Professional Documents
Culture Documents
US DIS CACD 8 20cv368 REPLY in Support of Amended Ex Parte Application A
US DIS CACD 8 20cv368 REPLY in Support of Amended Ex Parte Application A
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
2 I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1
26 B. The Opposition Does Not Address Governor Newsom’s and the California
Legislature’s Positions as to Whether Plaintiffs’ Claims May Go Forward in this
27 Court, Leaving Open the Possibility That They Will Consent ............................. 22
28
i
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 3 of 31 Page ID #:322
C. The State Defendants Ignore How the Fourteenth Amendment Prevails in a Direct
1 Clash with The Eleventh Amendment .................................................................. 23
2 V. AT A MINIMUM, THE COURT SHOULD PROVIDE PLAINTIFFS TIME TO
3 MARSHAL THE INFORMATION AND EVIDENCE THAT DEFENDANTS HAVE
WORKED SO HARD TO KEEP FROM THEM............................................................. 24
4
VI. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 24
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ii
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 4 of 31 Page ID #:323
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
1
2 Cases
McNary v. Haitian Refugee Ctr. Inc., 498 U.S. 479 (1991) ....................................19
1
2 Mich. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 667 F.3d 765 (7th Cir. 2011) (Wood, J.) ......13
3 Michigan v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 758 F.3d 892 (7th Cir. 2014) (Wood,
J.) ..........................................................................................................................12
4
5 Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass’n of U.S., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S.
29 (1983)...............................................................................................................19
6
Nat'l Ass'n of Regulatory Util. Comm'rs v. F.E.R.C., 475 F.3d 1277 (D.C. Cir.
7
2007) .....................................................................................................................20
8
Newman v. Apfel, 223 F.3d 937 (9th Cir. 2000) ......................................................17
9
Oregon Nat. Desert Ass’n v. U.S. Forest Serv., 465 F.3d 977 (9th Cir. 2006) .......16
10
11 Paterno v. State of California, 74 Cal. App. 4th 68, 104 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999) ......11
12 Pennhurst State School & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89 (1984)......................21
13 People v. Glenn-Colusa Irr. Dist., 127 Cal. App. 30 (Cal. Ct. App. 1932) ............12
14
Pinnacle Armor, Inc. v. United States, 648 F.3d 708 (9th Cir. 2011) .....................17
15
Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997) ...........................................................20
16
17 Roy v. Kentucky State Police, 881 F. Supp. 290 (W.D. Ky. 1995) .........................20
18 The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A) v. U.S., 870 F.2d 518 (9th Cir. 1989) ................13
19 Traynor v. Turnage, 485 U.S. 535 (1988) ...............................................................15
20 Trudeau v. Fed. Trade Comm’n, 456 F.3d 178 (D.C. Cir. 2006) ............................13
21
Ukiah Valley Med. Ctr. v. F.T.C., 911 F.2d 261 (9th Cir. 1990).............................16
22
Venuto v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (22 Cal. App. 3d 116, 129).................11
23
24 Veterans For Common Sense v. Shinseki, 644 F.3d 845 (9th Cir. 2011) ................13
28
iv
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 6 of 31 Page ID #:325
Win Win Aviation, Inc. v. Richland County, South Carolina Sheriff’s Dept., 2015
1
WL 1197534 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 16, 2015) ................................................................13
2
Statutes
3
28 U.S.C. § 1331 ......................................................................................................19
4
5 42 U.S.C. § 264 ........................................................................................................18
6 5 U.S.C. § 702 ..........................................................................................................12
7 5 U.S.C. § 706(2) .....................................................................................................19
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
v
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 7 of 31 Page ID #:326
1 balance of equities tips heavily toward the Plaintiffs.” (Id.) Plaintiffs demonstrated
2 that severe public health and safety risks were likely to ensue if the Defendants
3 moved people infected with Coronavirus to an inadequate facility.
4 Around the world, countries are shutting down their borders, enforcing
5 curfews, aborting major cultural events, and cancelling school to try to prevent the
6 spread of this disease. The risk to Costa Mesa in terms of threats to public health
7 and safety and interference with daily life is severe. The threat of Coronavirus could
8 also bring commerce to a halt and keep people shut in their homes. Business and
9 tourism visits could drop off dramatically, events and conventions could be
10 canceled, jobs may be lost, millions of dollars in tax revenues could disappear, and
11 people might stay away from Costa Mesa and Orange County.
12 And Costa Mesa first responders and local hospitals will bear the worst of this
13 crisis, as the CDC has itself has acknowledged that it expects more people from the
14 Diamond Princess to test positive for the disease, become ill, and require treatment.
15 (Dkt. 1-1, Ex. 15.) In other words, contrary to the suggestions of the federal and
16 state government in their oppositions, there is almost no chance the medically fragile
17 individuals quarantined at Fairview will remain at Fairview and not expose the
18 broader community; many will end up in local hospitals, exposing first responders
19 and local medical staff, at the very least.
20 A. President Trump’s Promise to Alabama Confirms that
Coronavirus Patients Pose a Public Health Risk, and Reveals the
21 Federal Government’s Plan as an Effort to Use this Crisis as a
Political Weapon
22
23 President Trump put a finer point on the harm threatened against Costa Mesa
24 Sunday when he promised to protect Alabama residents from this very same danger
25 even though the facility in Alabama selected as a location to treat other Coronavirus
26 patients is far more secure and suitable for this purpose. The public statements of
27 Governor Ivey, Senator Shelby, and Congressman Rogers thanking President Trump
28 for cancelling the plans to use the Center for Domestic Preparedness and thereby
2
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 9 of 31 Page ID #:328
1 “keeping Alabamians safe,” make clear that President Trump’s promise presumed
2 that moving individuals with Coronavirus to the State of Alabama posed a danger to
3 that state’s public health and safety. (Further Decl. of Nahal Kazemi, “Kazemi 2nd
4 Decl.,” Ex. A.)
5 Moreover, if it were truly necessary to send the Coronavirus patients to new
6 locations now, then President Trump would not have withdrawn the Government’s
7 supposedly well thought out and scientifically based plan to locate the majority of
8 those patients at a facility in Alabama uniquely qualified to handle this threat. And
9 the people of Costa Mesa are now left to wonder if everyone infected with
10 Coronavirus will be housed in a dilapidated former assisted living facility the State
11 of California declared just three weeks ago to be unsuitable as an emergency shelter.
12 Indeed, the State determined this facility could not be used even as an alternative to
13 having people sleep on the street because it required two years and $25 million
14 dollars in rehabilitation just to make it habitable. Are the people of Costa Mesa
15 really supposed to believe this is the best location in the entire country to serve as
16 the frontline for combatting and containing this potential epidemic?
17 In the absence of any meaningful communication from the federal
18 government, Plaintiffs and the people of Costa Mesa and Orange County are left
19 wondering why their community was chosen and why Alabama was spared. Why
20 are secure federal facilities and specialized medical facilities inappropriate, but a
21 rundown former home for people with developmental disabilities is perfectly
22 situated to contain a dangerous and deadly disease? The concerns of the Plaintiffs
23 and the people of Costa Mesa and Orange County are not founded on baseless
24 rumors or fearmongering. Instead, the harm this virus could wreak on the
25 community is palpable, and is exacerbated by the fact that the information they are
26 receiving from the government is contradictory, incomplete, and constantly
27 changing. Instead of getting reassurance that the federal government is working to
28
3
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 10 of 31 Page ID #:329
1 keep this region safe, Plaintiffs and those similarly situated feel abandoned by their
2 government. Worse than abandoned, they feel targeted.
3 B. Plaintiffs’ Further Declarations Underscore the Potential Harm
and Explain that Plaintiffs Have Only Just Begun to Understand
4 the Potential Detrimental Impact to Their Community
5 City employees have filed additional declarations with this reply in support of
6 Plaintiffs’ positions, highlighting the startling lack of coordination at the local level
7 and how that lack of coordination is negatively affecting the City’s ability to respond
8 to any emergencies or public health threats arising from the use of Fairview to isolate
9 Coronavirus patients. For example, Acting Police Chief Bryan Glass identified key
10 information the City’s leadership would expect to receive in the event of a public
11 health emergency that would allow it to better coordinate with other levels of
12 government in responding to any threats. (Glass Decl. at ¶ 5.) He noted the failure
13 to include City leadership in the planning process here would hamper the City’s
14 ability to serve as an effective partner. (Id. at ¶ 6.)
15 Emergency Services Manager Jason Dempsey compared the bare bones and
16 unconfirmed information he received from Cal OES to the robust and detailed action
17 plan he would prepare for a relatively mundane event, like a football training camp
18 that was expected to pose no threat to the community. (Dempsey Decl. at ¶ 4.) He
19 gave detailed examples of information the City still did not have and which it needed
20 to ensure community safety in the event Fairview was used to isolate Coronavirus
21 patients. (Id. at ¶ 7.)
22 And City Manager LoriAnn Farrell Harrison described in her declaration the
23 normal methods and legal authorities relied on to coordinate among federal, state,
24 county, and local officials, including activation of the National Incident
25 Management System (NIMS), which is the standard protocol for coordinating a
26 whole government response to an emergency. (Farrell Harrison Decl. at ¶ 28.) The
27 NIMS system was not activated here, meaning critical information has not gotten to
28
4
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 11 of 31 Page ID #:330
1 those who need it and vital lines of communication have not been opened. (Id. at ¶
2 29).
3 Accordingly, and contrary to Defendants’ claims of robust coordination (Dkt.
4 14 at 2-4), the intentional exclusion of the public safety officials and emergency
5 managers with the best understanding of this community has ensured that planning
6 for the use of Fairview has been inadequate and incomplete, increasing the risk to
7 Costa Mesa and the surrounding area.
8 C. Defendants’ Suggestion that FDC is the Only Possible Site Because
it is the Only Suitable State-Owned Property Makes No Sense
9
10 Defendants expended a great deal of energy attacking the declaration of Costa
11 Mesa City Attorney Kim Barlow. They said it needed more details. (Dkt. 13 at 10.)
12 They said it was hearsay (even though the statements relayed in it were those of the
13 Defendant Department of General Services, making them admissible as those of a
14 party opponent. (Id.). And they said it didn’t address the particular usage proposed.
15 (Id.) But what Defendants did not do was dispute its accuracy. That is because the
16 facts are plain: On February 5, 2020, representatives of the State Department of
17 General Services, which has responsibility for the closure of the Fairview
18 Developmental Center, informed officials from the City of Costa Mesa that the site
19 was not suitable for use as an emergency homeless shelter. And the reason given
20 was the time (two years) and cost (approximately $25 million) necessary to make
21 the facility fit for that purpose. (Dkt. 4-3).
22 If it was the case not three weeks ago that the Fairview Developmental Center
23 was unfit as an alternative to people sleeping on the street, how are Plaintiffs to
24 believe that the minor modifications Defendants claim were made over the weekend
25 (Dkt. 14-3 at ¶5) were sufficient to make this facility better suited to now house,
26 isolate, treat, and care for highly contagious individuals than a FEMA center tailor-
27 made to this purpose?
28
5
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 12 of 31 Page ID #:331
1 Rather than confronting these facts, Defendants fall back on the position that
2 that no other state-owned facilities are suitable. But Defendants give no reason why
3 a facility must be state-owned to be used for this purpose. And there are certainly
4 better suited federal facilities. There are also better suited medical facilities, such as
5 all those designated to treat Ebola patients in 2014. As the Ocean View Unified
6 School District argued in its amicus brief in this case:
7
There are approved facilities that are well-positioned to
8 receive, treat, and suppress the spread of the Coronavirus.
9 In coordination with the CDC, California state officials
10 approved and designated certain hospitals to address the
Ebola virus. Those hospitals include Kaiser Oakland
11 Medical Center, Kaiser South Medical Center in
12 Sacramento, University of California San Francisco
13 Medical Center, University of California Davis Medical
Center in California.
14
(https://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/viral/35-us-
15 hospitals-are-designated-ebola-treatment-centers). Based
16 on the designation of these facilities as Ebola virus
treatment centers, these facilities are much more
17
appropriate than Fairview, which is basically closed down.
18 These facilities have appropriate treatment rooms to
19 minimize or eliminate the spread of the Coronavirus.
20 More importantly, medical personnel and staff in these
facilities are rigorously trained in preventing the spread of
21
the Ebola virus, which procedures are very similar those
22 recommended by the CDC for treatment of the
23 Coronavirus.
24
Recently, 13 Americans infected with the Coronavirus
25 aboard a cruise ship off the coast of Japan were transported
26 to Omaha, Nebraska for treatment of the Coronavirus at
27 University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC).
(https://www.nebraskamed.com/biocontainment/coronavi
28 rus-qa-what-it-is-and-how-to-avoid-it). It is no
6
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 13 of 31 Page ID #:332
1 be exposed to the stress of travel. (Id.; Dkt. 13 at p. 17). The Federal and State
2 Defendants cannot both be correct and the contradictions in their respective claims
3 show there is no meaningful coordination at any level.
4 Further, while the State asserts it has fully coordinated with the County Health
5 Agency and suggests the City is nothing more than an annoying interloper (Dkt. 14
6 at pp. 2-4), statements by the Orange County Health Agency expose this as yet
7 another inaccurate statement. Specifically, the Orange County Health Agency has
8 expressed its concern over Defendants’ hasty, ill-thought out, and poorly-
9 communicated plan. (Kazemi 2nd Decl., Ex. F). And the State has only this
10 weekend tried to coordinate with the County Health Agency (even though the Health
11 Agency has a mandated role in enforcing quarantines and protecting public health –
12 Dkt. 13 at p. 20). In response, the County Executive asked the state and federal
13 government to include Costa Mesa, neighboring cities, emergency managers, and
14 local hospitals in the process because of the vital role each would play in minimizing
15 the threat of this disease spreading throughout the community. (Kazemi 2nd Decl.,
16 Ex. G).
17 E. Defendants’ Narratives Conflict with the CDC’s Most Recent
Guidance about the Coronavirus and the Most Recent Scientific
18 Evidence
19 Defendants claim there is no alleged harm to Plaintiffs because there is no
20 threat of transmission and no threat of burden on the community’s public health and
21 emergency resources. But this is flatly contradicted by information the CDC
22 provided during its own teleconference on Friday. The CDC admitted on this call
23 that it expects more people from the Diamond Princess to not only contract the virus,
24 but to become ill and require care. (Dkt. 1-1, Ex. 15). And if all those people are
25 relocated to Costa Mesa, just where are they supposed to receive medical care?
26 According to the State’s regional director for the Office of Emergency Services, in
27 local hospitals. (Dkt. 4-5). In their Opposition, the Federal Defendants attacked the
28 Plaintiffs for relying on this communication as it supposedly only reflected initial
8
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 15 of 31 Page ID #:334
1 plans, (Dkt. 13 at p. 2), yet Defendants have refused to provide Plaintiffs with any
2 information other than these “initial plans.” Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to
3 assume that Defendants mean what they say when they state that people who become
4 ill from the disease will be transported to local hospitals.2
5 Defendants also ignore the burden that hosting federal health workers, support
6 staff, and security personnel in the community will impose. If protocols for
7 preventing transmission of the disease are still changing, there is a substantial
8 likelihood of transmission of the disease to those charged with caring for the
9 infected. Yet Defendants have provided no information on how they will prevent
10 this potential vector of transmission. Will they be providing housing for the
11 caregivers, medical personnel, and support staff at Fairview? Are they, too, to be
12 isolated ore quarantined? If so, will there be sufficient space at Fairview, now that
13 it seems that it is the only place in the entire country where the federal government
14 intends to isolate Coronavirus patients? And if the health care, security, and support
15 personnel are not going to be housed at Fairview, where will they stay and what
16 precautions will be taken to prevent transmission off campus? To the extent the
17 federal government can be said to have a plan, it has not shared that plan with the
18 Plaintiffs or other stakeholders at risk of harm.
19 Further, the most recent scientific evidence shows the incubation of this
20 disease may be as long as 24 days or longer. (Dkt. 1-1, Ex. 5). Scientific evidence
21 also shows the virus may remain active for as long as nine days on inanimate
22 surfaces, contradicting Defendants’ claim that only close contact with infected
23 individuals creates a risk. (Kazemi 2nd Decl., Ex. B). Individuals who have
24 2
Defendants also argued that leaving the infected people in Solano County
25 would put an unfair burden on that community’s public health resources. (Dkt. 14-
1 ¶23). But this contention is at odds with their assertion that caring for these
26
individuals poses no burden to the community where they are hosted. Nor can
27 defendants explain why moving them to a more densely populated and more
residential area without coordinating with the local government in that region is not
28
an unfair burden.
