San Diego makes legally risky move to steer contracts to women and people of color

The move, which takes on Proposition 209, was fueled by a study that found such businesses didn’t get their fair share of contracts

San Diego will take the legally risky step of giving preferential treatment to women- and minority-owned businesses when awarding city contracts, a move that appears to be in direct conflict with a voter-approved state proposition that sought to ban affirmative action.

Despite advice from City Attorney Mara Elliott warning against creating such programs, the City Council voted 9-0 this week to establish legally defensible policies that aim to help businesses owned by women and people of color get their fair share of billions of dollars that San Diego awards in city contracts.

Councilmembers said they are aware of the legal risk, and of the failures of other cities like San Jose to successfully create preferences that aren’t struck down by courts for violating Proposition 209, the measure outlawing such preferences that state voters approved in 1996.

But councilmembers said aggressive action is needed to make San Diego a more equitable city, despite the potential legal risks.

Their move is being fueled by a disparity study released last summer that showed businesses owned by women and minorities — particularly Black people and Native Americans — don’t get their fair share of city contracts.

Businesses owned by White women and people of color received only 19 percent of $2.2 billion in city contracts awarded during a five-year period analyzed in the study, compared to the 31 percent the study says they should have landed.

“I don’t think you can look at the data, see the disparities and not think there was intent there — unless you think there was something wrong with the folks who were left behind,” Council President Sean Elo-Rivera said.

Establishing intent will be key to San Diego’s efforts, because Elliott has said preferences can only be legal under Proposition 209 if there is a compelling government interest to them, such as reversing clear evidence of intentional discrimination.

City staff and the authors of the disparity study say there is no evidence that San Diego’s inequitable awarding of contracts is the result of intentional discrimination, but council members disagree.

Councilmember Raul Campillo said many courts have ruled that substantial disparities are evidence of discrimination.

“We have to ask ourselves, ‘How can the data be so skewed?’” he said.

Campillo said the spirit of Proposition 209 is an equal playing field for contracts, but the city’s track record shows the playing field has been unequal.

“A reasonable inference, and in my mind the only reasonable inference, is that Proposition 209 is being violated as we speak,” he said, contending the city is obligated to change a process that has hurt women and people of color. “I think we all know we need to take this further.”

Councilmember Monica Montgomery Steppe, who has spearheaded the effort to establish preferences in partnership with Campillo, said San Diego must take the legal risk.

“The evidence is here,” she said. “I believe we owe it to the people to fight for what I believe is right.”

Click here to read the full article in the San Diego Union Tribune

Taxpayers on Hook as Gascón Brings in Nation’s Highest-Paid Attorney in Legal Battle with His Own Prosecutors

 Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón, whose own deputies sued him for permission to charge repeat offenders to the fullest extent of the law, has pulled out all the stops in his California Supreme Court appeal against them, retaining one of the nation’s top lawyers.

Neal K. Katyal, a former Acting U.S. Solicitor General who represented Al Gore in the 2000 election dispute and has appeared before the U.S. Supreme Court dozens of times, is also reportedly one of the country’s highest-paid attorneys.

Reuters reported in May that the Georgetown law professor and partner at Hogan Lovells was charging as much as $2,465 an hour to represent a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson in a bankruptcy case. At the time, that was more than the $2,295 an hour former Attorney General Eric Holder was billing.

PREVIOUS COVERAGE: Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón sued by Deputy DA

“That’s high, but appellate experts like him are in high demand,” said Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor and Los Angeles-based trial attorney.

Katyal is one of the most accomplished lawyers in the country. He has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court dozens of times, according to his Georgetown bio. He also faced a storm of criticism in late 2020 after defending two large corporations in a child slavery lawsuit that reached the Supreme Court.

“When you hire the former Acting Solicitor General to handle an appeal, it’s a big deal,” Rahmani told Fox News Digital.

But the expenditure could amount to a waste of taxpayers’ money if Gascón fails in front of the Supreme Court.

Rahmani said Gascón’s chances of prevailing “are low,” noting that the courts have already upheld similar sentencing schemes.

“It’s unfortunate that Gascón is spending so much time and money litigating against his own front-line prosecutors and challenging California’s Three Strikes law, which is well-established and supported by the majority of California voters,” he said. “Especially as he faces a likely recall.”

