. 14, 2021 with Amy Oppenheimer, the firm’s managing partner. It reads, “Firm agrees to conduct an impartial administrative investigation regarding police actions relating to an incident on December 29, 2020, involving Antioch Police Department and the children of an Antioch City Councilmember.” 2021.01.14 Oppenhemier Agreement

The investigators are lawyers, so the contract established an attorney-client relationship and states the “Firm’s communications, work product and final report are protected from disclosure…unless waived by the City”. The contract included payment of $420 per hour for the lead investigator, $180 per hour for an editor/writer and $120 per hour for an intern’s time, as well as other related costs of the investigation.

Second Contract Signed by City Manager, Police Chief Removes Language Focused on Police Actions

Prior to release of the contracts, attempts to reach Ms. Thomas to confirm if she was hired and by whom for the second contract were unsuccessful. But the second contract, dated Feb. 15, 2021 shows Antioch City Manager Ron Bernal’s name and signature, as well as Chief Brooks’ name and signature. It does not include Smith’s signature, nor anyone from the APOA, as Torres-Walker stated in her Feb. 16th video. 2021.02.15 Oppenhemier Agreement

“My signature is not on the second contract, which revised the scope of the investigation, because I was not notified of this contract,” City Attorney Smith shared.

However, the second contract is similar to the first, with the exception of who signed it. In addition, the second contract reads: “Firm agrees to conduct an impartial administrative investigation regarding an incident on December 29, 2020, involving Antioch Police Department and the children of an Antioch City Councilmember,” and no longer included the words “police actions relating to.”

It did not ask for a separate investigation into Ms. Torres-Walker, but the removal of the language included in the first contract is what allowed the investigation to be expanded to include her conduct and comments.

Furthermore, in her second video she stated, “On Wed., Feb. 10 at 11:00 a.m., I actually met with Vida Thomas, who is with Oppenheimer Investigations Group. They are handling the independent investigation into the situation that happened with my sons and Antioch PD.” Torres-Walker also said, “through the…interview process of the investigation, the attorney, Vida also alerted me that she is also representing the Antioch Police Officers’ Association in their request for independent investigation into my conduct.”

Only One Investigation Not Two

There was only one investigation, not two, into the incident, with the second contract expanding the scope of work from the first, which included the councilwoman’s conduct and comments. Thus, the reason for the same investigator working on both aspects of the investigation.

Questions to Staff, Torres-Walker and Other Council Members

The following questions were emailed to Bernal, Brooks, and Torres-Walker and included City Attorney Smith and the other four council members:

“How did the second contract revise and expand the scope of services outlined in the first one? Was the elimination of the words “police actions relating to” in the second contract the difference which revised and expanded the scope of work of the investigation to include Councilwoman Torres-Walker’s conduct and comments?

If so, then there was only one investigation, not two. Correct? And if that’s the case, has the investigation of all parties involved in the incident been concluded or terminated, when and by whom, and why?

Was there a cover letter for the second contract asking for a broader investigation into the councilwoman’s conduct and comments? Or was there other communication between Ron and Ms. Oppenheimer prior to the signing of the second contract?

Furthermore, since Ms. Torres-Walker stated in her Facebook video on Feb. 16 that, ‘On Wed., Feb. 10 at 11:00 a.m., I actually met with Vida Thomas, who is with Oppenheimer Investigations Group.’ and ‘through the…interview process of the investigation, the attorney, Vida also alerted me that she is also representing the Antioch Police Officers’ Association in their request for independent investigation into my conduct.’

First, to Councilwoman Torres-Walker, when did Ms. Thomas alert you to the second investigation? Was it on Feb. 10 or on Feb. 15 or 16, after the second contract was signed and prior to your video in which you mentioned it?

Second, to Ron and T (Chief Brooks), if she was alerted on Feb. 10, how would Vida Thomas know there was a second investigation before the contract was signed with Ms. Oppenheimer on Feb. 15 unless there were other communications between Ron and/or T, and Ms. Oppenheimer prior to signing the contract? If there were additional communications. Please confirm that fact and what was communicated to Ms. Oppenheimer as to what would be included in the additional scope of work, and provide that information/documentation, as well.”

They were also asked if the investigation has been concluded. If so or if not, when? If not, when will it be? Also, how much has the City been billed to date, for the investigation.

A formal records request was made on Saturday, March 13 for that additional communication if the city officials are unwilling to provide it and answer the questions.