9
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 16 of 31 Page ID #:335
1 repeatedly tested negative for the disease have transmitted it to others. (Kazemi 2nd
2 Decl., Ex. C). And cases in Italy, Iran, and Hong Kong suggest the disease can be
3 passed without direct contact with an infected individual. (Dkt. 1-1, Ex. 9).
4 Plaintiffs acknowledge that a novel and highly contagious disease is difficult
5 to understand and even more difficult to combat. Mistakes are going to be made,
6 such as the laboratory mistake in San Diego that allowed an individual who was still
7 contagious to be released from the hospital. (Kazemi 2nd Decl., Ex. D). Or the
8 mistakes made by the Japanese government in not moving more quickly or
9 effectively to quarantine the Diamond Princess. (Kazemi 2nd Decl., Ex. E). Or our
10 own Federal Government’s decision to repatriate individuals who had the disease,
11 over the CDC’s objections. (Dkt. 1-1, Ex. 12).3 But Defendants should recognize
12 that whatever mistakes are made in handling patients at the Fairview Developmental
13 Center will be borne by Costa Mesa, Orange County, and all of Southern California,
14 at the very least. Insisting on such a makeshift facility in such a densely populated
15 area for this quarantine will surely increase exponentially the harms arising from
16 those mistakes.
17 Additionally, it is worth noting that if Fairview is the only site in the entire
18 United States deemed acceptable for housing Coronavirus patients, it will remain
19 that way. No other community will step up to help shoulder this burden. They will
20 instead appeal to the President to protect them from the harm the federal government
21 sees fit to impose on Costa Mesa. If Fairview becomes the one place with staff
22 trained and protocols in place to contain Coronavirus, the impetus will be to send all
23 Coronavirus infected individuals here. As the CDC now believes it can no longer
24 prevent but can only slow the community-based transmission of the disease,
25
3
Defendants dismissed Plaintiffs’ concerns as nothing more than internet-
26
based rumormongering. They did not, however, contradict the assertion that the
27 federal government overruled the CDC’s own determination that it was too much of
a public health risk to repatriate the infected individuals rather than leave them in
28
hospitals abroad for treatment. (Dkt. 1-1, Ex. 12).
10
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 17 of 31 Page ID #:336
1 Defendants have themselves admitted they expect this disease will spread in the
2 communities where it is located. As of now, the most likely place for community-
3 based transmission will be the only community where the federal government
4 intends to introduce significant numbers of people with the disease – Costa Mesa.
5 III. PLAINTIFFS ARE LIKELY TO PREVAIL ON THEIR CLAIMS
6 A. Plaintiffs Are Likely to Prevail on Their Nuisance Claims
7 Defendants’ arguments that Plaintiffs may not assert nuisance claims against
8 them are meritless. Plaintiffs have strong claims against both sets of Defendants
9 which compel immediate injunctive relief.
10 First, the State Defendants’ contention that Section 3482 of the California
11 Civil Code (“Section 3482”) shields them from Plaintiffs’ nuisance claims
12 oversimplifies California law and ignores the factual record showing that Defendants
13 have no plan, and that their reckless choice of an unsuitable quarantine site
14 needlessly exposes Plaintiffs to risks of tremendous harm.4
15 The California Supreme Court and numerous other courts interpreting
16 California law have long recognized that, “‘although [under Section 3482] an
17 activity authorized by statute cannot be a nuisance, the Manner in which the activity
18 is performed may constitute a nuisance.’” Greater Westchester Homeowners Assn.
19 v. City of Los Angeles, 26 Cal. 3d 86, 101 (Cal. 1979) (quoting Venuto v. Owens-
20 Corning Fiberglas Corp. (22 Cal. App. 3d 116, 129)). For example, where a public
21 improvement “is erected improperly, it cannot be fairly stated that the legislature
22 contemplated the doing of the very act causing damage.” Paterno v. State of
23 California, 74 Cal. App. 4th 68, 104 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999) (emphasis in original and
24 internal quotation marks omitted); see also, e.g., McConnell v. PacifiCorp Inc., 2007
25 WL 2385096, at *5-6 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2007) (Section 3482 did not bar plaintiffs’
26 nuisance claims where pleadings “allege[d] that the manner in which defendant
27
4
Section 3482 provides that “[n]othing which is done or maintained under the
28
express authority of a statute can be deemed a nuisance.”
11
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 18 of 31 Page ID #:337
1 operated the dams has created a nuisance,” notwithstanding fact that project was
2 pursuant to a FERC-issued license); Bright v. East Side Mosquito Abatement Dist.,
3 168 Cal. App. 2d 7, 10-12 (Cal. Ct. App. 1959) (statute authorizing district to abate
4 mosquitoes did not permit abatement in such a manner as to create a nuisance
5 through the creation of a thick blanket of chemical fog which made it impossible for
6 motorists to see or to proceed safely down a highway); Ambrosini v. Alisal Sanitary
7 Dist., 154 Cal. App. 2d 720, 725-27 (Cal. Ct. App. 1957) (statutory authorization to
8 construct a sewer outfall did not preclude nuisance liability for constructing a
9 defective outfall); People v. Glenn-Colusa Irr. Dist., 127 Cal. App. 30, 36 (Cal. Ct.
10 App. 1932) (district’s statutory right to divert water from river did not give it the
11 right to do so without protecting fish, and its failure to do so was a public nuisance).
12 This commonsense rule is in accord with federal common law, which
13 similarly provides that a party may sue a federal agency under the federal common
14 law for creating a public nuisance caused by an agency’s selection of a course of
15 action to implement a policy. Michigan v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 758 F.3d
16 892, 901 (7th Cir. 2014) (Wood, J.) (“Mich. v. U.S. Army Corps II”).
17 Here, Defendants have, without coordinating with county or local officials, let
18 alone each other, decided to move forward with a quarantine in a manner that has a
19 high likelihood of introducing precisely the types of public health concerns that
20 nuisance laws are meant to abate.
21 Second, the Federal Defendants’ argument that the doctrine of sovereign
22 immunity bars Plaintiffs’ federal common law nuisance claims has no legal support.
23 Specifically, Section 702 of the Administrative Procedure Act provides a statutory
24 basis for a federal common law claim for nuisance. Section 702 provides:
25 An action in a court of the United States seeking relief
other than money damages and stating a claim that an
26 agency or an officer or employee thereof acted or failed to
act in an official capacity or under color of legal authority
27 shall not be dismissed nor relief therein be denied on the
ground that it is against the United States or that the United
28 States is an indispensable party.
12
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 19 of 31 Page ID #:338
1 proceeding and sought permission to escrow current and future assessments pending
2 resolution of the administrative proceeding. The administrative officer denied the
3 request to escrow the payments. The Ninth Circuit held the officer’s decision was
4 “not a ‘final agency action’ because it does not determine the rights or obligations
5 of the parties, nor are there legal consequences flowing from it.” The obligation to
6 pay assessments arose under the applicable federal law, not from the officer’s denial
7 of interim relief: “The judicial officer's denial of interim relief imposes no obligation
8 on Gallo at all. Further, there are no legal consequences arising from the decision
9 denying interim relief, nor does the decision fix the rights of the parties.” Gallo, 159
10 F.3d at 1199. Here, however, Federal Defendants’ decision to commandeer
11 Fairview will cause legal consequences for the City by depriving it of a facility it is
12 contractually entitled to use.
13 The Federal Defendants next argue the Court should refrain from intervening
14 in their arbitrary decision because the APA does not allow review of an agency
15 decision if the applicable statute vests discretion with the agency, and — according
16 to Federal Defendants — 42 U.S.C. § 264(a) does just that. (Fed. Defs.’ Opp’n at
17 16-17.) But the Ninth Circuit has addressed and rejected the argument Federal
18 Defendants advance here.
19 “[T]he mere fact that a statute contains discretionary language does not
20 make agency action unreviewable.” Pinnacle Armor, Inc. v. United States, 648
21 F.3d 708, 718–19 (9th Cir. 2011) (emphasis added; internal citation and quotation
22 omitted). See also ASSE Int’l, Inc. v. Kerry, 803 F.3d 1059, 1071 (9th Cir. 2015)
23 (holding that where a statute vested discretion with the State Department, “that does
24 not deprive [the court] of the right to review [an agency’s] actions for an abuse of its
25 discretion or to determine if its actions were otherwise arbitrary and capricious”);
26 Newman v. Apfel, 223 F.3d 937, 943 (9th Cir. 2000) (“The fact that an agency has
27 broad discretion in choosing whether to act does not establish that the agency may
28 justify its choice on specious grounds. To concede otherwise would be to disregard
17
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 24 of 31 Page ID #:343
1 entirely the value of political accountability, which itself is the very premise of
2 administrative discretion in all its forms.”); Beno v. Shalala, 30 F.3d 1057 at 1066,
3 1068 (9th Cir. 1994) (decision of the Secretary of Health & Human Services to grant
4 a waiver to California to permit greater experimentation with administration of
5 welfare benefits was reviewable even though the statute permits the Secretary to
6 authorize waivers only “to the extent and for the period the Secretary finds
7 necessary,” and which “in the judgment of the Secretary [are] likely to assist in
8 promoting[statutory] objectives”). Rather, the judicial review is precluded only in
9 “‘those rare instances where statutes are drawn in such broad terms that in a given
10 case there is no law to apply,’ Webster v. Doe, 486 U.S. 592, 599 (1988), thereby
11 leaving the court with ‘no meaningful standard against which to judge the agency’s
12 exercise of discretion.’ Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.S. 821, 830 (1985); see 5 U.S.C.
13 § 701(a)(2).” Pinnacle Armor, 648 F.3d at 719.
14 Here, the Federal Defendants rely on 42 U.S.C. § 264, which provides ample
15 standards for the Court to judge the agency’s exercise of its discretion. Under § 264,
16 and the correlated C.F.R. provisions, the Surgeon General is permitted to promulgate
17 regulations “necessary to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of
18 communicable diseases[.]” The Federal Defendants’ decision can therefore be
19 examined in this context, which the Federal Defendants admit applies.
20 Applying the standard in § 264 reveals the Federal Defendants’ decision does
21 not further their statutory obligation to make decisions in a manner that will prevent
22 the transmission of Corona Virus. The Federal Defendants’ decisions defy common
23 sense. It is impossible to fathom how a rundown building just deemed unfit to be an
24 emergency homeless shelter, located in a densely populated area, can be the best
25 place in the entire country to isolate individuals with Coronavirus. The crumbling
26 and obsolete infrastructure of Fairview and its incompatibility with the CDC’s own
27 guidelines for isolation would make it a truly illogical choice, even if it were not
28
18
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 25 of 31 Page ID #:344
1 located in one of the most densely populated parts of one of the most densely
2 populated counties in the country.
3 Finally, Federal Defendants claim that there is no independent jurisdiction
4 under the APA. But, where a plaintiff alleges federal constitutional violations as a
5 result of an agency’s decision, federal question jurisdiction already exists under 28
6 U.S.C. § 1331. See, e.g., McNary v. Haitian Refugee Ctr. Inc., 498 U.S. 479, 498
7 (1991) (holding that a statutory preclusion provision did not deprive courts of
8 constitutional challenges to agency conduct).
9 2. Federal Defendants’ Decision to Relocate Coronavirus-
Positive patients to a Dilapidated Former Assisted Living
10 Facility for Their Own Convenience and Expediency is
11 Arbitrary and Capricious
12 The APA requires that where, as here, an agency acts in a manner that is
13 “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with
14 law,” the reviewing court shall “hold unlawful and set aside [the] agency action,
15 findings, and conclusions.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(2). “[W]hile formal findings are not
16 required, the record must be sufficient to support the agency action, show that the
17 agency has considered the relevant factors, and enable the court to review the
18 agency's decision.” Beno v. Shalala, 30 F.3d 1057, 1074 (9th Cir. 1994) (citing
19 Florida Power & Light Co. v. Lorion, 470 U.S. 729, 744, (1985)). An agency rule
20 is “arbitrary and capricious if the agency has relied on factors which Congress has
21 not intended it to consider, entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the
22 problem, offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the evidence
23 before the agency, or is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference
24 in view or the product of agency expertise.” Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass’n of U.S., Inc.
25 v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 43 (1983).
26 It is difficult to imagine a decision-making process more arbitrary and
27 capricious than the one seen here. The federal government has taken out of
28 consideration a facility on a secure installation, with the infrastructure, equipment,
19
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 26 of 31 Page ID #:345
1 law, including the Fourteenth Amendment (as well as Section 1983 and potentially
2 other federal statutes).
3 The State Defendants’ other flawed arguments contend they are but pawns in
4 this Fairview debacle because “it is the federal government’s responsibility to
5 provide security and safety precautions for housing of quarantined patients at the
6 Fairview facility.” See State Opp. at 19. Nonsense. First, that argument presents a
7 highly factual issue for which the State Defendants’ opposition provides insufficient
8 evidence. Second, that argument is belied by the undisputed fact that Fairview is not
9 federal property. Third, the relevant state officials cannot abandon their duties and
10 responsibilities to the people of Costa Mesa and California because “the Feds made
11 us do it.” Id. Nor can the State Defendants reconcile their claim of purported
12 “sovereign immunity” with their simultaneous – and unsupported – contention that
13 the involved California officials are somehow powerless against the Federal
14 government.
15 B. The Opposition Does Not Address Governor Newsom’s and the
California Legislature’s Positions as to Whether Plaintiffs’ Claims
16 May Go Forward in this Court, Leaving Open the Possibility That
They Will Consent
17
18 The State Defendants concede that Plaintiffs’ claims against them can proceed
19 with the consent of the State of California. See State Opp. at 17. But their
20 Opposition makes no mention of Governor Newsom’s or the California Legislature’s
21 position on the matter.7 Until the Court has heard from those branches of
22 government, any consent and/or waiver arguments remain open, and any and all
23 claims directly against the State Defendants should move forward.
24
25
7
Notably, Governor Newsom made clear last May that Fairview required “a
26
site evaluation” and presented “constraints” in meeting housing and homelessness
27 needs. See, e.g., https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/news/story/2020-02-
23/federal-agencies-respond-to-costa-mesas-temporary-restraining-order-calling-it-
28
disruptive-interference.
22
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 29 of 31 Page ID #:348
1 safeguards and precautions have been put in place, and the public and local
2 government have been informed of all efforts to mitigate risk of transmission of the
3 disease. These requests made sense at the time of Plaintiffs’ original application.
4 But as Plaintiffs have acquired more information about Defendants’ reckless
5 and arbitrary decision-making, as well as their total lack of meaningful coordination,
6 Plaintiffs now believe evidentiary hearings are warranted and essential for
7 determining whether Defendants should move forward at all in Costa Mesa.
8 Accordingly, Plaintiffs also respectfully request further evidentiary hearings to
9 address the significant questions about the safety and suitability of Fairview for
10 housing Coronavirus patients.
