The resolution was approved on a 7-0 vote to encourage use of masks and getting vaccinated. The ordinance requiring use of masks indoors was approved as an emergency ordinance to take effect immediately on a 6-1 vote over the objection of Council Member Glenn Ellerbe.
Ellerbe had argued on several occasions he wanted everyone to use masks and vaccination but opposed having it be a requirement.
“I am not against masks or vaccination. I want everybody in town to be vaccinated,” Ellerbe said during the discussion of the resolution. “I propose we ask people to do something rather than telling them to do something.”
Mayor Bill Snavely said, “It is not an either/or. We can do both.”
That is what happened. All seven members of Council were in favor of a statement of encouraging residents to use masks and getting vaccinated and that passed easily with little discussion.
Section 1 of the resolution reads, “City Council encourages and recommends that all eligible individuals within the City of Oxford be fully vaccinated including a booster shot to prevent hospitalization and possibly death.”
Section 2 adds, “City Council encourages and recommends that all individuals within the City of Oxford over the age of two wear a face mask in public indoor settings.”
Considerably more discussion and time were needed for the mask ordinance as Council members wrestled with conflicting considerations.
An amendment proposed by Council Member David Prytherch expanded the definition of types of masks approved by the ordinance. He said he was concerned limiting the requirement to KN95 and N95 masks would be out of the reach of lower-income residents because of the expense and difficulty of acquiring them. For that reason, an amendment was approved.
The ordinance’s Section 4 now reads: “For the purposes of this Ordinance, ‘face mask’ means three-ply surgical mask, KN95 masks, N95 mask, or not fully recommended can include a cloth mask. A face mask shall be worn so as to cover the mouth and nose in compliance with the CDC’s guidance on wearing face masks.”
The ordinance has a sunset date of March 1, which is a Council meeting night, but Snavely said if the current spike in cases subsides before that time, it can be repealed. Several speakers commented the ordinance cannot be enforced because the city does not have the staff to do so and businesses do not have the ability to strictly enforce it.
“It is really unenforceable,” Snavely said. “If we err, I’d rather err on the side of keeping people healthy, rather than err on the side of roll the dice and let people do what they want.”
Speaking from the audience, Chris Skoglind told Council members to look around the room at what he said was most people wearing masks voluntarily. He then questioned enforcement, saying it is not possible to enforce and that could dilute support for enforcement for other ordinances they pass in the future.
Ann Kamphaus, of Church Street Social, made a plea to Council to not approve the ordinance and referred to the resolution passed minutes earlier.
“In the face of the health and safety of the community, I believe the resolution you approved early in the meeting, gets us there,” she said. She said although Miami students are largely vaccinated, they will not come to local businesses because of the mask requirement. “This will negatively impact local businesses.”
Earlier wording of the proposed ordinance made a reference to the return of Miami students, but that was deleted in the proposal on Council’s agenda Jan. 18 because of that large percentage of vaccinations among students and the inclusion was seen as discriminatory against one group of people.
Council Member Alex French referred to that saying they do not intend to single out students, but it has bad optics passing the ordinance the week before classes resume.
“The timing is truly unfortunate. Many students were vaccinated even before the Miami University mandate. Doing this now looks like we are doing it because the students are returning,” she said. “There is a huge discrepancy between vaccinations of students and people who live here.”
Ellerbe proposed an amendment to exempt fully-vaccinated individuals with vaccine and booster from the ordinance’s requirements but it died for lack of a second.
“Obviously, this is a discriminatory act,” he said, in listing numbers he said show roughly 19,000 of the city’s total population of 23,000 are fully vaccinated. “We have enough data now for people to make the decision on their own. Let businesses decide. Why are we not incentivizing getting vaccinated by providing an incentive?”
About the Author