In addition, another public records request was submitted the same day for the City to waive their attorney-client privilege and release any and all reports from Oppenheimer to the City of Antioch as described in the contracts. The City has 10 days to provide that information.

As of Monday, March 15 at 12:45 p.m. no responses to the questions were received from any city official.

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond announces $240,000 in grants to address inequities that deepened during pandemic

SACRAMENTO—State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond announced Thursday that the California Department of Education (CDE) has selected 12 recipients of mini grants, totaling more than $240,000, that will fund local efforts across the state to address equity and opportunity gaps through supporting educator and student needs in distance learning, in-person instruction, and hybrid models. The Antioch Unified School District will receive $20,000 of the grant funds.

Since the applications were announced in December 2020 as part of CDE’s ongoing efforts to address the COVID-19 pandemic’s continued impact on students, more than 400 schools and districts across California applied for the grants, which are funded by contributions from philanthropic partners. The funds must be used to advance equity and close opportunity and access gaps. The grantees are given discretion to decide how they will address the topic of equity. The list of grantees is at the end of this press release.

“It’s been an unprecedented, unpredictable year for our schools, and California’s educators have been looking for resources and support to ensure that students can still attend class, access a great education, and learn and achieve during the pandemic,” Thurmond said. “Congratulations to these school districts for showing their communities that they’re committed to recognizing and addressing opportunity gaps during the pandemic and providing targeted supports to students and families who have been struggling.”

Issues addressed by the grant funds include transportation, internet connectivity, modifying spaces to serve as family resource centers, one-on-one academic intervention, mentorship for students struggling with distance learning and asynchronous instruction, small group tutoring, home visits, professional development for educators needing assistance with technology, and a variety of other family engagement activities.

Since last spring, the State Superintendent and the CDE have maintained an ongoing and urgent focus on addressing the numerous access and opportunity gaps that impact student learning—gaps that, in many cases, have deepened and become newly exposed during the pandemic. During the past year, the CDE has secured hundreds of thousands of computing devices for students, pressured internet service providers to expand access, bolstered mental health and counseling resources, made it easier for schools to provide meals, and provided guidance and dozens of training opportunities for educators to strengthen distance learning for California’s highest-need students.

As the state continues to battle COVID-19, CDE will continue to support efforts to protect the health and safety of school communities while providing the custom supports needed to ensure learning continues and improves.

The Equity Mini Grant recipients and intended uses of funds are:

• Antioch Unified School District: $20,000 to implement home-visit teams to gain engagement from students and provide support to students and families that are currently not showing high engagement/attendance.
• Castaic High School: $20,000 to pay for district buses to pick up students from a central location in an underserved neighborhood.
• Colusa Unified School District: $20,000 for transitioning the current Colusa High School Library to serve as a student and parent resource center.
• Imperial Unified School District: $20,000 to support internet connectivity for our students who live in an underserved area.
• Kern High School District: $20,000 to provide one-to-one academic intervention and support for students with unique needs who have failed multiple classes.
• Lakeside Union School District: $20,000 to provide mentor support to students who continue to struggle with engagement in asynchronous instruction.
• Riverside County Special Education: $20,000 to purchase book bags, books (English/Spanish sets), educational materials/manipulatives for arts and crafts, and staff mileage reimbursement for the home delivery of weekly literacy bags.
• San Ysidro School District: $20,000 to provide support services to students and families to address the academic and technological needs of students and families.
• Sundale Union Elementary School District: $20,000 to strengthen family connection with parents by having students on campus in small cohorts during non-school days/intercessions.
• Tehachapi Unified School District: $21,352.32 to provide additional opportunities for credit recovery for seniors who are at risk of not graduating.
• Twin Rivers Unified School District: $20,000 to train and provide support to teachers displaying the highest needs for support during distance learning.
• West Contra Costa Unified School District: $20,000 to expand capacity to provide outreach and mentorship to students by hiring a full-time mentor through the Peacemaker program.

 

By Patrick McCarran, Real Estate Broker

Leaving California or is it time to reinvest in a different property or state? Due to the recent upswing in homes values we have realized a significant growth in equity.  Many owners think that they may be stuck in their current investment property. Whether you bought it as an investment, or it was an owner occupied that went past your three-year deferment period you have options. Maybe you would prefer an investment in a different city, region or even another state. Possibly you would like to combine many properties into few or few into many. The answer is a 1031 Tax Exchanges otherwise known as a Starker Exchange. This process allows real estate owners to defer taxes on capital gains resulting from the sale of investment real estate, often a sizable sum since combined Federal and State taxes can run as high as 38 percent.

