JIMCHI

Stay-at-Home orders covering much of the state right now.

nmpls

The order does make a distinction.
https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/up...U-Scenario.pdf

This should also apply to Airbnb.

sam_goh

Oof just came across this thread. Have an overnight planned in SJC otw to HI. Last year we stayed at the HH SJC and it was easy to get there, sleep, and leave first thing in the morning. I had called the property several nights ago and they said it was at each guest's risk. So I guess we will see....

Deez Nutz

Laws are passed by the legislature, not issued by the governor and/or public health officials.

Majuki

Santa Clara County and a couple of the other counties in the Bay Area are under modified SAH orders proactively even though the state isn't requiring them to shut down at this point since they haven't met the threshold. San Mateo County chose not to go along with this. Also unique to Santa Clara County is a quarantine requirement if one is coming in from an origin > 150 miles and spending the night in the county with some exceptions.

dkc192

Oh, thanks for correcting me on that!

Kacee

The issue is whether properties will enforce these rules in any way. Hyatt has indicated it may in some measure, at least with respect to out of state travelers.

With the original shut down order in March, there was no governmental enforcement of any hotel stay restrictions. There were anecdotal reports of some properties asking you to sign a certification that your travel qualified for an exception. I suspect that's about the most we'll see this time, too, but time will tell.

LoungeLizardHugo

Grand Hyatt SFO is a top of list fav and go-to for SFO long layovers or day before positioning flights, I know many employees there by first name basis, hate to hear this for their sake The Hyatts in Turkey, Costa Rica, Mexico, and various US locations could not have been more thrilled to welcome my wife and I, so that they can feed their families. They (humans who depend on working to survive) have already been devastated by the insanity. I await, one, single, credible study ("science") that confirms hotels doing business causes covid increases. I have personally seen the damage the "lockdowns" cause. History will judge the sheep very harshly for this mess.

I make it a point to tip everyone far higher than I ever have, and I sleep soundly at night knowing my travels support working families.

MSPeconomist

Is transit an exception for the CA rules? Surely there are a lot of overnight connections to/from international flights and CA doesn't want to lose that business for their airports. In addition, more people are allowing more time at major airports like SFO and LAX for COVID-19 testing, including before travel to Hawaii.

BTW, is AirBnB considered lodging? Logic would say yes, but they might argue that it's more like renting a furnished apartment or even house guesting with someone you know (like couch surfing).

JIMCHI

No one has said it's a "law". It's an "order" which the governor has every right to issue during emergency situations, and this is certainly an emergency situation. We have a President who issues executive orders without the approval of Congress and over much more controversial matters.

azepine00

Making it a binary choice is not gonna be effective or productive. People can travel and manage it as minimal risk activity if they follow common sense precautions.

And if we want to vent at someone, vent at companies that invite us to travel - here is today's email from ihg "just jump in the car and go"

skywalkerLAX

There are plenty of foreign travellers in California. Are they going to kick them all out or refuse a reservation? That won't go over well.

Kacee

No.
lol, that's not the way California is currently governed. There is very little if any regard for the real world consequences of these scientifically unsupported decisions.

JIMCHI

So what would you do if you were governor ? What information would you trust and rely on ?

Kacee

Like much of this thread, that's completely OT.

But I would focus on mask compliance and any additional restrictions would be narrowly tailored to address known high risk activities (like indoor drinking and dining). I find the views of Scott Morrow (San Mateo County Health Officer) on this subject particularly compelling. He's declined to go along with the knee-jerk scientifically unsupported decisions by other Bay Area health officers because he doesn't believe the science justifies the economic harm. And that imposing scientifically unsupported, nanny-state restrictions just causes people to tune out and ultimately decreases compliance with restrictions that do matter.