SUGGESTED: DA Gascón recall effort: County officials to proceed with full review of signatures

Gascón’s office did not immediately respond to questions about how much taxpayer money is going toward paying Hogan Lovells or Katyal.

The Democrat Gascón is facing a recall effort and rising crime, as well as a storm of criticism over his handling of high-profile cases involving egregious crimes, including the 26-year-old trans child molester who was incarcerated in a juvenile facility nearly a decade after attacking a 10-year-old girl in a Denny’s bathroom.

In the past two weeks, as the recall effort cleared several roadblocks, Gascón disbanded the unit in his office tasked with notifying crime victims of their assailants’ parole hearings and taken his appeal against a lawsuit that blocked his directive banning prosecutors from charging strikes under California law to the state Supreme Court. In June, he said he had secured an “appropriate” sentence of five to seven months in juvenile probation camp for a wrong-way-driving teen in a stolen car who pleaded guilty to mowing down a mother walking her infant son in a stroller.

Katyal, who argued in appellate court that Gascón should be able to implement his unilateral directives over the Association of Deputy District Attorneys, wrote the opposite in a 2020 op-ed for the New York Times, critics said. Katyal and fellow Georgetown law professor Joshua Geltzer disputed the decision of the Justice Department, under then-Attorney General Bill Bar, to drop criminal charges against former Trump adviser Michael Flynn.

SUGGESTED: Whittier to vote on bypassing LA DA Gascón on misdemeanor crimes

“Fortunately, in our system, a prosecutor’s say-so is not enough to drop a prosecution,” they wrote. “It requires the approval of the court. And while judges rarely interfere with such decisions, this is that rare case.”

Neither Katyal nor Geltzer responded to requests for comment.

“This is diametrically opposed to his position on this case,” Eric Siddall, the vice president of the Los Angeles Association of Deputy District Attorneys, which initially sued Gascón over the three-strikes policy in December 2020, said of the Flynn op-ed Tuesday.

Eric George, the Ellis George Cipollone O’Brien Annaguey LLP partner representing the Association of Deputy District Attorneys, described Katyal as a “very good lawyer” Tuesday but said last week that he is confident in the ADDA’s case before the state’s Supreme Court.

“Each of the four respected jurists who have considered the matter has validated our client’s claims, and we are confident the California Supreme Court will take no action to interfere with the injunction against Mr. Gascón,” he said.

In June, the Second Appellate District Court upheld portions of a lower court’s injunction that said Gascón cannot refuse to charge three-strike cases, which can dramatically increase prison sentences for some of the most serious repeat offenders.

Gascón is hoping to have the court’s order overturned, arguing that it is “draconian,” creates “a dangerous precedent” and amounts to “taking the charging decision out of a prosecutor’s hands.”

“The district attorney overstates his authority,” the Second Appellate District ruling reads. “He is an elected official who must comply with the law, not a sovereign with absolute, unreviewable discretion.”

California Board OKs Parole of Ex-Mexican Mafia Killer

California parole officials have approved the release of a notorious former Mexican Mafia prison gang leader who has been cooperating with law enforcement for nearly 20 years.

Two consecutive governors previously blocked parole for Rene “Boxer” Enriquez in part based on the argument that he is safer in prison than on the streets, where he may be targeted as a snitch by his old cronies.

“They can’t deny him parole based on, ‘He might be in danger.’ That’s kind of his risk to take,” his attorney, Laura Sheppard, said Tuesday.

Authorities have taken extraordinary steps to protect him over the years, once booking him into custody under a false name on a bogus charge of possessing a swordfish without a license.

In 2015, the Los Angeles Police Department used SWAT officers and a police helicopter to secure a downtown building so Enriquez could speak to a group of police chiefs and business leaders about the gang’s growth and operations. Just last week, prison officials refused to provide his current photograph, citing security concerns.

“With his knowledge of the mafia, it’s his belief that if he stays out of their way … that he’ll be fine,” Sheppard said. “He doesn’t believe they’re going to chase him down like you see in the movies, hunt him throughout the world.”

Yet Enriquez plans to keep cooperating with federal authorities as they are again prosecuting the leadership of the prison-based gang that began in the 1950s in a juvenile jail and has since grown into an international criminal organization.