11
12 Dated: February 24, 2020 KELLER/ANDERLE LLP
13
By: /s/ Jennifer L. Keller
14 Jennifer L. Keller
15 Attorneys for Plaintiffs,
City of Costa Mesa and Katrina Foley
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
25
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-1 Filed 02/24/20 Page 1 of 4 Page ID #:351
9
10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SOUTHERN DIVISION
12
13 CITY OF COSTA MESA, and Case No.
KATRINA FOLEY,
14
FURTHER DECLARATION OF
15 Plaintiff, NAHAL KAZEMI IN SUPPORT
OF EX PARTE APPLICATION
16 vs. FOR TEMPORARY
17 RESTRAINING ORDER AND
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE
THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY
18 AND HUMAN SERVICES, THE INJUNCTION
19 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE, THE UNITED STATES
20 AIR FORCE, THE CENTERS FOR
DISEASE CONTROL AND
21 PREVENTION, THE STATE OF
22 CALIFORNIA, FAIRVIEW
DEVELOPMENTAL CENTER
23 (FAIRVIEW), THE CALIFORNIA
GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF
24 EMERGENCY SERVICES, and THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
25 GENERAL SERVICES,
26
Defendants.
27
28
1 https://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/3051784/shipping-lines-face-
2 troubled-waters-oil-tankers-container
3 13. Attached as Exhibit M is a true and correct copy of the Transcript for
4 CDC Telebriefing: Update on COVID-19, dated February 21, 2020, downloaded
5 from: https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/t0221-cdc-telebriefing-covid-
6 19.html
7 14. Attached as Exhibit N is a true and correct copy of Natsuko Imai, et
8 al. Report 3: Transmissibility of 2019-nCoV (Jan. 2020), downloaded from:
9 https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-
10 fellowships/Imperial-2019-nCoV-transmissibility.pdf
11 15. Attached as Exhibit O is a true and correct copy of a LIVESCIENCE
12 article titled How long can the new coronavirus last on surfaces?, dated February
13 18, 2020, downloaded from: https://www.livescience.com/how-long-coronavirus-
14 last-surfaces.html
15 16. Attached as Exhibit P is a true and correct copy of a Science Daily
16 article titled, Spread of coronavirus underestimated, review finds, dated February
17 14, 2020, downloaded from:
18 https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/02/200214111519.htm
19 17. Attached as Exhibit Q is a true and correct copy of a CNBC news
20 article titled, France has seen a 30% to 40% fall in tourists following the
21 coronavirus outbreak: Finance minister, dated February 23, 2020, downloaded
22 from https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/23/coronavirus-impact-france-sees-tourism-
23 numbers-fall-by-30percent-to-40percent.html
24 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the
25 best of knowledge and recollection.
26 Executed on February 24, 2020.
27
Nahal Kazemi
28
3
FURTHER DECLARATION OF NAHAL KAZEMI IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-2 Filed 02/24/20 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:355
Exhibit B
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-2 Filed 02/24/20 Page 2 of 5 Page ID #:356
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-2 Filed 02/24/20 Page 3 of 5 Page ID #:357
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-2 Filed 02/24/20 Page 4 of 5 Page ID #:358
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-2 Filed 02/24/20 Page 5 of 5 Page ID #:359
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-3 Filed 02/24/20 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:360
Exhibit B
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-3 Filed 02/24/20 Page 2 of 7 Page ID #:361
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-3 Filed 02/24/20 Page 3 of 7 Page ID #:362
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-3 Filed 02/24/20 Page 4 of 7 Page ID #:363
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-3 Filed 02/24/20 Page 5 of 7 Page ID #:364
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-3 Filed 02/24/20 Page 6 of 7 Page ID #:365
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-3 Filed 02/24/20 Page 7 of 7 Page ID #:366
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-4 Filed 02/24/20 Page 1 of 8 Page ID #:367
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-4 Filed 02/24/20 Page 2 of 8 Page ID #:368
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-4 Filed 02/24/20 Page 3 of 8 Page ID #:369
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-4 Filed 02/24/20 Page 4 of 8 Page ID #:370
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-4 Filed 02/24/20 Page 5 of 8 Page ID #:371
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-4 Filed 02/24/20 Page 6 of 8 Page ID #:372
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-4 Filed 02/24/20 Page 7 of 8 Page ID #:373
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-4 Filed 02/24/20 Page 8 of 8 Page ID #:374
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-5 Filed 02/24/20 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:375
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-5 Filed 02/24/20 Page 2 of 5 Page ID #:376
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-5 Filed 02/24/20 Page 3 of 5 Page ID #:377
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-5 Filed 02/24/20 Page 4 of 5 Page ID #:378
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-5 Filed 02/24/20 Page 5 of 5 Page ID #:379
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-6 Filed 02/24/20 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:380
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-6 Filed 02/24/20 Page 2 of 7 Page ID #:381
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-6 Filed 02/24/20 Page 3 of 7 Page ID #:382
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-6 Filed 02/24/20 Page 4 of 7 Page ID #:383
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-6 Filed 02/24/20 Page 5 of 7 Page ID #:384
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-6 Filed 02/24/20 Page 6 of 7 Page ID #:385
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-6 Filed 02/24/20 Page 7 of 7 Page ID #:386
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-7 Filed 02/24/20 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:387
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-7 Filed 02/24/20 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:388
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-8 Filed 02/24/20 Page 1 of 4 Page ID #:389
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-8 Filed 02/24/20 Page 2 of 4 Page ID #:390
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-8 Filed 02/24/20 Page 3 of 4 Page ID #:391
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-8 Filed 02/24/20 Page 4 of 4 Page ID #:392
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-9 Filed 02/24/20 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:393
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-9 Filed 02/24/20 Page 2 of 5 Page ID #:394
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-9 Filed 02/24/20 Page 3 of 5 Page ID #:395
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-9 Filed 02/24/20 Page 4 of 5 Page ID #:396
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-9 Filed 02/24/20 Page 5 of 5 Page ID #:397
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-10 Filed 02/24/20 Page 1 of 53 Page ID
#:398
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-10 Filed 02/24/20 Page 2 of 53 Page ID
#:399
TABLE OF CONTENTS
#:401
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE 4
MISSION OF TRAVEL COSTA MESA 5
FISCAL OVERVIEW 6
ECONOMIC IMPACT OF TOURISM IN OC 10
U.S. TRAVEL FACTS 10
AIRLIFT 11
CALIFORNIA’S TOP INTERNATIONAL MARKETS 12
OC VISITOR STATS 14
NEW SUPPLY IN OC 15
ECONOMIC IMPACT OF TOURISM IN COSTA MESA 16
COSTA MESA & OC ECONOMICS 17
FOOD TRENDS 18
MARKETING 20
WEBSITE OVERVIEW 27
PARTNERSHIPS 30
SOCIAL MEDIA AND INFLUENCERS 37
IPW AND OC MARATHON 34
PUBLIC RELATIONS 41
MEDIA COVERAGE 45
ACCOLADES 48
BOARD MEMBERS 50
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-10 Filed 02/24/20 Page 5 of 53 Page ID
#:402
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE \
TOURISM
“If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what
you’ve always got,” Henry Ford once said. Travel Costa Mesa (TCM)
has cultivated several exciting changes this past year. At the end of
fiscal year 2017-2018, TCM began the process of a brand refresh that
focused on website, logo redesign and a dynamic marketing approach
dedicated to the current core demographic. The TCM team also
embarked on a new partnership with an innovative ad agency that is
revitalizing our brand.
International Pow Wow (IPW) will make its way to Anaheim June 1-5,
2019. This tradeshow is the U.S. Travel Association’s premier travel
industry marketplace and the largest generator of travel to the U.S.
This will be the ninth year our organization will be participating. We
will partner with Segerstrom Center for the Arts, South Coast Plaza,
OC Fair & Event Center as well as others to showcase the City of the
Arts® to media and the meetings and incentive markets worldwide.
The TCM brand is reenergized! With the dedication of the team and
support from the community, the City of the Arts® is poised to reach
and welcome more guests than ever.
Paulette Lombardi-Fries
PRESIDENT, TRAVEL COSTA MESA
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-10 Filed 02/24/20 Page 6 of 53 Page ID
#:403
TRAVEL COSTA MESA’S \
MISSION, VISION
& KEY OBJECTIVE
I In 1995, Travel Costa Mesa was formed as a nonprofit corporation to market the
city of Costa Mesa as a desirable, leisure overnight destination in Orange County.
MISSION
STATEMENT
Travel Costa Mesa enhances and
promotes the destination brand
experience, further increasing
visitor spending for industry and
community economic viability,
sustainability and quality of life.
VISION
STATEMENT
Travel Costa Mesa is the engaged
destination marketing leader,
supporting and selling the city’s
distinct visitor brand experiences
and advocating community tourism
benefits.
KEY
OBJECTIVE
Increase brand awareness for the
city of Costa Mesa as a desirable,
overnight, leisure Orange County
destination.
FISCAL OVERVIEW
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-10 Filed 02/24/20 Page 9 of 53 Page ID
#:406
BIA \
METHOD
& BASIS OF LEVY
The proposed method and basis of levying the assessment to allow each business owner to estimate the
amount of the assessment to be levied against his or her business are set forth according to City of Costa
Mesa Ordinance 95-9, and is as follows:
The BIA assessment will be used to fund TCM. The organization will fund marketing efforts to promote
tourism in Costa Mesa and will sponsor related tourist events that benefit the hotel and motel businesses
within the City.
The improvements and marketing funded by this assessment are outlined in the annual report.
REVENUE
A three percent (3%) levy will be assessed against each of the 11 hotels listed in the annual report,
based on the net revenue from the sale of overnight room stays.
Business owners shall pay the assessment to the Costa Mesa City Finance Department on a
monthly basis. A penalty and interest shall be assessed on late payments.
New hotel and motel businesses that are interested in participating in the BIA should contact the
City and TCM. This is a voluntary program for hotel partners.
2% ART/TRANSPORTATION
11%
TOTAL
ADMINISTRATIVE
EXPENSES
24%
TOTAL
63% TOTAL
EMPLOYEE
EXPENSES
MARKETING
EXPENSES
HOTEL
PARTNERS
LODGING ADDRESS BUSINESS OWNER PROPERTY OWNER
Avenue of the Arts 3350 Avenue of the Arts Rosanna Inc. Rosanna Inc.
Costa Mesa Costa Mesa, CA 92626 3350 Avenue of the Arts 3350 Avenue of the Arts
Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Ayres Hotel 325 Bristol Street Newport Country Inn & Suites, Inc. Newport Country Inn & Suites, Inc.
Costa Mesa, CA 92626 355 Bristol St., Suite A 355 Bristol St., Suite A
Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Best Western Plus 2642 Newport Blvd. James Hsuen & Shang-Pu Lee James Hsuen & Shang-Pu Lee
Newport Mesa Inn Costa Mesa, CA 92627 2642 Newport Blvd. 2642 Newport Blvd.
Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Hilton 3050 Bristol Street Ashford TRS CM LLC Remington Lodging & Hospitality LP
Costa Mesa, CA 92626 14185 Dallas Parkway, Suite 1100 14185 Dallas Parkway, Suite 1100
Dallas, TX 75254 Dallas, TX 75254
Crowne Plaza 3131 Bristol Street Brighton Management Bright Bristol Street, LLC
Costa Mesa, CA 92626 1901 Main Street, Suite 150 3131 Bristol Street
Irvine, CA 92614 Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Holiday Inn Express 2070 Newport Blvd. Narendra B. Patel Narendra B. Patel
Hotel & Suites Costa Mesa, CA 92627 2070 Newport Blvd. 2070 Newport Blvd.
Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Marriott 500 Anton Blvd. Host Hotels & Resorts HEI Hotels & Resorts
Costa Mesa, CA 92626 6903 Rockledge Dr., Suite 1500 101 Merritt 7 Corporate Park, 1st Floor
Bethesda, MD 20817 Norwalk, CT 06851
Ramada Inn & Suites 1680 Superior Ave. B.D. Inn Inc./Ramada Ltd. B.D. Inn Inc./Ramada Ltd.
Costa Mesa, CA 92627 1680 Superior Ave. 1680 Superior Ave.
Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Residence Inn 881 Baker Street Marriott International BRE Hotels & Resorts
by Marriott Costa Mesa, CA 92626 10400 Fernwood Rd. 6201 15th Avenue
Bethesda, MD 20817 Brooklyn, NY 11219
The Westin 686 Anton Blvd. Host Hotels & Resorts CJ Segerstrom & Sons
South Coast Plaza Costa Mesa, CA 92626 6903 Rockledge Dr., Suite 1500 c/o South Coast Plaza
Bethesda, MD 20817 686 Anton Blvd.
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
BLVD Hotel 2430 Newport Blvd. Hollywood Corner Inc. Shyamal Patel
Costa Mesa, CA 92627 2430 Newport Blvd. 16609 Honeybee Dr.
Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Tustin, CA 92782
In 2017, 15.6 million American jobs were supported by the travel industry. One out of 9 U.S. jobs depend on travel and tourism. Travel is among the top 10
industries in 49 states and D.C. in terms of employment. This industry alone generated $2.4 trillion in economic output.
Domestic leisure travel accounted for over 70 percent of all domestic travel within the U.S. Approximately 1.8 billion person-trips* took place in 2017 which
was an increase of 2.1 percent from the year prior. Domestic business travel increased over 1 percent and accounted for 462 million person-trips.
International arrivals to the U.S. also increased in 2017 to 76.9 million up .7 percent from the previous year. Arrivals from Canada and Mexico totaled 38
million and overseas markets represented 38.9 million. Overseas travelers spend over $4,200 when they visit, and their average length of stay is 18 nights.
They represent 51 percent of all international arrivals and account for 84 percent of international travel spending.
74% 2017
of domestic trips taken TOP 10
are for leisure purposes INTERNATIONAL
MARKETS TO THE U.S.
DID $131.9 billion Origin Visitations
62%
the country. More than three fourths of
the state’s visitors, over 217 million, are
from within the United States and over
decide where they are
13 million are international guests. The
going to travel less state continues to see an increase in
than one month out international travel however, modestly
at .7 percent in 2018. Mexico, Canada
Data from U.S. Travel Association
*A person-trip is defined as one person spending the and China remain as California’s top
night away from home in paid accommodations or on international markets.
a day trip which is 50 miles or more away from home.
5.5% increase
11,500,000
2017
6,500,000
2018 California’s busiest airport traffic statistics showed an
1,500,000 increase in 2018 passenger traffic compared to 2017.
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
5,000,000
INTERNATIONAL TRAFFIC / 2018 vs 2017
6.2% increase
International traffic to California airports
4,000,000
3,000,000
2,000,000
2017
5.3% increase
Domestic airport traffic
2018
1,000,000
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Los Angeles, Burbank, Long Beach, Ontario, Orange County, San Diego, Sources: Individual airports.
Oakland, San Jose, San Francisco, & Sacramento Note: Monthly figures may not sum to YTD totals due to date revisions.
TOP 3 INTERNATIONAL
MARKETS
Canada
Visitors from our neighbors to the North are projected to increase to 1.8
million in 2019. There are currently 420 weekly nonstop flights to California
with over 59 thousand seats available. This was a 5.4 percent increase from
the year prior. Those that travel by air tend to research further in advance
with more than 43 percent beginning at least six months in advance. Top
states visited by Canadians are Florida, New York, California, Illinois and
Texas. The U.S. remains the top international destination for Canadians
followed by the United Kingdom, China and France.
CANADIAN
TRAVELER
PROFILE } 1.723M
2018 Projected Visits
$2.266B
2018 Projected Visitor
Spending
+3.0%
2019 Forecasted Visits
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce
Mexico
The United States is the number one destination for the Mexican market.
Visitors from Mexico that travel by air are expected to increase to 631
thousand in 2019. There are currently 584 weekly nonstop flights to
California with over 92 thousand seats available. The Tijuana airport
is a new gateway to California in which 22 million passengers utilized
in 2018, up over 22 percent from the year prior. Visit California will
create a new welcome center in spring of 2019 to take advantage of
this opportunity. Popular travel seasons coincide with school holiday
schedules and are around Easter, mid-July and August and Christmas.
Long weekend getaways are an opportunity as summer break typically
lasts five weeks.
The leisure traveler that books their trip by air visits just under two
destinations within the state, stays 9.6 nights and spends over one
thousand dollars per trip. Hotels are used 50 percent of the time and
9 percent bring children. Group size that travel by air is 1.5. Booking
directly with the airlines is the preferred method as 46 percent chose
this option. Travel agencies are used 25 percent of the time followed by
online travel agencies at 22 percent.