In general terms to roll their profit into another property and defer the tax and preserve equity and cash flow.

To accomplish this, sellers need to engage a Qualified 1031 Intermediary to document the sale as an exchange and to receive the funds from the sale. I cannot stress the importance of a THIRD party for the exchange. This does NOT mean a title or escrow company. By definition you cannot have any direct control over the funds, which is not just in your pocket but anywhere within your reach.

Central to a 1031 Exchange is the interpretation of like-kind property. While the common assumption is that like-kind implies land for land or a condominium for a condominium swap, the definition of like kind has become far less literal.  Today it defines like kind as meaning that both the replacement and the original property must be used as an investment. So, land, condominiums, single-family homes and motels can all be exchanged for one another as long as they are used in the exchanger’s business or held as an investment.

1031 Exchanges do have specific IRS requirements and a set timeframe for performing. This is why it is very important that you contact an experience agent such as myself and engage the Intermediary BEFORE  you close and ideally before you place the property for sale.

There Are other options for example you can opt for a Reverse Exchange where you buy the replacement property first then sell the current property.  An Improvement Exchange, allows you to build investment properties from the ground up or improve existing properties.

If you want more information on 1031 Exchange or have any questions feel free to contact myself or a real estate professional you know. Make sure that he or she is familiar not only with the process but also with the specific documentation and time frame mandated by the IRS.

This article is intended to inform readers, but does not constitute any financial or legal advice.

Patrick McCarran is a local Realtor and Broker DRE# 01325072. He can be contacted by phone or text at (925) 899-5536, pmccarran@yahoo.com or www.CallPatrick.com. An independently owned and operated office.  In association with Realty One Group Elite DRE# 0193160. Equal Housing Opportunity.

County shows steady improvement since Winter COVID-19 spike; schools can reopen without submitting a safety plan

COVID-19 is spreading slower in Contra Costa than during a post-holiday peak a few weeks ago, allowing some business and community activities to resume in the county for the first time since November.

The average daily number of new cases in Contra Costa has fallen enough that California today moved the county from the purple tier to the red tier of its Blueprint for a Safer Economy, effective Sunday, March 14.

Contra Costa was poised to enter red tier on Wednesday next week, but will transition a few days earlier after the state met a goal of administering 2 million doses of COVID-19 vaccine in high-risk, economically disadvantaged communities on Friday. That triggered a relaxation of the blueprint’s requirements.

“It is encouraging to see our data moving in the right direction, and it’s a testament to the hard work Contra Costa residents have put in to slow the spread of COVID-19,” said Dr. Chris Farnitano, Contra Costa County’s health officer. “But it is important that we make healthy choices to keep up our momentum. This pandemic is not over yet.”

Contra Costa has more tools to protect against COVID-19 than it did last fall, including safe, effective vaccine. So far more than 250,000 county residents have received a dose – about one quarter of the population.

More groups of Californians will become eligible for vaccine on Monday, March 15, including public transit workers, people in congregate living situations and people who have health conditions that put them at high risk of serious illness from a COVID-19 infection. Visit covid19.ca.gov for more information.

Vaccine, along with physical distancing, face coverings, avoiding close contact with people who are not housemates, hand hygiene and regular testing are all healthy choices that protect against COVID-19 and that have helped reduce transmission of the virus since January.

In early January, nearly 50 new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 population were identified every day in Contra Costa, during the worst part of the most recent surge. On Friday, the county’s adjusted per-capita case rate was 6.7, qualifying for reduced state health order restrictions, including:

• Restaurants, gyms, dance studios and museums may resume indoor operation, following state health guidelines.
• Indoor retail stores and shopping malls may increase their maximum occupancy and grocery stores may operate at fully capacity.
• Small private gatherings may be held indoors, following state health guidance.
• Colleges and other higher education institutions may reopen indoor lectures, following state health guidance.
• Elementary and secondary schools can reopen for in-person learning without submitting a safety plan to Contra Costa Health Services.

For details and sector-specific health guidance, visit covid19.ca.gov. Contra Costa also updated its county health orders so they do not create additional restrictions to business or community activities.

Contra Costa met other state criteria for returning to the red tier weeks ago, with the average daily percentage of COVID-19 tests that return positive in the county below 8 percent (2.4 percent on Friday). The average daily percentage of positive tests in disproportionately impacted neighborhoods identified through the state’s health equity metric was 4.3 percent.

For Contra Costa data and COVID-19 health information, visit cchealth.org/coronavirus.