“It’s how he makes amends,” Sheppard said. “He’s probably prevented more crimes than he was ever involved in.”

He has been in prison since 1993, serving a life sentence for two second-degree murders, multiple assaults and drug trafficking conspiracy.

Enriquez joined the Mexican Mafia — nicknamed the Black Hand or “La Eme,” its Spanish language initial — in 1985 while serving an earlier prison stint for rape and armed robbery, according to parole records. He spent nearly the next two decades building a reputation within the gang through murder, drug-running and terror, both in and out of prison.

Gov. Gavin Newsom turned over the final decision on the fate of Enriquez, now age 60, to a hearing by a 12-member panel of the 21-member parole board.

He cited in part the “unique security threats.” Enriquez has revealed “the inner workings of large-scale gang associations, and informed on individual gang members. He testified for the prosecution in numerous cases,” Newsom wrote.

Officials including a retired assistant director for the California prison system told the parole panel during a hearing Monday that Enriquez is a changed man who will continue contributing to law enforcement’s battle against the gang.

“I’ve seen the worst of the worst and I know that he has definitely changed his world,” said retired San Diego Police detective and gang expert Felix Aguirre.

But relatives and friends of Cynthia Figueroa Gavaldon lined up to argue that he is still dangerous and they fear for their safety upon his release. She was a 27-year-old mother of two young children when Enriquez ordered her killed on Christmas Eve 1989.

Enriquez “has nothing to offer the community. All he ever has known and touched has died,” said her father, Raymond Figueroa, referring to Enriquez as a “monster.”

He had two gang associates, including Figueroa’s daughter, killed for violations such as stealing drugs and money. In the second case, he and an accomplice first forcibly overdosed their victim with heroin before driving him to a remote area where Enriquez fatally shot him.

He and another man also stabbed Mexican Mafia leader Salvador “Mon” Buenrostro 26 times with inmate-made weapons in 1991 in an interview room in the Los Angeles County Jail, though Buenrostro survived.

Enriquez has said he quit the gang in 2002 when he discovered its members were killing children and innocent relatives of gang members who fell into disfavor. He has said that he would have help from a witness protection program if he is released.

And over the years, Enriquez has had dozens letters of support for his parole from the FBI, local law enforcement officials, multiple state and federal prosecutors, and a deputy state attorney general.

Newsom previously blocked Enriquez’s parole twice, in 2019 and 2020, and then-Governor Jerry Brown blocked it three times, in 2015, 2016 and 2017.

“He personally molded and shaped the Mexican Mafia’s expectations of its members and expanded the gang’s reach outside the prison,” Brown wrote in 2016. He said that included pioneering the gang’s control of a vast network of drug dealers and gang members outside the prison walls.

Newsom this time said he was leaving a decision to the parole board because of its “unique procedural and appellate history” and “other unusually complex factors.” He asked parole officials to consider both Enriquez’s “particularly violent criminal history and his singular rehabilitative record.”

A Los Angeles County judge overturned Newsom’s 2020 parole reversal in August, saying the governor hadn’t shown proof that Enriquez is still dangerous. The Second District Court of Appeal had blocked Enriquez’s release while it considers Newsom’s appeal.

Sheppard said she hopes the appeals court still rules on the case, even with Enriquez paroled, to set a legal precedent that “the governor can’t just make a decision based on speculation and historical issues.”

Southern Californian K-12 School Districts, Universities Announce Return of Mask Mandates

During the weekend, schools across Southern California reinstated indoor mask mandates in the buildup to the return of the fall semester next month, despite many parents and groups now in opposition to the mandates.

Many of the affected schools are in K-12 districts. Of those to announce the return of mandates during the weekend, the most prominent was the San Diego Unified School District. The decision, triggered by the District due to the County surpassing the “high” CDC COVID-19 community levels of new cases and hospitalizations on Thursday, will at the very least be active for two weeks. However, with the rise of BA.4 and BA.5 variants of COVID across the state, it will likely not be going away anytime soon.

“We will continue to monitor the COVID-19 community level according to the CDC and County data and we will communicate if there are any changes in two weeks,” the San Diego school district said during the weekend. “If your student is participating in summer school or other summer enrichment program, please send them to school or their program with a mask. If they do not have one, masks will be provided. Students and staff will be required to wear their masks while indoors only.”