CHINA
TRAVELER
PROFILE
China
Visitors from China are projected to increase to 1.7 million in 2019. There are currently 148 weekly nonstop
1.601M
flights to California with over 44 thousand seats available. Two new routes were added last year which are from 2018 Projected
Xian to LAX by Hainan Airlines and Shenyang to LAX by China Southern Airlines. Visits
Both routes were added in December 2018. Advance airline reservations are between one to three months for
the individual traveler where those that are group travelers’ book three to six months in advance.
The leisure traveler represents 62 percent of the total visitors to California. Over half of this segment, 55 percent,
choose to stay in a hotel and stay 13.6 nights. Their spend per trip is just under two thousand dollars. Group size
$3.407B
is 2.1 people and they visit over 3 destinations while visiting the Golden State. Twenty percent of these leisure
2018 Projected
travelers bring children with them. Visitor Spending
Outbound tourists from China took over 71 million trips over a six-month period of time in 2018 which was up 15
+6.2%
percent compared to the year prior, according to Ctrip, an online provider of travel services. Overall, 59 percent of
women traveled abroad compared to 41 percent of men. Private and customized tours are becoming popular as
seasoned travelers are requesting more flexibility.
2019 Forecasted
Travelers from China rank the U.S. fifth in visitor satisfaction according to the China National Tourism Visits
Administration. Singapore, New Zealand, Maldives and Mauritius are ranked higher amongst the satisfaction
index. However, the U.S. is the number one market for long-haul destinations, followed by France and Germany. Source: U.S. Department of Commerce
Source: Tourism Economics; DKSA, TNS Global (domestic); CIC Research, OTTI (international); Dean Runyan, CIC Research (expenditures)
On the horizon, Anaheim will welcome two hotels in 2020. Orange County’s first JW Marriott will be adjacent to the GardenWalk and will have 466 guest rooms.
The Westin Anaheim Resort adjacent to the Anaheim Convention Center will have 613 guest rooms. Both will be four-star properties.
TCM worked with Tourism Economics to conduct a market research initiative 7.2 – – 700
based on the economic impact of tourism in Costa Mesa. An estimated 7.5 million 7.0 – – 680
visitors came to Costa Mesa in 2017, up 3.6 percent from 2016. International
6.8 – – 660
visitors are estimated at 1.9 million or 25 percent of total visitors. The city’s
primary visitors come from California, Arizona, Nevada, Washington and Texas. 6.6 – – 640
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
The greater majority of visitors, nearly 6.7 million came for the day. 6.4 – – 620
6.2 – – 600
In 2017, direct visitor spending accounted for $738 million, up 4 percent, and
generated nearly $81 million in indirect impacts (goods and services as inputs Visitor Volume, mils (L) | Visitor Spending, $mils (R)
into production such as food wholesalers’ utilities and financial or legal services)
and $91 million in induced impacts (employees whose income are driven directly
or indirectly by tourism spend a portion of that income in the local regional
economy).
Costa Mesa Visitor
Volume & Spending
Visitor data from this report reveals that visitor volume and spending has
increased substantially from 2012. In fact, visitor spending in Costa Mesa is
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
outpacing the state. However, the city is pacing behind the county regarding
visitor spending since 2012 with a growth of 23.7 percent vs. OC at 27.3 percent. Visitor Volume (mils) 6.72 6.99 7.13 7.26 7.53
% CHANGE 4.1 1.9 1.9 3.6
It’s no surprise that retail spending in the city is the top spending category for
visitors at over $241 million with food and beverage coming in at a close second 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
with over $238 million in 2017. Lodging accounted for over $151 million and Visitor Spending ($mils) 615.9 6.559 672.1 709.5 737.7
recreation at over $69 million. The food and beverage segment increased the % CHANGE 6.4 2.5 5.6 4.0
most in 2017 at 7.6 percent, followed by recreation at 4.5 percent and lodging at
over 3 percent.
DID effect on our local hotels. Competition to attract new customers in OC is fierce. Although
some hotels have had refreshes and renovations, there has not been a new hotel product to
YOU
KNOW? offer guests in quite some time. Areas of opportunity other than new product development
specifically fall into the categories of increasing weekend group and contract business relating
to 2018 hotel performance collectively for TCM partnering hotels. With the anticipated
grand opening of Disney’s Star Wars-Galaxy’s Edge, the second half of the calendar year
should provide an increase in visitors to OC as well as our city.
Based on Tourism Economics 2017 report, demand was slightly outpacing supply and averaged 1.1
over
percent growth since 2013, compared to .6 percent for supply. The last two years (2016 and 2017)
have been flat regarding demand and supply.
8,000 jobs
the amount of tourism-supported
employment COSTA MESA SPENDING PROFILE
$151.5m
LODGING
$238.2m
FOOD
Visitor spending on retail was relatively flat in 2017. However, retail sales per capita
is the third highest in the state at $48,300 per person. Only Beverly Hills and Ontario
outrank Costa Mesa. The state average is $17,100.
2016-17
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 % ch
LODGING 122.0 130.7 137.7 146.9 151.5 3.1%
FOOD 184.0 197.8 208.2 221.3 238.2 7.6%
48 – – 13
The county welcomed 49.4 million visitors in
2017 up over 2 percent from 2016. Spending also
46 – – 12
continues to grow and totaled $13.5 billion, up over
4 percent from the previous year. Residents within
44 – – 11
the state as well as Arizona, Texas, Nevada and
Washington are key markets for OC. International
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
42 – – 10
visitors increased to 4.5 million up 2.2 percent and
accounts for over 9 percent of total visitation for
40 – –9
2017. The top three international key markets for
OC remain the same from 2016 and are Canada, Visitor Volume, mils (L) | Visitor Spending, $bils (R)
China and Mexico. China continues to be an SOURCE: CIC Research, Tourism Economics
important market for OC and is first in terms of
spending and second in terms of visitor volume.
Orange County Visitor
Direct visitor spending for 2017 generated $13.5 Volume & Spending
billion, up 2.3 percent from 2016 and generated
$3.6 billion in indirect impacts and $4.1 billion in
induced impacts. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Visitor Volume (mils) 43.80 44.40 46.40 47.35 48.24 49.36
Overall, visitor spending grew over 4 percent in key % CHANGE 2.1 1.4 4.1 2.5 1.9 2.3
categories in 2017. Food and beverage spending
grew 6 percent and represents the leading growth
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
segment within the key categories of visitor spend. Visitor Spending ($mils) 10,643.6 10,931.14 11,695.0 12,212.9 13,016.9 13,551.7
Lodging grew over 4 percent and retail spend grew % CHANGE 5.2 2.7 7.0 4.4 6.6 4.1
2.7 percent.
ORANGE COUNTY
VISITOR SPENDING BY CATEGORY
DID
YOU
(US $ MILLIONS)
2016-17
KNOW?
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 % ch
LODGING 2,451.1 2,696.6 2,972.0 3,169.1 3,301.5 4.2%
FOOD & BEVERAGE
RETAIL
2,541.1 2,729.7 2,889.8 3,051.4
2,682.0 2,840.5 2,827.6 3,010.4 3,092.4
3,234.0 6.0%
2.7%
131,190 jobs
RECREATION 2,568.7 2,720.3 2,782.9 3,32.2 3,092.9 2.0%
LOCAL
TRANSPORTATION 440.7 445.5 449.0 464.2 519.2 11.8% direct visitor spending
AIR sustained in 2017
TRANSPORTATION
(LOCAL) 94.9 96.6 98.4 102.5 107.7 5.1%
Tourism employment in OC has expanded more rapidly than total jobs in the county as well as the
$1.2 billion
state. More than 3,400 tourism jobs were added per year since 2010. Approximately 1 in 13 of all state & county revenues
jobs in OC were sustained by tourism. generated from tourism in OC
FOOD TOURISM
IS THE ACT OF
TRAVELING FOR A
TASTE OF PLACE IN
ORDER TO GET A SENSE
OF PLACE
— AS DEFINED BY WORLD
FOOD TRAVEL ASSOCIATION
EATCATION™
BY TRAVEL COSTA MESA:
A FOOD-CENTRIC
VACATION, WHERE
RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES
ARE CENTERED
AROUND DINING
FOODIE TRENDS \
TOURISM-EATING
LIKE A LOCAL
Food and beverage clearly enhance a destination’s offerings and can be used to connect visitors with locals. Tasting something new and locally
sourced creates memories for travelers. Unique food and beverage options can also assist in building a brand’s voice. Travelers are searching
for unique culinary options and experiences more than ever before. World Food Traveler Association sites in their 2019 State of the Food
Travel Industry that sustainable practices for restaurants and educating visitors about local food and drink knowledge is as important as serving
a meal.
Skift highlights that in 2019 experiential culinary travel will continue to increase primarily due to the social media giant, Instagram. Another
noteworthy trend as expressed by Expedia Group Media Solutions found that 56 percent of travelers who combined their business and leisure
travel said they were more likely to extend a work trip if the destination has great food or restaurants. According to Specialty Food News, one
key driver for 2019 will be an increase in integrative culinary and cultural events at music and art festivals. They also expect the global culinary
tourism market to increase more than 9 percent within the next four years.
Food tourism has been a marketing focus for TCM for the past several years. The dynamic selection and quality of restaurants in Costa Mesa
makes it the culinary center of Orange County. It contributes greatly to the economic impact of the city. In fact, 2017 food and beverage spend
from those visiting Costa Mesa outranked lodging-related spend and has increased over 7.5 percent compared to the prior year.
YOU
that promote travel to Costa Mesa such as the Orange County Visitors
KNOW? Association (OCVA) and Visit California. Costa Mesa, along with other cities
work in conjunction with OCVA to further visitor brand marketing and overall
awareness domestically and internationally. Branding the City of the Arts®
as an overnight, leisure destination in OC is critical to the success of our
organization. This partnership has allowed TCM to reach audiences we could
80%
not reach ourselves, based on a collective approach with other cities within the
county. TCM is actively involved in the North America and Chinese initiatives
with OCVA.
of leisure travelers had been motivated to visit
Over the past several months, OCVA has redesigned their website, VisittheOC.
a particular destination because of a culinary
com. A creative digital initiative will also be launched and media missions
activity or attraction focusing on leisure travel from San Francisco, Arizona and the Pacific
95%
Northwest will continue. Opportunities such as exposure on Samantha Brown’s
Places to Love, which generated over 1 million views last year, would not be
possible without this partnership. TCM also works closely with the meeting
percentage of leisure travelers that had and incentive Chinese markets and continues to partner with other DMOs to
intentionally participated in a culinary tourism increase exposure and ultimately hotel room nights to OC. OCVA works closely
activity in the past two years with organizations that promote and advocate tourism like Visit California, U.S.
Travel Association and Cal Travel. Additional outreach and education to the
77% OC Board of Supervisors and U.S. Beijing Embassy regarding visa policies and
economic impact of the tourism industry are a priority.
the increased percentage in the last two years
of leisure travelers participating in a culinary
tourism activity
OC “STYLE FAM”
Visit California was created over two decades ago to market California
as a premier travel destination to increase the state’s share of tourism-
related revenues. Visit California invests $126 million annually into
global marketing programs. Visit California’s initiatives allow partners
like TCM to extend our media reach through co-ops, programming and
gain valuable insights from research and market trends. TCM is also
able to leverage this relationship by coordinating familiarization trips ARTS, CULTURE, OUTDOOR
and host media influencers from around the world. ENTERTAINMENT RECREATION
MARKETING
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-10 Filed 02/24/20 Page 23 of 53 Page ID
#:420
VISITOR GUIDE
While the focus on the arts and Costa Mesa as the trademarked City of the Arts® is still going strong, we recognized the need and
opportunity for Costa Mesa to present itself to a younger market. Part of the brand refresh included revamping our strategy to focus
more on dining, local shopping and unique entertainment. As we continue to market Costa Mesa as a destination for the weekend
leisure traveler to a short flight or drive market, we adopted the new tagline, “Create your escape” – along with a simple, fresh logo
that continues to highlight the city’s location in Southern California by focusing on sun and sea. An additional “stamp” was also created
with “Orange County, California” to use when marketing to other states or internationally.
MINDFUL OF
CAPTIVATING AREA ART
BRING
AND PLAYFUL AND CULTURE
VIBRANCY
IMAGERY/ WITH DEEP
TO BRAND
MESSAGING SENSE OF
COMMUNITY
THE CHOICE
IS YOURS.
NEW CITY VIDEO
Created by The James Agency entitled “Split Decisions,” highlighting a variety of hot, trendy destinations in the city and with split
screen, showing how close they are in an eye-catching way. The video runs on the home page.
WEBSITE UPDATES
Along with a brand redo, the TCM website underwent a major refresh as well, focusing on less
copy and more imagery, with brighter colors and theming in line with the new branding.
NEIGHBORHOOD
MAP
HOME PAGE
We created an entirely new map experience focusing on
neighborhoods. By selecting one of the 6 different Costa Mesa
neighborhoods, visitors will see a page filled with top shopping,
dining, recreation and hotels in that particular area.
BLOG ITINERARIES
Our blog was redesigned for cleaner lines, bigger images and brighter Itineraries now image based rather than pages of written content. Top picks
colors, continuing the simplification and modernization of the site and based on user’s “travel style” and highlighting top spots and attractions for
highlighting the ability for social share. singles, couples, active visitors and families.
CROWDRIFF
TCM integrated the CrowdRiff platform into the website in 2018.
CrowdRiff is a visual marketing tool that allows the creation of photo
galleries on the site that include owned content and user-generated
content from Instagram. We created photo galleries on the home
page, Eatcation™ page and the About page, with more planned for
the future. CrowdRiff also provides a place for vendors and partners
CALENDAR
to easily access Costa Mesa imagery, and a media hub where we can
receive media relations requests.
We made significant upgrades to our calendar, including bigger images,
titles and copy, with the new capability to search by date(s) of stay.
WEBSITE OVERVIEW
#:425
For the first time ever, TravelCostaMesa.com generated over 1 million pageviews in
calendar year 2018, specifically 1,353,454, shattering last year’s pageview number by more than double. The site also made large increases in
session and new user numbers. New vs. returning users and demographic data stayed similar to 2017, with the biggest increase being users in the
25-34 age bracket, who increased in numbers by approximately 23 percent.
TOP WEB VISITORS BY STATE Of the 90% of our visitors from the United States (approximately 10% of our
DIGITAL MARKETING
CAMPAIGNS
According to eMarketer, total digital
ad spending in the US will grow 19
percent to $129.34 billion in 2019
– 54.2 percent of estimated total US
ad spending. Mobile will continue its
dominance, accounting for more than
two-thirds of digital ad spending, at
$87 billion this year. For the first time,
U.S. digital ad spending will surpass
traditional in 2019. Travel Costa Mesa
has had a digital-heavy marketing
strategy for the past several years and
continues to grow investment in new
media, including social.
SPECIFIC CAMPAIGNS
As the branding campaign creative is refreshed
quarterly, it was paused when we ran specific
campaigns offering special hotel deals during
our hotel partner need times. We ran a holiday
campaign from mid-November through early
January, where we drove over 850 leads to
our hotel partners offering their best rates.
Our holiday campaign continued the “Split
Decisions” concept with holiday imagery.
SPRING CREATIVE:
Spring’s Better Here
VISITOR GUIDE
We created a new visitor guide in the beginning
of 2019 in line with our new branding, colors
and style.
PARTNERSHIPS
AND EVENTS
3.3k
# of guests
participating in
the 3 day event
$3.8m
value of media
coverage
impressions
282m
# of impressions
achieved in
total marketing
efforts
As the largest generator of travel to the U.S., IPW 2019 is expected to draw
more attendees than ever from around the world. Being hosted in Anaheim
from June 1 – 5, this will be the first time the show is back in California since
2012 and in Orange County since 2007.
A media marketplace was also held during the first day of IPW. TCM met
with 22 media, which resulted in multiple leads for FAMS and media
coverage around the dining, culture and fashion segments.
