Correction
A previous version of this article said Hughes' amendment to introduce a case trigger failed in a 6-1 vote. The amendment failed in a 5-2 vote, with Hughes and MacKay voting for the case trigger.
It will be two weeks before St. Albert city council can vote on changes to its mask bylaw, which would no longer accept face shields as adequate face coverings.
The amendments passed first and second readings in a 5-2 vote, with Coun. Sheena Hughes and Coun. Ken MacKay opposed.
But when it came for unanimous consent for third reading, Hughes stood her ground.
“To say that a screen in front of your face is less effective than not wearing a screen in front of your face doesn’t even make any sense – you don’t need to be a doctor to figure that out,” Hughes said.
Council passed a motion in August requiring people to wear face coverings in all indoor public spaces until Dec. 31. Administration was also directed to report back to council no later than Oct. 5 on the experience to date with the bylaw and any recommended amendments.
Since then, municipal enforcement officers have conducted 388 site visits and issued one ticket related to enforcement and education as of Sept. 15, according to the city. Officers spent approximately between 200 and 300 hours of patrol time related to the bylaw, according to Aaron Giesbrecht, policing services manager.
In conversation with the St Albert RCMP, the city was told about at least one public disturbance incident where two customers were arguing over the wearing of masks at a local business.
Face shields could be considered acceptable under the city’s current bylaw, said Percy Janke, city director of emergency management.
However, face shields are not recommended by Alberta Health Services (AHS) as an acceptable substitute to masks as “there is no current evidence that shows wearing a face shield alone adequately protects others from the wearer’s respiratory droplets,” according to an AHS document.
This amendment would make that clearer in the bylaw, said David Leflar, legal and legislative services director.
“What would change is the ambiguity around face shields would be removed, and face shields would no longer constitute as compliance,” Leflar said.
People wearing face shields are wearing them as an alternative to masks, which can cause “extreme aggravation or physical reactions," Hughes said. Taking face shields out as a potential option could discourage people from wearing anything at all, she said.
“You’re going to have fewer people who are actually going to be compliant,” Hughes said.
“I don’t think this is actually a recommendation that is going to be a benefit to our residents, I don’t think it will be a benefit to our city as a whole. And I can’t see how it will be better than wearing nothing.”
Some businesses allow their employees to wear face shields instead of masks for various reasons, and MacKay noted a lack of a transition period should council pass the new requirement.
Janke said they had reached out to the St. Albert and District Chamber of Commerce about the amendment and educating its members about the changes. But MacKay wasn’t convinced it would be an easy change for businesses to implement so soon.
“I think this creates a challenge for a number of our businesses, from grocery stores to restaurants to some of the other service industries. I don’t think I can support amending it to ban the use of actual face shields,” he said.
The amendments passed first and second reading, but failed unanimous consent for the third reading with Hughes opposed.
Case trigger voted down
Hughes brought forward an amendment to provide a measure of when the bylaw would take effect and when it would be repealed.
Under it, the mask bylaw would be enforced in indoor public spaces once St. Albert had reached 25 positive COVID-19 cases. It would be removed once St. Albert's case count stayed at 15 cases for two weeks.
Other neighbouring municipalities outside of Edmonton, like Spruce Grove and Sturgeon County, all have similar triggers built in their bylaw and have maintained lower case counts than St. Albert, Hughes noted. Most have yet to enact their mandatory mask bylaw.
With masks required for all indoor public spaces, people are also less likely to take care of their masks out of fear they could accidentally forget them.
"Because it's mandatory, you don't take (the mask) out of your car. You just leave it in your car and it keeps getting dirtier and dirtier, because if you take it out, you might forget to put it back in," she said.
"I honestly believe that if we said 'keep those numbers down and you don't have to wear mandatory masks' ... people would wear them voluntarily, and they would wear them better."
Mayor Cathy Heron called Hughes' argument a balanced one, but the biggest problem is the correlation between mask bylaws and case numbers is vague. Putting triggers into the bylaw could also cause confusion if it's repeatedly enacted and then retracted.
"If we start playing with it and fiddling (with) when it's mandatory and when it's not, the confusion in our community would be immense," Heron said.
Coun. Ray Watkins echoed concerns about a trigger causing undue confusion. Natalie Joly said her daughter was exposed to COVID-19 at a St. Albert daycare, and felt thankful the mask bylaw was in place at that time.
The amendment was voted down in a 5-2 vote, with Hughes and MacKay supporting the trigger.