Joining K-12 districts were higher and secondary education colleges and universities. UC Irvine, UC Riverside, and UCLA were among the most prominent to return to the mandates, with UCLA actually having been on a continual indoor mask requirement renewal since last month. Like the K-12 districts, most of the campuses have all tied the return of the mandates to the CDC “high” community level threshold.

“In order to help mitigate possible exposure to and transmission of COVID-19 on property controlled by UCI, and to help prevent the spread of COVID-19 within the UCI community, the following requirements apply,” said UC Irvine Chancellor Howard Gillman in a letter on Monday. “This Executive Directive (“Directive”) is being re-issued and effective on the date indicated above, as Orange County recently moved into the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (“CDC”) “High” Covid-19 Community Level. This Directive supersedes all prior campuswide guidance regarding face coverings to the extent such guidance is inconsistent with this Executive Directive.”

“This Directive applies to all individuals on UCI controlled property and UCI employees conducting work off-site when not at their living unit.”

The number of districts and universities bringing back the mandate is expected to be significantly increased later this month due to LA County likely falling under the CDC threshold by then, despite many county health experts only calling the situation “media hype”.

The return of mask mandates in schools

While few districts and universities have already announced mask mandates for the upcoming fall semester, with San Diego’s school district specifically saying that they haven’t brought them back for the semester yet, many worry that they will ultimately be back in place before schools start fall classes next month.

“It’s good to be cautious, especially when it comes to the health of children,” said Luisa Renteria, a nurse in Los Angeles who has assisted COVID patients since March 2020, to the Globe on Monday. “But they are treating this as if COVID is still out there as this big, scary disease that is killing everyone instead of treating like a more seasonal disease like the Flu which it is quickly becoming.”

“Now new COVID-19 case numbers have rebounded a bit. We can’t deny that. California hit a 7-day average peak of new cases in January with 119,536. Beginning of February it was 66,000, with April going below 3,000. These new variants then caused numbers to go back up. June hit 15,471, and recently the state has been back up over 20,000 per weekly average. But the average number of deaths have stayed low. We are below where they were in April and are currently at a weekly average of 36.”

“This is what you aren’t hearing. No one is really dying from COVID anymore, it’s just the number of cases, and to a lesser extent, the number of hospitalizations. But rather that focus on methods used to combat other season illnesses, especially washing hands, it’s just back to masks based solely on where the CDC line is. They aren’t taking into account anything else really, like vaccination levels, class makeup, parental decisions, class need, or any other of the dozens of factors. And they absolutely should.”

Click here to read the full article in the California Globe

S.F. Taxpayers Shell Out Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars a Year to Disgraced City Officials. This Plan Would End That

In the wake of a corruption scandal that ensnared some of San Francisco’s highest level officials, two city supervisors want to make sure those officials don’t keep receiving fat pension checks when they retire.

Supervisor Aaron Peskin introduced a charter amendment trying to get on the Nov. 8 ballot that would make former city employees forfeit their pension after a finding of “clear and convincing evidence” from an administrative hearing held by the San Francisco Employees’ Retirement System that they committed bribery, embezzlement, extortion, or wire fraud in connection with their city work, or committed perjury trying to conceal a crime.

With few exceptions, San Francisco city workers cannot currently lose their pensions unless they’re convicted of and sentenced for a crime of “moral turpitude,” which doesn’t have a clear legal definition.

The measure is not-so-subtly aimed at specific officials who’ve pleaded guilty or been charged with corruption over the past two years, but still get checks from the city every month.

As of last summer, Mohammed Nuru, the former Public Works director who pled guilty to accepting bribes from contractors, collects $7,200 a month. Tom Hui, the ex-Department of Building Inspection chief who resigned amid accusations of giving preferential treatment to a contractor in exchange for gifts, gets nearly $16,000. And Harlan Kelly, the former Public Utilities Commission head accused of trading insider information on city contracts for overseas trips and jewelry, rakes in about $21,000 a month.

It’s not clear if all three would be subject to the charter amendment if it makes the ballot and is passed.

Peskin wasn’t available for comment before deadline, but told Mission Local earlier this year that officials who “do all the kind of things that make everyone barf in their mouth about government” were just getting lucrative retirements.