$31k
revenue booked
from IPW 2018
To extend the opportunity to engage with media in the local market, Visit
California conducted a media meet and greet and luncheon for California
destinations with 12 Denver-based media.
More than 6,000 buyers, suppliers and media attended from domestic and international sectors. TCM was joined by representatives from Avenue of the
Arts Hotel, BLVD Hotel and The Westin South Coast Plaza where the team conducted 38 individual meetings over a three-day period. As a result of the
tradeshow, $31,026 in revenue has been booked.
20k
Number of
runners in 2018
OC MARATHON 2018
To encourage runners of the annual OC Marathon and Half Marathon to stay
in Costa Mesa, Travel Costa Mesa provided complimentary shuttle to and
from the race for hotel guests for the 8th consecutive year. This race is an
economic driver for the city as hotels, restaurants and retail all benefit from
the 20 thousand runners who participate in it.
INTERNATIONAL
MARKETING
INTERNATIONAL VISITORS
TCM continues to reach out to international visitors, particularly through our partnerships with OCVA and Brand USA. TravelCostaMesa.com
now translates to 7 languages, and TravelCostaMesa.cn is the Simplified Chinese site.
CTRIP
Ctrip, one of China’s largest online travel agencies, continues
to partner with the Orange County Visitors Association in an
effort to highlight “The OC” as a premier Southern California
destination. Brand USA, Disneyland, Anaheim, Newport and
Huntington Beach are major sponsors of the page, which is
dedicated to driving leisure transient and packaged vacations to
OC. Costa Mesa is featured, along with 10 of our 11 partnering
hotels. This initiative continues to grow for our hotel products
relating to room nights. Marketing channels included banner ads,
social media and instant and mobile messaging. In 2018, Costa
Mesa hotels experienced a 56 percent increase in room nights
booked compared to 2017. Overall, for OC hotel listings, the
market experienced a 33 percent increase from the year prior.
SOCIAL MEDIA
UGC
Incorporating UGC into our social media strategy not only increases
the diversity of our online content and promotes brand authenticity
97%
but also encourages social media users to post more photos of their
activities in Costa Mesa for a greater chance to have their posts
shared.
of millennials use 86%
In the last year, social media platforms have taken strides to improve social media while
consumer trust, removing fraudulent accounts and increasing traveling
advertising transparency. Most notably, Twitter removed 70 million (Forbes, 2016)
accounts from its platform in July, decreasing the overall number of
of people say they’ve become
active users by 20 percent and the average follower rate for brands
interested in visiting a destination
by 6 percent. Google also announced the close of its social media
after seeing social images from
platform Google+ due to declining use.
peers & other consumers (Stackla)
Explore the OC Fair A Look at Fall Events Costa Mesa: Your Next
Without Breaking the Bank in Orange County Foodie Destination
CONTENT MARKETING:
In 2018, TCM continued to use Taboola, a native advertising and content
platform, to expand our online reach through audience targeting. Twelve
monthly pieces posted to the TCM blog were syndicated through Taboola’s
advertising platform, resulting in an average of 8,194 clicks per month to
TCM’s website and 209,261,859 impressions. The three most popular pieces
were “Explore the OC Fair Without Breaking the Bank,” “A Look at Fall Events
in Orange County” and “Costa Mesa: Your Next Foodie Destination.”
INFLUENCER PARTNERSHIPS
TCM continued its work with social media influencers
in 2018 to increase the brand’s reach to new
audiences via direct partnerships and in conjunction
with OCVA visits. As part of the partnerships,
influencers provide social media promotion of their
stay and often a blog post detailing their experience.
Over the year, we worked with travel, style and
foodie experts on social media who served as brand
ambassadors to present Costa Mesa as an ideal
weekend destination.
PUBLIC
TCM hosted 50 partners
at Leatherby’s Café Rouge
in July ahead of the free
RELATIONS
Friday Night Jazz Series
on the Argyros Plaza,
which proved to be a great
networking opportunity
and introduction to the
energizing events that take
place at Segerstrom Center As a result of hiring a new creative agency to support Costa Mesa’s
for the Arts. rebrand, the focus on the public relations efforts will continue to highlight
Costa Mesa as the City of the Arts®, while also refocusing attention to
a slightly younger, more discerning demographic than in previous years.
Food, fashion and the arts continue to be the key brand pillars guiding
TCM along with
TCM’s storytelling.
representatives from
Anaheim, Disneyland,
While Travel Costa Mesa heavily focuses its marketing and public
Huntington Beach
relations efforts on nearby drive markets and cities within about an hour
and Newport Beach
(by car or by air) of Costa Mesa, visitation by travelers from international
participated in the OCVA
destinations continues to increase.
mission to China.
TRAVMEDIA INTERNATIONAL
MEDIA MARKETPLACE
To reach a broader media audience including journalists who traditionally are based on the East Coast, TCM has joined Visit California and other OC
destinations annually on a media mission to New York City. For the first time, Visit California joined forces with TravMedia, the largest organization of
travel writers, to conduct a day-long schedule of 20-minute meetings with local journalists. This is one of the quickest ways, similar to the IPW Media
Marketplace, to target and engage with media that share similar interests in our destination’s product offerings.
DESTINATION
THE OC WITH KIDS PARTNERSHIPS
Winter is wonderful for family travel in Orange County
In 2018 TCM partnered with the
OCVA to participate in a variety of
PR efforts including a media mission
to Seattle as well as hosting media
from Vancouver, Portland, Seattle,
San Francisco and the Bay Area as
part of a North America focus.
Additional partnerships have been established with select cities throughout OC that
complement Costa Mesa’s offerings and allow each of our cities to be highlighted in shared
editorial. Together with Buena Park and Irvine, TCM hosted Houston Family Magazine as
well as Houston Modern Luxury. A later opportunity included partnering with these same
DMOs, plus Huntington Beach to be featured on a 30-minute Seattle-lifestyle program –
Seattle Refined on KOMO-TV.
In December, all seven Orange County DMOs hosted a reception for San Diego media
at the Paradise Point Resort on Mission Bay. This resulted in more than 50 bloggers and
influencers attending and multiple FAMs being scheduled in the first quarter of 2019.
A highlight of partnering with other destinations during 2018 was a broadcast media
tour with The Travel Mom, Emily Kaufman. Together with Greater Palm Springs and
Sonoma County, Emily appeared on news segments in five target media
markets to promote different aspects of each of our destinations for fall
“Grownup Getaways.” Not only did this result in a significant number
of media impressions, the three-city media tour earned her a Visit
California Eureka Award, awarded to travel writers doing an outstanding
job of highlighting California destinations.
FAMILIARIZATION TRIPS
One of the best ways to engage media in a story about Costa Mesa is to host them for a familiarization (FAM) tour of the destination. TCM creates
customized itineraries based on the areas of interest (arts, food, shopping, etc.) and includes activities to help these visitors become immersed in
the destination. The FAM itineraries focus on Costa Mesa’s six neighborhoods that include 17th Street dining and shopping, The Triangle, The
LAB and The CAMP, South Coast Plaza, SOCO and The OC Mix and Segerstrom Center for the Arts.
MEDIA COVERAGE
New to Costa Mesa in 2018 was a partnership with Los Angeles Times to host The TASTE – Costa Mesa at The MET
from October 19-21, 2018. This event was intended to draw attention to Costa Mesa as a culinary mecca. A variety
of media coverage was garnered leading up to and following the fall event. Some samples of media outlets who
covered The TASTE are listed above.
MEDIA COVERAGE
- INTERNATIONAL
3.14 million
US News Express – Chinese Domestic
and International News
impressions
151,000 Media
Impressions
50,000 Media
Impressions
208,402 Media
Impressions
46 // 2018-2019 ANNUAL REPORT //
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-10 Filed 02/24/20 Page 48 of 53 Page ID
#:445
288,100 750,000
Monthly readership Monthly readership
1,100,000 1,816,878
Monthly readership Monthly readership
NOTEWORTHY
THE OC FAIR &
EVENTS CENTER
BREAKS RECORD
ATTENDANCE OF 1.47
MILLION VISITORS
DURING THE 2018
SEASON.
AVENUE OF THE
ARTS NAMED AN AAA
4-DIAMOND HOTEL
FOR THE FIFTH YEAR
IN A ROW.
COSTA MESA IS
FEATURED IN THE
REAL CITIES OF
ORANGE COUNTY
BY SMART MEETINGS
MAGAZINE.
MARRIOTT
INTERNATIONAL
NAMED AVENUE
OF THE ARTS – A
TRIBUTE PORTFOLIO
HOTEL – AS HOTEL
OF THE YEAR.
ORANGE COUNTY
REGISTER FOOD
CRITIC BRAD
JOHNSON’S “20 BEST
PLACES I ATE IN 2018”
FEATURES 5 COSTA
MESA RESTAURANTS.
ORANGE COUNTY’S
GOLDEN FOODIE
AWARDS NAMED CHEF
NOAH VON BLÖM OF
ARC FOOD & LIBATIONS
AS ORANGE COUNTY’S
CHEF OF THE YEAR.
TACO MARÍA
RECOGNIZED AS
ONE OF ONLY THREE
ORANGE COUNTY
RESTAURANTS
IN THE TOP 101
RESTAURANTS WE
LOVE IN 2018 LIST IN
THE LOS ANGELES
TIMES.
Mike Hall VICE PRESIDENT, GENERAL MANAGER, The Westin South Coast Plaza
Paul Sanford SECRETARY, GENERAL MANAGER-ASSET MANAGER, Avenue of the Arts, A Tribute Portfolio Hotel
DIRECTORS
Naj Ekhlas GENERAL MANAGER, Best Western Plus
ADVISORS
Sarah Kruer DIRECTOR OF TOURISM DEVELOPMENT, South Coast Plaza
STAFF
Paulette Lombardi-Fries PRESIDENT
7'14'31
&YWMRIWW¶¶ 'SQTERMIW
1RSiiS_Q\S_KmP>GKolapF\KIv>oKlm>maS\
o>_[KlmªGa_o>S_KlG>llSKlm>_IGlpSmK\S_Km
moaiG>\\S_Qa_
RS_>PalPK>laPG>oGRS_Q
oRKGala_>uSlpm
4SVXGEPPWF]GSRXEMRIVGEVVMIVWJIPPTIVGIRXMR*IFVYEV]JVSQE]IEV
EKSEGGSVHMRKXS'PEVOWSRW
3MPWLMTQIRXXS'LMREJVSQXLI1MHHPI)EWXJIPPXSTIVGIRXSJ[LEXMX
[EWE]IEVEKSSR*IFVYEV]
8STMG¶`¶¶8VERWTSVXERHPSKMWXMGW
6]ER7[MJX
4YFPMWLIHEQ*IF
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-12 Filed 02/24/20 Page 3 of 9 Page ID #:456
-aloG>\\moa
RS_>>lKFKGa^S_Q\KmmPlKkpK_oª>mPK>laPG>oGRS_QoRKGala_>uSlpm>_I>
m\avIav_S_oRK
RS_KmKKGa_a^xR>uKIKoKllKIGlpSmK\S_KlmªGa_o>S_KlmRSimªaS\o>_[Klm>_I
Fp\[G>llSKlm>\S[KPla^moaiiS_Q>ooRKGap_olxÉmR>lFaplm¯
a^^KlGS>\uKmmK\mR>uKmoaiiKI>llSuS_QªvSoRialoG>\\mP>\\S_QFx>_KmoS^>oKIiKlGK_oS_
KFlp>lxª>_IGa_o>S_KloRlapQRipoKmoS^>oKIoaIKG\S_KFxFKovKK_
>_IiKlGK_oª
>GGalIS_Qoa
\>l[ma_m¾>mRSiiS_QlKmK>lGRGa^i>_x¯1KuK_aPoRKval\IÉm\>lQKmo
Ga_o>S_Klialom¹º>lKS_
RS_>ªS_G\pIS_Qa_Qa_Q¯
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-12 Filed 02/24/20 Page 4 of 9 Page ID #:457
2RKGala_>uSlpmapoFlK>[ªvRSGRR>mmSG[K_KI^alKoR>_ª>lap_IoRKval\I>_I[S\\KI
^alKoR>_
ªªSm>IIS_QoaoRKvaKmaP>_S_IpmolxoR>oSm>\lK>Ixmp|KlS_QPla^oRK31¿
RS_>ol>IKv>l¯m^>_x>maPoRKªi>mmK_QKlma_oRKGlpSmKmRSiS>^a_I-lS_GKmm
¾^aalKIS_;a[aR>^>apomSIK2a[xa¾Ga_ol>GoKIoRKuSlpmvRS\KS_G\amKilawS^Soxoaa_K
>_aoRKlªvRSGRPploRKlIKoKllKIuKmmK\mPla^G>\\S_Qa_^>S_\>_I
RS_>ªvRKlK^alKoR>_
iKlGK_oaPGa_l^KI>~SGoSa_m>_IIK>oRm>lK¯
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-12 Filed 02/24/20 Page 5 of 9 Page ID #:458
1oS\\ªuKmmK\av_KlmKwiKGoIK\SuKlxoaFKIK\>xKI¯#S_KaPoRK
RS_KmKmRSix>lImmpluKxKIFx
\>l[ma_mipooRKSlx>lIma_Ga^i\KoKmpmiK_mSa_a_KFlp>lxªvSoR_a_K>oPp\\ilaIpGoSa_¯
Æ9KPalKmKKoRKIK\>xoaFKFKovKK_a_Koaova^a_oRmªIKiK_IS_Qa_oRKG>i>FS\Sox>_I
lKmS\SK_GKaPIS|KlK_omRSix>lImªÇm>SI=RapS>_¿K_Qª^>_>QS_QISlKGoalaP9>Rva_Q
">lSoS^K2l>_mialoa\IS_QmªvRSGRR>movamRSimp_IKlGa_molpGoSa_>o
RS_KmKmRSix>lImª
>_IR>mmKuKl>\aoRKlilaZKGomp_IKlv>x¯
2l>IKmRavm>_IFpmS_Kmm^KKoS_Qm>lK\S[K\xoaFKiamoia_KIªvRSGR^K>_moR>ooRKlKvS\\FK
PKvKlFpS\IS_QGa_ol>GommSQ_KIS_oRKmRalooKl^ª>GGalIS_Qoa>KZS_ KKª^>lSoS^K>_>\xmoPal
1">l[So¯
i>loPla^oRKIK\SuKlxIK\>xª
RS_>ÉmuKmmK\av_Klm>_ImRSiiS_Q\S_Km>lKP>GS_QIS}Gp\ox
_IS_QGlKvª>mm>S\alm>_Ia}GKlmPla^^>S_\>_I
RS_>^pmoPa\\avkp>l>_oS_KlKQp\>oSa_m
oR>o>ii\x>oKuKlxialoG>\\ª>IIS_QGa^i\KwSoSKm>_IIK\>xm¯
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-12 Filed 02/24/20 Page 6 of 9 Page ID #:459
RS_>SmoRKmKGa_I¿FSQQKmomaplGKaP^>lSoS^KGlKvªFKRS_Ia_\xoRK-RS\SiiS_Kmª>_I>RK>IaP
_IS>ªlKKGK>_I>moKl_plaiKª>GGalIS_QoaI>o>FxoRKa_Qa_Q1RSi%v_KlmmmaGS>oSa_
»1%¼¯
RS_>ÉmmRSiFpS\IS_QS_IpmolxR>mKwi\aIKIS_mS{KauKloRKi>moovaIKG>IKmmS_GKoRK_>oSa_Ém
^K^FKlmRSiS_oRK9al\I2l>IK%lQ>_Sm>oSa_»92%¼ª>_IS_oRKKGa_a^SGlKGauKlxmS_GKoRK
apoFlK>[aPoRKmKuKlK>GpoKlKmiSl>oalxmx_Ila^K»1>lm¼¯
RS_>ÉmmR>lKaPQ\aF>\
^>lSoS^KGa_molpGoSa_Fxoa__>QK>\^amoolSi\KIPla^
iKlGK_oS_
oaiKlGK_oFx
ªFKGa^S_QoRKval\IÉm\>lQKmomRSiFpS\IS_Q_>oSa_¯
RS_KmKmRSiiS_Q\S_Km\S[K
amGa>_IoRK_>_GS>\\K>mS_Q>l^maPoRKGap_olxÉmFSQQKmoF>_[m
>lKGa\\KGoSuK\xoRKmKGa_I¿\>lQKmouKmmK\av_Klma_oRKi\>_KoªvRSGRp_IKlmGalKmoRKSl
>QQlKmmSuK\K>mS_Q>GoSuSoxauKloRKi>moIKG>IKoaG>llxoRK_>oSa_ÉmmR>lKaPQ\aF>\Ga^^KlGK¯
8LI(MEQSRH4VMRGIWWGVYMWIWLMTEXXLI(EMOSOY4MIV'VYMWI8IVQMREPMR=SOSLEQESR*IFVYEV]4LSXS)4%
)*)
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-12 Filed 02/24/20 Page 7 of 9 Page ID #:460
2RKval\IÉmmKGa_I¿\>lQKmoKGa_a^xª
RS_>>GGap_oKIPaliKlGK_oaP>\\Ga_o>S_KlSmKI
G>lQaKwialom\>moxK>lª
iKlGK_oaPmK>Fal_KGlpIKaS\ªiKlGK_oaPIlxFp\[mRSiiKIªiKl
GK_oaP\SkpKKIQ>m>_I
iKlGK_oaP>\\mK>Fal_KSla_alK¯
2R>oR>mo>[K_>Il>moSGopl_ª>moRKGala_>uSlpmapoFlK>[Q>oRKlKIi>GKS_KFlp>lx¯
lpIKaS\
o>_[KlmR>uKmoaiiKIm>S\S_QPal
RS_>mS_GKoRKmo>loaPoRK^a_oRªGa^i>lKIvSoR¯
FS\\Sa_
oa_¿^S\KmKuKlxI>xa_>uKl>QK\>moxK>lª>GGalIS_Qoam>oK\\SoKI>o>ilauSIKIFx8KmmK\m8>\pK¯
1RSi^K_omPla^oRK"SII\K>moª
RS_>Ém\>lQKmomaplGKaPoRKGa^^aISoxªvKlK
^S\\Sa_
IK>IvKSQRooa__KG>lQa^S\Kma_KFlp>lxª>^KlK
iKlGK_oaPoRK
¯
FS\\Sa_92¿^S\K
mRSiiKIa_oRKm>^KI>xS_
ª>GGalIS_QoamRSiiS_Q>_>\xoSGml^lKvlxªvRa_aoKoR>o
Q\aF>\PlKSQRol>oKmIlaiiKI¯iKlGK_oS_oRKmKGa_IvKK[aPKFlp>lxªIKG\S_S_Q>_aoRKl¯
iKlGK_ooRSmvKK[¯
2R>ovap\IipomSQ_SG>_oÆmolKmmÇa_ialolKuK_pKSPoRK\avua\p^KGa_oS_pKmFKxa_I">lGRª
FKG>pmK^amoplaiK>_>_I"SII\K>moialomR>uKmSQ_SG>_oKwiamplKoa
RS_>ª>GGalIS_Qoa
SoGR0>oS_QmQK_Gx¯
">_xaPoRKval\IÉm\>lQKmoGa_o>S_KlmRSiiS_Q\S_KmªS_G\pIS_QoRK"KISoKll>_K>_1RSiiS_Q
a^i>_x»"1
¼ª-"a\\Kl">Klm[ª
"¿
">_Ia_Qa_QÉmav_%%
R>uK>\\G>_GK\\KI
m>S\S_Qma_oRKSlG>lQalapoKmPla^mS>oaplaiK>_I#aloR^KlSG>S_lKGK_ovKK[m¯
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-12 Filed 02/24/20 Page 8 of 9 Page ID #:461
8LI;IWXIVHEQGVYMWIWLMTEXXLI'EQFSHMERTSVXSJ7MLERSYOZMPPISR*IFEJXIVFIMRKXYVRIHE[E]F]¡ZISXLIV
%WMERLEVFSYVW4LSXS<MRLYE
2R>ovap\IGlS^iQ\aF>\Ga^^KlGKª>GGalIS_Qoa
\>l[ma_mI>o>ª>moRKlKmK>lGRGa^i>_xGpo
SomQlavoRPalKG>moaPoRKval\IÉm
^>lSoS^Kol>IKoa
¯
iKlGK_oPla^>_K>l\SKlKmoS^>oK
aP
¯iKlGK_o¯
2RKm\avKlQlavoRvap\I>|KGoR>lFaplaiKl>oalm\S[KpoGRSma_-aloa\IS_Qmª>p_SoaP
oxGaa_ S>¿mRS_QÉm
poGRSma_Ga_Q\a^Kl>oK¯2RKGa^i>_xªoRKval\IÉm\>lQKmoaiKl>oal
aPGa_o>S_KlialomS_G\pIS_QoRKv>S2mS_QoKl^S_>\mS_a_Qa_QªvS\\mKKÆ_KQ>oSuK
QlavoRÇS_oRSmxK>lÉmoRlapQRipoª>PoKl\>moxK>lÉmiKlGK_oIKG\S_Kª"aaIxÉm_uKmoalm
1KluSGKm>SIa_KFlp>lx¯
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-12 Filed 02/24/20 Page 9 of 9 Page ID #:462
2RKmRSiiS_QS_IpmolxR>m>\lK>IxmolpQQ\KIvSoRoRKmvSoGRoa\avmp\iRplPpK\m>m^>_I>oKI
Fx"%
ªvRSGRilaRSFSommp\iRplKwR>pmo¯3_GKlo>S_ox>FapooRK>u>S\>FS\SoxaP\av
mp\iRplPpK\m>_IoRKSlGamoR>m\KIoa>_p^FKlaPG>lQa\S_KmoaooRKSlmRSimvSoR
ÆmGlpFFKlmǪvRSGRlK^auKmp\iRplPla^mRSiÉmKwR>pmo¯
\>l[ma_mKmoS^>oKIoR>oiKlGK_o
aP>\\mpGRlKomvKlKFKS_QIa_K>o
RS_KmKmRSix>lIm¯
K\>xmvS\\G>pmKRK>I>GRKmoamRSiiKlmvRaFKoa_oRKGamoFK_KoaPmGlpFFKlmuKlmpmpmS_Q
\avmp\iRplPpK\m¯
1aplGK30 ©Rooim©µµmG^i¯Ga^µFpmS_KmmµGa^i>_SKmµ>loSG\KµµmRSiiS_Q¿\S_Km¿P>GK¿
olapF\KI¿v>oKlm¿aS\¿o>_[Klm¿Ga_o>S_Kl
S_[m
¹ºRooim©µµvvv¯mG^i¯Ga^µFpmS_KmmµGa^i>_SKmµ>loSG\KµµGRS_>¿R>m¿mSw¿val\Im¿¿
FpmSKmo¿Ga_o>S_Kl¿ialom¿mipllKI¿Faa^S_Q
2/24/2020 Transcript Document
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE for CDC Telebriefing:
19-13 UpdateFiled
on COVID-19 | CDC Online
02/24/20 Page Newsroom
1 of 7| CDC
Page ID #:463
CDC Newsroom
Please Note: This transcript is not edited and may contain errors.
Telebrie ng Audio
>>> Good afternoon and thank you all for standing by. For the duration of today’s conference, all listeners are on
silence mode until the question and answer section. After that time, press star one. Today’s call is recorded. If you
have objections, disconnect at this time. It is my pleasure to introduce Mr. Paul Fulton. Thank you, sir. You may
begin.
>> Thank you for joining us on the brie ng of the COVID-19 response. We’re joined by secretary for consular a airs
for the department of state, Ian G. Brownlee, and Nancy Messonnier, the Director for the National Center for
Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, who will give opening remarks before taking your questions. At this time, i
will turn the call over to acting assistant secretary for counselor a airs Brownlee.
>> Good morning. I’d like to say a word about the cruise ship travel alert that the State Department posted yesterday
afternoon. U.S. Department of State has no higher priority than the safety and welfare of U.S. citizens overseas.
February 20th, the department advised all U.S. citizens to reconsider travel by cruise ship to or within Asia. Many
countries implemented strict screening procedures to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 virus. This is a dynamic
situation, and U.S. citizens traveling by ship may be impacted by travel restrictions a ecting their itineraries or may
be subject to quarantine procedures implemented by local authorities. While the U.S. government has successfully
evacuated hundreds of our citizens in recent weeks, such repatriation ights do not re ect our standard practice and
should not be relied upon as an option for U.S. citizens under potential risk of quarantine by local authorities. We
urge U.S. citizens to evaluate the risks associated with choosing to remain in an area that may be subject to
quarantine and to take all appropriate proactive measures. People who plan to travel by cruise ship should contact
their cruise ship line companies for further information on the current rules and restrictions, and should continue to
monitor the travel.state.gov website for updated information. We encourage all U.S. citizens traveling overseas to
enroll their travel plans in the smart traveler enrollment program, step.state.gov. They can receive important
messages about their destination, including timely alerts and updates to travel advisories. Finally, you can nd the
text of the travel alert on that same website, travel.state.gov. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you, acting assistant secretary Brownlee. Thank you all for joining us today. This is Nancy Messonnier. I
want to start with how we will be reporting our cases of COVID-19 beginning today and going forward. We are
making our case counts in two tables. One only tracks people who were repatriated by the state department, and
the second tracks all other cases picked up through U.S. public health network. CDC will continue to update these
numbers every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. We are keeping track of cases resulting from repatriation e orts
separately because we don’t believe those numbers accurately represent the picture of what is happening in the
community in the united states at this time. As of this morning, when you break things up this way, we have 13 U.S.
cases versus 21 cases among people who were repatriated. The repatriated cases include 18 passengers from the
“diamond princess” and three from the wuhan repatriation ights. I want to update you on the status of the
repatriation e orts. Yesterday, nearly all of the remaining people who returned from Wuhan, China, via state
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/t0221-cdc-telebriefing-covid-19.html 1/7
2/24/2020 Transcript Document
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE for CDC Telebriefing:
19-13 UpdateFiled
on COVID-19 | CDC Online
02/24/20 Page Newsroom
2 of 7| CDC
Page ID #:464
department chartered ights, who have been quarantined at four department of defense installations across the
U.S. have completed their 14-day quarantine. We are truly thankful to those released from quarantine for their
cooperation and patience and wish them well as they return to home, work, and school. I want to be clear that
someone who has been released from quarantine is not at risk for spreading the virus to others. Speci cally, they
are not infected. Additionally, i want to extend my thanks to the men and women on all of the dod bases and their
families for their graciousness while hosting these guests. We are also thankful that Travis Air Force Base and Joint
Base San Antonio-lackland opened their doors to the recently returned passengers from the “Diamond Princess”
cruise ship. Now, the “Diamond Princess.” 329 U.S. citizens earlier this week returned to the united states aboard
two state department chartered ights. So far, 18 have tested positive at CDC. Another 10 were reportedly positive
in Japan. 11 are receiving care at the university of Nebraska medical center. Five are receiving care around Travis.
Two are receiving care around Lackland. Because the passengers on the “Diamond Princess” were in a close setting,
where there has been a signi cant spread of COVID-19, they are considered at high risk for infection. We do expect
to see additional con rmed cases of COVID-19 among the passengers. Additionally, since many of these people are
over the age of 60, we are also prepared for other medical issues to arise that will require hospitalization. We’re
going to do everything we can to make their quarantine as easy as possible while monitoring them to see if they
develop illness. Our goal for these people who have been repatriated is to be sure that each and every person is
properly cared for and that those who are in need of medical care receive it. To ensure this, we are working closely
with local hospitals as well as other facilities across the country who are prepared to provide this care. I want to take
a minute to extend my condolences to the families who have lost loved ones who were infected on the “Diamond
Princess.” we heard yesterday that two Japanese passengers of the “Diamond Princess” died. There are several
Americans with COVID-19 who are hospitalized in japan and who are seriously ill. Sadly, we may see poor outcomes
in others, not just people who were on board the “diamond princess,” but among others who become sick with this
virus. Despite the increasing cases in china and around the world, we believe our aggressive travel precautions are
working. As I said, the number of cases detected through the recent U.S. surveillance systems has increased to 13.
The most recent patient was announced last night by Humboldt county in California. This patient had traveled to
mainland china. The fact we have been able to keep this number low is good news, especially given what we are
seeing among some countries in Asia that are beginning to experience community spread. This is when cases are
detected in a community but it is not known what the source of the infection was. This is being reported in
Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam, as well as Hong Kong and Japan. The last two countries we
issued level one travel notices for earlier this week. We are working in close coordination with the state department
to keep travelers informed with up-to-the-minute guidance, including on cruise ship travel, as discussed by
Mr. Brownlee. We never expected we’d catch every traveler with novel coronavirus from China. It would be
impossible. We’re not seeing spread here in the United States yet, but it is possible, even likely, that it may eventually
happen. Our goal continues to be slowing the introduction of the virus into the U.S. This buys us more time to
prepare our communities for more cases and possibly sustained spread. This new virus represents a tremendous
public health threat. We don’t yet have a vaccine for this novel virus, nor do we have a medicine to treat it
speci cally. We are taking and will continue to take aggressive action to reduce the impact of this virus, that it will
have on the communities in the U.S. we are working with state, local, and territorial health departments to ready our
public health work force to respond to local cases and the possibility this outbreak could become a pandemic. We
are working closely with health care systems across the country to reinforce infection control principles and plans for
surges of people seeking and requiring care. We’re collaborating with supply chain partners to understand what
medical supplies are needed and available. This will help CDC understand when we may need to take more
aggressive measures to ensure that health care workers on the front lines have access to the supplies they need.
We’re working with businesses, hospitals, pharmacies, clinicians, manufacturers, and distributors to communicate
about these measures and what they can do to get ready. I want to direct everyone to a document that will be very
informative in terms of what people can expect in the coming weeks if the virus starts spreading in our community.
This is an MMWR recommendations and report titled “community mitigation guidelines to prevent pandemic
in uenza, united states–2017.” we are reviewing the materials and adapting them to COVID-19. These materials will
serve as a blueprint for the community interventions we will use here in the U.S. if you’re watching the news, you
may be hearing about schools shutting down and businesses closing in countries in Asia to reduce the potential
spread of this virus. The day may come where we need to implement such measures in the U.S. communities. By
next week, we expect to be posting a new web page focused on what CDC is already doing to mitigate transmission in
communities. We recognize the uncertainty of the current situation. As always, CDC public health experts strive to
make the best recommendations based on the most up to date data. Our guidance will change as we learn more
about this virus. When that happens, we will share it with you. We’d be happy to take questions now.
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/t0221-cdc-telebriefing-covid-19.html 2/7
2/24/2020 Transcript Document
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE for CDC Telebriefing:
19-13 UpdateFiled
on COVID-19 | CDC Online
02/24/20 Page Newsroom
3 of 7| CDC
Page ID #:465
>> Thank you. If you would like to ask a question, please unmute your phone. Press star 1, and when prompted,
record your rst and last name clearly so i may introduce you. To withdraw your question, press star 2. Again, to ask
a question, press star 1. Our rst question comes from Jason Gale with Bloomberg news. Your line is open.
>> Thanks for taking my question. It has two parts. We’ve heard something like 40% of COVID-19 patients
hospitalized in China have received corticosteroids. Could this be worsening the disease or helping patients by
calming the damaging immune response? The second bit is, what is the worst threat, the virus or the body’s
response to it?
>> This is CDC. I would say, in general, that CDC clinical guidance does not recommend the use of steroids for this
virus based on the information we have now. I’ve also seen the reports out of China, but i would consider it to be
unveri ed at this point. As we’ve talked about before, folks are rushing appropriately to get information out.