Pensions are significant, since labor costs take up a majority of San Francisco’s $14 billion budget. The measure matters as the city’s widespread corruption scandal, which began in early 2020, drags on, and there’s a possibility that more high-level heads could still roll.

Click here to read the full article in the SF Chronicle

The Attorney General’s Taxpayer-Funded Political Advertising

We hate to pick on Attorney General Rob Bonta two weeks in a row, but he’s really given us no choice. Last week we chronicled his hypocrisy on data privacy by posturing as a champion on that issue while negligently allowing his Department of Justice to release sensitive information on Californians who hold carry concealed weapons permits.

What spurred today’s critique was an article in the Sacramento Bee with the headline, “Why is California’s Attorney General spending taxpayer money to send you emails?” First, a hat tip to the Sacramento Bee – typically no friend of conservatives – and its reporter Ryan Sabalow.

The article reports that two months before the June primary election, millions of California voters received an email from Bonta’s Department of Justice with the subject line, “I want to hear from you.” The message was from an official email account and said, “As Attorney General, protecting California and its people is my highest priority” and “your opinion truly matters to me.”

Those receiving the email might have wondered what it was all about. After all, it is unusual to receive an unsolicited email from a state agency unless you’ve opted in to remain informed on a particular topic.

But it’s really no mystery at all. Prior to the primary election, Bonta was serving as the appointed, but unelected, Attorney General. No doubt that his name ID wasn’t very high, and he was willing to do anything possible to elevate his profile. That’s one reason he directed his staff – shortly after his appointment – to include his smiling visage on these email solicitations to as many as 7 million voters.

The Bee article, citing several sources, accurately notes that what Bonta did was technically legal, even if ethically questionable. Indeed, the question of the extent to which elected officials or government agencies expend taxpayer dollars for political advocacy or “self-promotion” is one that the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association gets a lot. In fact, our Public Integrity Project was formed precisely to monitor and to litigate when necessary illegal expenditures of public funds for illegal activity.

Fortunately, HJTA has had a string of successes in the courtroom including an action against the County of Los Angeles for producing a slick television ad advocating the passage of a sales tax to address homelessness. That action resulted in a $1.3 million fine against the county. Other successful legal actions include a suit against California’s then-Secretary of State, Alex Padilla, for spending an unauthorized $35 million contract with a politically connected public relations firm that referred to itself as “Team Biden” on its own website, ostensibly for nonpartisan “voter outreach” and public education.

The bad news is that there is a very high bar to prove illegality when it comes to public expenditures for non-election-related public relations campaigns. Rarely will an elected official or government entity be so foolish to use taxpayer funds for ads that say “Vote for Me” or “Vote for Measure X.”

But just because “outreach” communications, such as those emails sent by Bonta, may be technically legal, that doesn’t mean that they are ethically defensible. The attorney general is responsible for enforcing the law against other Californians. It looks pretty bad for him to skirt the law himself.

Click here to read the full article at the OC Register

Suspect Accused of Shooting San Bernardino County Deputy Had ‘Extensive Criminal History’

“He was right over him, shot him point-blank” says a visibly shaken Sycamore Court resident, describing the shooting of a Rancho Cucamonga deputy who had responded to a suspicious vehicle parked outside the home of Juan Cardenas.

“He’d been there for hours, with the lights blinking” says Cardenas, who saw the suspect get in and out of the car, use a cell phone and what looked like a laptop in the vehicle. Wondering why AAA hadn’t responded, since the Toyota was parked in a no-parking area, he figured he’d call deputies to check if everything was ok. He says he saw a deputy park behind the vehicle, approach the driver, talk to him and return to his vehicle. A couple of minutes later, as the deputy returned to the Toyota, Cardenas says the suspect “lunged at the officer”, knocking him to the ground, shooting him several times while standing over him.

Not believing what he was seeing, he immediately called 911 to report the officer down. Investigators say the deputy managed to get a description of the suspect out over the radio, as he lay on the ground. The huge response from law enforcement was immediate. The injured officer was put on an Ontario Police Department helicopter and flown to Pomona Valley Hospital, where he is listed in stable condition.

PREVIOUS COVERAGE: San Bernardino sheriff’s deputy hospitalized after being shot by suspect in Rancho Cucamonga

The suspect, who fled on foot, was captured by officers down the street. He’s been identified as 35-year-old Nicholas Campbell, from Northern California. San Bernardino County Sheriff Shannon Dicus confirmed that the suspect has a long rap sheet and is on probation for a carjacking in Northern California.

Fresno police say a Nicholas Campbell was arrested in September 2017, when witnesses reported the then 32-year-old and a woman allegedly broke into the sunroof of a car they had locked themselves out of. The responding officers found that the car had been stolen in Northern California in a possible carjacking, and booked Campbell on suspicion of possession of stolen property and illegal possession of a firearm. San Bernardino County Deputies will neither confirm nor deny if this is the carjacking probation they are referring to, but say he does have an “extensive criminal history.”

Click here to read the full article at FoxNews

2 suspects in Deadly California 7-Eleven Robberies in Jail

LOS ANGELES (AP) — The two men arrested Friday in connection with a series of deadly robberies at Southern California 7-Eleven stores are now in jail, authorities said Saturday.

The Santa Ana Police Department released the booking photos of Malik Patt and Jason Payne, both of Los Angeles. Police said Patt, 20, is believed to have been the shooter and is considered the main suspect. Jason Payne, 44, is the other suspect.

A half-dozen 7-Elevens and a doughnut shop were robbed within five hours early Monday in San Bernardino, Orange and Riverside counties, setting off an intensive manhunt that resulted in the arrests of the two men in Los Angeles.

Matthew Hirsch, a 40-year-old clerk, was shot and killed at a Brea store, and Matthew Rule, 24, was shot and killed in the parking lot of a Santa Ana store. Two of the three wounded have been released from hospitals.

Authorities said the men are also suspected of a July 9 killing in Los Angeles, but have provided few details in the case.

Click here to read the full article in AP News

Paul Pelosi Buys Millions in Semiconductor Stocks Before Congressional Subsidy Vote

Paul Pelosi, husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), recently bought up to $5 million in stocks in a semiconductor company.

This comes right before the Senate is set to vote on a competition bill next week that would give a $52 billion subsidy to the semiconductor industry, Reuters reported.

Paul Pelosi exercised 20,000 shares worth between $1 million to $5 million in Nvidia, a semiconductor company based in Santa Clara, California, which was revealed in a disclosure that Nancy Pelosi filed to the House of Representatives on Thursday.

The same disclosure also revealed that Paul Pelosi sold 10,000 shares worth between $1 million to $5 million in Visa and 50 call options worth between $100,000 to $250,000 in Apple.

In June 2021, Paul Pelosi also purchased up to millions of dollars in Nvidia stocks, the Daily Caller reported. It appears this purchase occurred around the same time the Senate would pass a more expanded version of the semiconductor subsidy bill; however, the House never took up the legislation.

“Obviously Speaker Pelosi would be aware of the timing of this legislation over in the Senate,” Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC) told the Daily Caller. “On the heels of that vote, for anyone in her orbit to purchase seven-figures worth of stock of an U.S.-based chip manufacturer just reeks of impropriety.”

Click here to read the full article in Breitbart California

L.A. County Hits ‘High’ COVID Level; Countdown to Indoor Mask Mandate

Los Angeles County has reached a “high” level of COVID-19 and has begun a countdown to the re-imposition of indoor mask mandates, according to county health director Barbara Ferrer on Thursday.

As Breitbart News reported earlier in the week, county officials had warned that a mask mandate could be re-imposed by month’s end if the ongoing surge of highly contagious variants of coronavirus continued:

The county’s public health website is registering a dramatic rise in test positivity rate and hospitalization, though deaths remain flat.

According to a briefing Thursday by L.A. County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer, authorities will reimpose the indoor mask mandate if hospitalizations — currently at 8.4. per 100,000 — reach 10 per 100,000 and stay there for two weeks.

The rise of new and highly contagious variants of COVID-19 is driving the new surge in infections.

On Thursday, Ferrer announced (via KABC-7) that according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) standards for community levels of COVID-19, the county had entered the “high” level — driven by data showing 10.5 hospital admissions per 100,000 people — an 88% increase since a month ago.

Ferrer added that if the community level remains high through July 28, the county would immediately begin to reimpose indoor mask mandates on July 29.

Click here to read the full article at Breitbart