Sometimes, it is di cult to know which of those have been fully reviewed. I wouldn’t want to comment more directly
on what clinical practice is or is not in china. As many of you know, there is a team on the eld now in china working
speci cally on this outbreak. We, like everyone else, are waiting for the reports to come out so we can learn more
about what they’re nding in china. Also point out that there is also a WHO overseeing clinical group that is involving
not just the U.S. but all the countries that are treating patients with this, so that we can be sharing experiences and
using best practices that are available across the globe. In terms of your second question, and i really do think it is
premature to hypothesize why some patients are having poorer outcomes than others, but i would remind us that
emergent data still says that the people who have the worst outcomes are those who are older and with underlying
illnesses. That seems to be true, continue to be true. Next question?
>> Our next question is from Lisa Krieger with “San Jose Mercury News.” your line is open.
>> Thank you very much. Ten Americans tested positive in Japan, and 18 tested positive here with the CDC test upon
their arrival. Does that suggest that they were infected en route, or might be there some other explanation?
>> This is CDC again. What i would say is, as we said when this started, these group of people we judge to be at high
risk for COVID-19 based on what the attack rates were on the cruise ship. Therefore, it is possible that some of these
people were already incubating the disease when they left japan. That is similar to, for example, what we’ve seen in
just some of the travelers in the U.S. I’ll remind you that some of the U.S. cases were asymptomatic when they came
back in the U.S., and then developed symptoms several days later. It is entirely possible that that’s what’s going on
here. I think that more information will become available over the next couple days, as we fully evaluate these
repatriated travelers and as we line up the lab results from japan, as well as the testing in the united states. So more
than that, i think it is really premature to say. Next question.
>> Actually, for state, just one clari cation to that. The positive results that you saw in folks that were repatriated
either before they were transported, becoming positive or immediately upon arrival, it is important to note that
those test samples were obtained 48 to 72 hours prior to the evacuation and repatriation ight. So the results that
you’re seeing don’t represent infection en route. They actually represent infection that existed prior to the
evacuation that is only now coming to light.
>> Our next question is from Lenny Bernstein with the “Washington Post.” your line is open.
>> Thank you very much for taking my call. Dr. Messonnier, you say you expect to see more infections from
“diamond princess” passengers. Is that based on preliminary testing? Is that just a prediction? If you can say, how
many more? Is this going to be a very large number?
>> As i think you know if you’ve been listening to me give these telebrie ngs for weeks, i’m never going to make
predictions that way. I guess what we would say is that this was a high-risk situation. Based on what we know about
the attack rates and the exposures, we should expect to see additional cases. Some of these passengers are still in
what we would consider the incubation period, which we know to be 10 to 14 days. Until we’re through that period,
we won’t have a good feel for how many additional cases there are. But i’m — we do think, based on epidemiology
and risk assessment, that there may be additional cases. Next question?
>> Our next question is from Luke Simmons from San Antonio. Your line is open.
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/t0221-cdc-telebriefing-covid-19.html 3/7
2/24/2020 Transcript Document
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE for CDC Telebriefing:
19-13 UpdateFiled
on COVID-19 | CDC Online
02/24/20 Page Newsroom
4 of 7| CDC
Page ID #:466
>> Thank you for taking my call. I was wondering if you could clarify on the group that is over at Lackland. Is that two
more patients that have tested positive, not including the one that had originally come here? Also, we had some
elected o cials that were concerned with them being taken, you know, for testing at the local hospitals. It seems like
you may have changed course a little bit with the Texas center for infectious disease. I’m just wondering if you can
kind of clarify what that process is once you guys, you know, start testing in this type of incident.
>> I’m going to maybe answer the second question rst. So as we’ve said with these repatriated groups, our
assessment of the groups, in terms of their risk, drives our stance in terms of what kind of testing we do. So because
these returning passengers — because these repatriated individuals were judged to be at high risk, we have done
additional testing on them. It is — in addition to that testing, we also are continuing to do surveillance for illness,
which is clearly our focus. Identifying people that are ill and making sure they are getting appropriate treatment so
they don’t have poor outcomes. When somebody is identi ed as being ill, those are the folks that are being
hospitalized, if that’s what you’re asking me. So there are people who are in quarantine. There are people who are in
local hospitals. They’re getting care. Is that what you’re asking me?
>> Yes. Well, and also, it just seems like, you know, some of the elected o cials were concerned about the testing
itself, making sure that that was happening at lackland. They didn’t necessarily need to go to a hospital at that point.
And then can you also talk about the texas center for infectious disease? Is that where you plan to take these people
now who are testing positive, and not just local hospitals, you know, with the general population?
>> I would say we probably need to defer back to dod for this. But in every situation, we’re trying to make the best
decision possible for the health of these individual patients. In each of these bases, and each of these situations, the
individual patient level decisions end up being a little bit di erent as we make those decisions with the health
department and with the dod, folks that have been kind enough to let us keep the passengers on these bases. Our
focus is on the individuals, again, making sure they’re getting the care possible, but also we want to make sure that
the rest of the communities, as well as the folks on the dod bases, also are assured of their own safety. So working
those issues together, each individualized situation ends up being a little di erent. Next question.
>> Our next question is from John Woolfolk from “Bay Area News Group.” your question?
>> Thank you, doctor. I have to ask you to go over the numbers of infections, both from the previous cases and the
“diamond princess.” you talk awful fast. If you could clarify, have you subtracted from the total the two that we know
of that have been declared recovered, or is that still being counted in? And is this new case out of Humboldt County
in California being added to that? If you could just go over the numbers of who is infected, that would be a big help.
>> Yeah. And i am sorry for going through those quickly. What i would start by saying is that the numbers should be
up on the CDC website within the hour. Because it is a little complicated to work through the details. Let me start by
saying that if you’re a case, you remain a case. Even if you recover, you remain a case. We’re not subtracting cases.
The patient from Humboldt County who was announced overnight should be added into those numbers. If, for
example, somebody was identi ed as being a con rmed case this afternoon, that number won’t be posted until
Monday. That’s the distinction, you know. We pick a time to post our numbers. It is Monday, Wednesday, and
Friday. We are separating out the folks that are repatriated because we think they really do — are a separate
category, and that it doesn’t re ect transmission and risk in general in the U.S. so what you’ll see us separating is the
U.S. cases versus the cases among repatriated individuals. Those are in two groups. The rst set of repatriated
individuals are the folks who came back from Wuhan on the repatriated ights. There are three patients that are
con rmed COVID-19 associated with their ight, those ights. Then there are the repatriated folks from the
“diamond princess.” that also will be a separate category. So far, that number is 18. We are still trying to adjudicate
the Japanese results, as well. So we likely will be including in that number, eventually, patients that were con rmed
in japan. We’ll really try to make sure, on our website, to post those numbers di erently. Bottom line is, there is one
new U.S. case since our last brie ng, which was a week ago. Then there is a separate category of folks that were on
the “diamond princess.” we will continue to keep those numbers separately. Please, within the hour, it’ll be on the
website and hopefully make it clearer. Next question.
>> Our next question is from Julie Steenhuysen from Reuters. Your line is open.
>> I have a couple questions. First of all, can you tell us how many states have testing capacity? We’re hearing that
only three states at the moment are capable of testing for the coronavirus because of issues with the test kits. And
secondly, and you touched on this, at what point does it make sense to still screen passengers at airports, given how
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/t0221-cdc-telebriefing-covid-19.html 4/7
2/24/2020 Transcript Document
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE for CDC Telebriefing:
19-13 UpdateFiled
on COVID-19 | CDC Online
02/24/20 Page Newsroom
5 of 7| CDC
Page ID #:467
many countries now are seeing widespread — or seeing additional cases and starting — you know, at what point do
you shift to community-based measures to control this virus? Thirdly, do — where do we stand in our understanding
of whether this virus is spread in asymptomatic patients? Thank you.
>> So i have to say that i thought that this was one question and one follow-up, but i will try —
>> In terms of the test kits, you know what, i think we’ve been as transparent as one could be about this issue. I’m
happy to report that we’re fully stood up at CDC. There is no lag time for testing at this point. That is the focus of
testing in the united states, the testing here at CDC. We’ve had no issues at all in terms of the quality of that. As
we’ve pushed tests out to the state, they did what we would expect as part of the normal procedures, which is do the
veri cation in their own laboratories. There were problems identi ed with the test kits. That is a normal part,
unfortunately, of these processes. We obviously would not want to use anything but the most perfect possible kits,
since we’re making determinations about whether people have COVID-19 or not. So that is still where we are. We
are working with FDA, who is the one that have oversight over us. Under this e.u.a. on redoing some of the kits. We
still consider it a priority to get the kits out to patients as soon as possible. It is overridden by the priority to make
sure that the test is correct. The second question is about screening. I guess what i would say in general is that if you
look at global data, the focus still of most of the cases is in china and, speci cally, in wuhan. That is why the layered
approach that the U.S. government has put in place has focused on those places at higher risk. We continue to
reevaluate this. Screening at the airport is two di erent things. There is routine screening for any passenger coming
back with — CDC works with them on it, and it is screening ill people returning from overseas. That’s routine. That’s
ongoing. That is not driven by these countries separately. We do have focused e orts focused on people returning
from china. We continue to look at those e orts to make sure the focus is appropriate, given where the burden of
disease is, and given where transmission is. We still think that, as of today, that is the right focus. It is also important
for you to realize, that’s not all we’re doing. In addition to what’s going on at the airports, we have clinicians all over
the country on the lookout for patients. We have patients who are traveling, getting information from us as to
potential risk, so that they can be part of this — of the important work of identifying cases in the U.S. we also
haven’t — this is not a turn on, turn o way of approach. That is, we’re often doing community surveillance. The
reason we’ve moved quickly to stand up community surveillance is with the understanding that we want to make
sure that we also have other ways, outside of just travel-associated screening, to look for cases in the U.S. that is
starting at a few sites, but we’re rapidly working to make that all over the united states. It will be community-level
surveillance for patients ill with respiratory diseases, so that we can also look at a community level, both to make
sure our screening is still focused appropriately, and also with the understanding that there is still the possibility in
the future that this is going to spread. The nal question is asymptomatic disease. There is certainly more data
coming out that suggests that there are people who are reportedly asymptomatic who have this virus with the swab.
We need to fully understand what that means in the individual patients. Are those patients, for example, that are
being caught early, that may eventually go on to get disease? How hard are folks looking to ask them for symptoms?
In other similar illnesses, we have found that if you dig deeper, you actually nd many of these patients can recall
some sort of mild symptom. I don’t think there is anything especially new about our posture on this. We are still
gathering information. When it is enough information to impact how we operationalize, we obviously will make sure
all our partners, as well as the public, knows it. Next question.
>> Our next question is from Dan Vergano with “Buzzfeed” news. Your line is open.
>> Thanks. I wanted to ask the state department o cial about some of the reports that there might be a spread or
outbreak in Iran, and whether our status with them, UN sanctions, would prevent us from aiding that country, or any
other with UN sanctions, in the case of stopping an outbreak for medical help. As a follow-up, i wanted to clarify,
was there a disagreement between CDC and state department about the passengers transferred back to the U.S.
from the cruise ship? Thanks.
>> This is CDC. I’ll take the reports out of Iran in terms of cases. You can answer the second question. So, you know,
as folks know, at CDC, we look carefully at both formal reports from other countries, as well as rumors. There have
been emerging reports informally of additional cases in Iran. Some of that isn’t con rmed yet. I expect this will be
something that we are looking at and talking about over the next couple days. It’s a little premature right now.
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/t0221-cdc-telebriefing-covid-19.html 5/7
2/24/2020 Transcript Document
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE for CDC Telebriefing:
19-13 UpdateFiled
on COVID-19 | CDC Online
02/24/20 Page Newsroom
6 of 7| CDC
Page ID #:468
Really, that data is new as of today, and we need some time to evaluate it. I would also say that this is something
where, obviously, we’re working closely with the World Health Organization. State Department, I’ll leave the next
question to you.
>> This is Dr. Walters from the State Department. With regard to decision making during the evacuation, it is
important to remember that this was an emerging and unusual circumstance. We had 328 people on buses. We had
a plan. We were executing the plan. Then we received lab results on otherwise asymptomatic, un-ill people that
were on their way to an airport. I think the folks on the ground did just the right thing by, out of an abundance of
caution, moving those 14 people into an isolation area where they pose no threat to themselves or anyone else. It
provided room for an inter-agency discussion between not just CDC and state but the operational elements of HHS,
which were from the assistant secretary of preparedness and response. At the end of the day, the state department
had a decision to make, informed by our inter-agency partners. We made ahead and made that decision. The
decision, i think, was the right one, in bringing those people home.
>> This is CDC. Maybe i’ll just add that, you know, these are di cult decisions that we’re faced with every day. We’re
making those decisions in real time. When you make those kind of complicated decisions, there are going to be
di erent perspectives that are brought to the table. We are one U.S. government working together, and we will
continue to operate under that stance, as we have forever, since this started and as we will into the future. Our focus
is on, right now, the forward-looking health of these repatriated citizens, and to continue to manage the response
seamlessly within the government. Next question.
>> Our next question is from Andrew Joseph. Your line is open.
>> Hi. Following up on some of the testing questions. Has testing started through the in uenza network yet? Also,
you mentioned, you know, how clinicians are on the lookout for patients. Have you all thought about broadening the
recommendation? As it stands now, i think online, it’s either fever and — or sorry, symptoms and either travel history
to wuhan or contact with a con rmed case or person or investigation. As you mentioned, it seems to be spreading
pretty e ciently outside Wuhan. Have you thought about expanding that evaluation guideline? Thank you.
>> Certainly, our plan. I’d like to under promise and over deliver, but we expect it to be on track for next week. In
terms of case de nition, you may know that on our web page we do go through in detail our current case de nition.
The current case de nition does say that patients that have fever, symptoms of lower respiratory infection, requiring
hospitalization, and a history of travel from mainland china meet the case de nition for testing. We are regularly
looking at the epidemiological situation globally. With our state and local health department partners, evaluating our
case de nition to make sure it is sensitive and speci c enough. We will continue to do that. Including conversations
today on this issue. We are certainly sensitive to the question of when and if this starts spreading more broadly in
communities globally, how that impacts how we de ne a patient under investigation here in the U.S. We want to
make sure that we’re targeting our e orts appropriately. We also obviously don’t want to mistransmit in the United
States. Balancing those things going forward, we are going to continue to look at travel history and see when and if
there’s the right reasons to expand that beyond China.
>> Thank you, Dr. Messonnier. Thank you, all, for joining us today for today’s brie ng. Check CDC’s 2019 COVID-19
website for the latest updates on CDC response e orts. If you have further questions, please call CDC’s media line.
404-639-3286. Email [email protected]. Thank you.
>> This concludes today’s conference. Thank you for participating. You may disconnect at this time.
###
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
CDC works 24/7 protecting America’s health, safety and security. Whether disease start at home or abroad, are
curable or preventable, chronic or acute, or from human activity or deliberate attack, CDC responds to America’s
most pressing health threats. CDC is headquartered in Atlanta and has experts located throughout the United States
and the world.
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/t0221-cdc-telebriefing-covid-19.html 6/7
2/24/2020 Transcript Document
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE for CDC Telebriefing:
19-13 UpdateFiled
on COVID-19 | CDC Online
02/24/20 Page Newsroom
7 of 7| CDC
Page ID #:469
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/t0221-cdc-telebriefing-covid-19.html 7/7
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-14 Filed 02/24/20 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:470
Summary
Self-sustaining human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCov) is the only
plausible explanation of the scale of the outbreak in Wuhan. We estimate that, on average, each
case infected 2.6 (uncertainty range: 1.5-3.5) other people up to 18th January 2020, based on
an analysis combining our past estimates of the size of the outbreak in Wuhan with
computational modelling of potential epidemic trajectories. This implies that control measures
need to block well over 60% of transmission to be effective in controlling the outbreak. It is likely,
based on the experience of SARS and MERS-CoV, that the number of secondary cases caused
by a case of 2019-nCoV is highly variable – with many cases causing no secondary infections,
and a few causing many. Whether transmission is continuing at the same rate currently depends
on the effectiveness of current control measures implemented in China and the extent to which
the populations of affected areas have adopted risk-reducing behaviours. In the absence of
antiviral drugs or vaccines, control relies upon the prompt detection and isolation of symptomatic
cases. It is unclear at the current time whether this outbreak can be contained within China;
uncertainties include the severity spectrum of the disease caused by this virus and whether
cases with relatively mild symptoms are able to transmit the virus efficiently. Identification and
testing of potential cases need to be as extensive as is permitted by healthcare and diagnostic
testing capacity – including the identification, testing and isolation of suspected cases with only
mild to moderate disease (e.g. influenza-like illness), when logistically feasible.
Introduction
A new human coronavirus, now termed 2019-nCoV, emerged during December 2019 in the
Chinese city of Wuhan. As of 1900 GMT 24th January 2020, over 900 cases have been reported
in China (with 26 deaths), and cases have been detected in at least 9 regions or countries
outside mainland China. Initial phylogenetic analysis suggests that the new virus is similar to
the SARS coronavirus when compared with other coronaviruses known to infect humans.
In our report published on January 22nd, we used an estimate of the frequency of international
travel from Wuhan to estimate that 4000 cases (uncertainty range: 1000-9700) had occurred
there with onset of symptoms up to 18th January [1].
Here we report estimates of the human-to-human transmissibility of 2019-nCoV. We generate
a set of simulated epidemic trajectories using a mathematical model of 2019-nCoV transmission
and examine the extent to which each trajectory is consistent with our prior estimates of
outbreak size.
For our baseline estimates, we assume that two key characteristics of 2019-nCoV are similar to
those observed for SARS: that there is high level of variability in the number of new infections
generated by each infectious individual (negative binomial offspring distribution with k=0.16 [2]);
and that the generation time (the average time between generations of infection) is the same
as was estimated for SARS (mean of 8.4 days [3]). We also explore an alternative scenario
which assumes that 2019-nCoV shows less case to case variation in infectiousness and has a
shorter generation time. This scenario might be more realistic if a majority of 2019-nCoV cases
have mild to moderate (‘flu-like’) symptoms and if both milder and severe cases are able to
transmit infection onwards.
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-14 Filed 02/24/20 Page 2 of 5 Page ID #:471
The estimates of transmissibility we derive depend upon the number of cases infected from the
original animal source of this virus, which is currently unknown. Therefore, we explicitly consider
a range of numbers of human cases caused by zoonotic exposure to the virus.
The transmissibility of a virus is measured by the reproduction number, R, which measures the
average number of new infections generated by each infected person. When R is greater than
1, the outbreak is self-sustaining unless control measures are introduced to reduce R and slow
or stop transmission. When R is less than 1, while some human-to-human transmission occurs,
the number of new cases decreases over time and, eventually, the outbreak will stop. At the
start of an outbreak, when the population is largely unaware of the new threat and everyone is
susceptible, it is reasonable to assume that R is constant for a period of time. We call this initial
transmissibility the basic reproduction number R0.
Here, we describe different estimates of R0 and assess the degree to which they are consistent
with our estimates of the size of the outbreak in Wuhan: we measure the proportion of
simulations that are statistically compatible with 4000 total cases by 18th January. Our best-case
(most optimistic) estimate is the value of R0 for which 5% of simulated trajectories match or
exceed 4000 cases by 18th January. Our central estimate of R0 gives 50% of simulated
trajectories matching or exceeding 4000 cases. Our worst-case (most pessimistic) estimate is
the value for which 95% of simulated trajectories match or exceed 4000 cases. Figure 1
illustrates our approach. As a sensitivity analysis, we also generate estimates assuming 1000
or 9700 cases by 18th January, the lower and upper bounds of the uncertainty range around our
central estimate of 4000 cases by that date.
Results
Our analysis indicates that it is highly likely that the human-to-human transmissibility of 2019-
nCoV is sufficient to support sustained human transmission (R0>1) unless effective control
measures are implemented.
We judge that the most likely estimate corresponds to the smallest level of zoonotic exposure
explored here (40 cases), namely R0=2.6 (Table 1 and Figure 1). Uncertainty caused by the
intrinsically random nature of epidemics and the uncertainty in the level of zoonotic exposure
gives a range of 1.5-3.5, assuming a total of 4000 cases by 18th January. Central estimates of
R0 for the (unlikely) scenario that the true outbreak size in Wuhan was at the lower end of the
uncertainty range of our previous estimates (namely 1000 cases) vary from 1.7 to 2.6,
depending on the level of zoonotic exposure. Estimates of R0 assuming 9,700 cases by 18th
January (our highest estimate from report 2) were higher, at R0=3.1 (uncertainty: 1.9-4.2), for
40 cases caused by zoonotic exposure.
The only scenario which supports R0<1 requires a low number (1000) of cases overall in Wuhan
by 18th January and a very large number (200) of those cases being caused by zoonotic
exposure (Table 1), and even then, R0 is <1 only for our best case (most optimistic) estimate.
Infection of 200 individuals with a novel virus with very limited genetic diversity would represent
an unprecedently large point source zoonotic exposure event for the initial seeding of this
epidemic. Current evidence of very limited genetic diversity in the published genetic sequences
of the virus suggests a smaller seeding event (perhaps smaller than the 40 cases assumed in
our lowest zoonotic seeding scenario) [4–6].
Our baseline analysis assumes SARS-like levels of case-to-case variability in the numbers of
secondary cases generated by each case (i.e. it includes super-spreading type events), and a
SARS-like generation time. We also examined sensitivity to these assumptions. Assuming a
shorter generation time (mean of 6.8 days rather than 8.4 days) reduces our central estimate of
R0 to 2.1 (uncertainty range: 1.3-2.7), but does not change overall conclusions about the
likelihood of self-sustaining human-to-human transmission. Increasing the generation time to
10.7 days results in a higher central estimate of R0 of 3.1 (uncertainty range: 1.7-4.3) but again
does not change basic conclusions.
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-14 Filed 02/24/20 Page 3 of 5 Page ID #:472
Assuming a lower level of variability in infectiousness (at the minimum level statistically
consistent with SARS data [1]) narrows the uncertainty range of R0 but changes the central
estimate only marginally: R0=2.5 (uncertainty range 1.6-2.9), for a negative binomial offspring
distribution with k=0.64. Assuming a lower level of variability in infectiousness (at the minimum
level statistically consistent with SARS data [2]) narrows the uncertainty range of R0 but changes
the central estimate little: R0=2.5 (uncertainty range 1.6-2.9), for a negative binomial offspring
distribution with k=0.64.
If the current virus causes more cases with mild to moderate symptom severity than SARS, and
these cases are infectious – a scenario consistent with some recently published data on a family
cluster of cases [7], both the generation time and level of heterogeneity in infectiousness may
be lower than for SARS. This scenario might be more realistic if a majority of 2019-nCoV cases
have mild to moderate (‘flu-like’) symptoms and both milder and severe cases are able to
transmit infection onwards. This results in both a lower central estimate of R0 and a narrower
uncertainty range: R0 = 2.0 (uncertainty: 1.4-2.3) for a mean generation time of 6.7 days and
k=0.64.
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-14 Filed 02/24/20 Page 4 of 5 Page ID #:473
Discussion
The unprecedented quarantining of multiple cities in Hubei province, China on 23rd January
2020 clearly marks a new stage of the public health response to this outbreak. Here, we
explored a range of different scenarios for the extent of zoonotic (animal) exposure to estimate
transmissibility of 2019-nCoV in Wuhan up to 18th January. We conclude that self-sustaining
human-to-human transmission of the virus must have occurred, with a reproduction number
estimate of 2.6 (uncertainty range: 1.5-3.5), to explain our previous central estimate of the scale
of outbreak (namely 4000 cases by 18th January). Even assuming our lowest estimate of 1000
cases by 18th January, it is highly likely that sustained human-to-human transmission was
occurring. Assuming that our upper bound estimate of 9700 cases occurred, R0 estimates are
correspondingly higher.
Whether transmission continues at the same rate now critically depends on the effectiveness of
the intense control effort now underway in Wuhan and across China. We note the large body of
evidence that suggests that the reproduction number for SARS changed considerably when
populations became fully aware of the threat. If a similar change to contact patterns is occurring
in this outbreak, rates of transmission are likely to be lower now than during the period for which
these estimates were made, due to control measures and risk avoidance in the population.
Whether the reduction in transmission is sufficient to reduce R to below 1 – and thus end the
outbreak – remains to be seen. Reports point to mildly symptomatic but infectious cases of
2019-nCoV, which were not a feature of SARS. Prompt detection and isolation of such cases
will be extremely challenging, given the larger number of other diseases (e.g. influenza) which
can cause such non-specific respiratory symptoms. While more severe cases will always need
to be prioritised, control may depend upon successful detection, testing and isolation of suspect
cases with the broadest possible range of symptom severity.
Our results emphasise the need to track transmission rates over the next few weeks, especially
in Wuhan. If a clear downwards trend is observed in the numbers of new cases, that would
indicate that control measures and behavioural changes can substantially reduce the
transmissibility of 2019-nCoV. Genetic data from Wuhan after the implementation of strong
public health measures may also provide valuable insight into the patterns and rate of
transmission.
Despite the recent decision of the WHO Emergency Committee to not declare this a Public
Health Emergency of International Concern at this time, this epidemic represents a clear and
ongoing global health threat. It is uncertain at the current time whether it is possible to contain
the continuing epidemic within China. In addition to monitoring how the epidemic evolves, it is
critical that the magnitude of the threat is better understood. Currently, we have only a limited
understanding of the spectrum of severity of symptoms that infection with this virus causes, and
no reliable estimates of the case fatality ratio – the proportion of cases who will die as a result
of the disease. Characterising the severity spectrum, and how severity of symptoms relates to
infectiousness, will be critical to evaluating the feasibility of control and the likely public health
impact of this epidemic.
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-14 Filed 02/24/20 Page 5 of 5 Page ID #:474
References
1. Imai N, Dorigatti I, Cori A, Riley S, Ferguson NM. Report 2: Estimating the potential total
number of novel Coronavirus cases in Wuhan City, China. [cited 24 Jan 2020]. Available:
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/news--wuhan-
coronavirus/
2. Lloyd-Smith JO, Schreiber SJ, Kopp PE, Getz WM. Superspreading and the effect of
individual variation on disease emergence. Nature. 2005;438: 355–359.
doi:10.1038/nature04153
3. Lipsitch M, Cohen T, Cooper B, Robins JM, Ma S, James L, et al. Transmission dynamics
and control of severe acute respiratory syndrome. Science (80- ). 2003;300: 1966–1970.
doi:10.1126/science.1086616
4. Bedford T. Nextstrain / narratives / ncov / sit-rep / 2020-01-23. [cited 24 Jan 2020].
Available: https://nextstrain.org/narratives/ncov/sit-rep/2020-01-23?n=0
5. Rambaut A. Preliminary phylogenetic analysis of 11 nCoV2019 genomes, 2020-01-19 -
Novel 2019 coronavirus - Virological. [cited 24 Jan 2020]. Available:
http://virological.org/t/preliminary-phylogenetic-analysis-of-11-ncov2019-genomes-
2020-01-19/329
6. Huang C, Wang Y, Li X, Ren L, Zhao J, Hu Y, et al. Clinical features of patients infected
with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Lancet. 0. doi:10.1016/S0140-
6736(20)30183-5
7. Chan JF-W, Yuan S, Kok K-H, To KK-W, Chu H, Yang J, et al. A familial cluster of
pneumonia associated with the 2019 novel coronavirus indicating person-to-person
transmission: a study of a family cluster. Lancet. 0. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30154-
9
2/24/2020 How Document
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE long can the new19-15
coronavirus last on02/24/20
Filed surfaces? | Live Science1 of 10 Page ID
Page
#:475
TRENDING Coronavirus Podcast Climate Change Life's Little Mysteries Live Science Gear!
Live Science is supported by its audience. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an a liate commission. Learn more
Comments (0)
https://www.livescience.com/how-long-coronavirus-last-surfaces.html 1/10
2/24/2020 How Document
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE long can the new19-15
coronavirus last on02/24/20
Filed surfaces? | Live Science2 of 10 Page ID
Page
#:476
(Image: © NIAID-RML)
China's central bank is taking steps to deep clean and even destroy its cash out of fears that the new coronavirus can survive on the
surface of money and potentially spread, according to CNN.
But how long can the new coronavirus linger on surfaces, anyway? The short answer is, we don't know. But if this new coronavirus
resembles other human coronaviruses, such as its "cousins" that cause SARS and MERS, it can stay on surfaces — such as metal,
glass or plastic — for as long as nine days, according to a new study. (In comparison, u viruses can last on surfaces for only about 48
hours.)
https://www.livescience.com/how-long-coronavirus-last-surfaces.html 2/10
2/24/2020 How Document
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE long can the new19-15
coronavirus last on02/24/20
Filed surfaces? | Live Science3 of 10 Page ID
Page
#:477
In the new study, researchers analyzed several dozen previously published papers on human coronaviruses (other than the new
coronavirus) to get a better idea of how long they can survive outside of the body. The authors found that these coronaviruses can
linger on surfaces for over a week but that some of them don't remain active for as long at temperatures higher than 86 degrees
Fahrenheit (30 degrees Celsius). The authors also found that these coronaviruses can be e ectively wiped away by household
disinfectants.
PLAY SOUND
https://www.livescience.com/how-long-coronavirus-last-surfaces.html 3/10
2/24/2020 Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE How Document
long can the new19-15
coronavirus last on02/24/20
Filed surfaces? | Live Science4 of 10 Page ID
Page
For example, disinfectants with 62-71% ethanol, 0.5% hydrogen#:478
peroxide or 0.1% sodium hypochlorite (bleach) can "e ciently"
inactivate coronaviruses within a minute, according to the study. "We expect a similar e ect against the 2019-nCoV," the researchers
wrote, referring to the new coronavirus. But even though the new coronavirus is a similar strain to the SARS coronavirus, it's not clear
if it will behave the same.
It's also not clear how frequently hands become contaminated with coronaviruses after touching a sick patient or contaminated
surface, according to the study. The World Health Organization recommends alcohol-based hand rubs for decontamination of the
hands, the authors wrote.
It's possible that a person can be infected with the virus by touching a contaminated surface or object, "then touching their own
mouth, nose, or possibly their eyes," according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). "But this is not thought to be
the main way the virus spreads."
Rather, the virus is most likely to spread from person to person through close contact and respiratory droplets from coughs and
sneezes that can land on a nearby person's mouth or nose, according to the CDC.
With impressive cutaway illustrations that show how things function, and mindblowing photography of the world’s
most inspiring spectacles, How It Works represents the pinnacle of engaging, factual fun for a mainstream audience
keen to keep up with the latest tech and the most impressive phenomena on the planet and beyond. Written and presented in a style
that makes even the most complex subjects interesting and easy to understand, How It Works is enjoyed by readers of all ages.
VIEW DEAL
The Genius Trick Every Bath & Body Works Shopper Should Know
https://www.livescience.com/how-long-coronavirus-last-surfaces.html 4/10
2/24/2020 How Document
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE long can the new19-15
coronavirus last on02/24/20
Filed surfaces? | Live Science5 of 10 Page ID
Page
Wikibuy | Sponsored #:479
This Is Why Hotel Guests Should Always Put Coins In The Sink
amomedia.com | Sponsored
New coronavirus may have 'jumped' to humans from snakes, study finds
Livescience
MOST POPULAR
READ MORE
READ MORE
READ MORE
READ MORE
READ MORE
READ MORE
READ MORE
https://www.livescience.com/how-long-coronavirus-last-surfaces.html 6/10
2/24/2020 How Document
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE long can the new19-15
coronavirus last on02/24/20
Filed surfaces? | Live Science7 of 10 Page ID
Page
#:481
READ MORE
Your brain waves could predict if an antidepressant will work for you
By Lucy Hicks February 21, 2020
READ MORE
Despite a 'double-barreled' flu season, the vaccine is mostly doing its job
By Rachael Rettner February 20, 2020
READ MORE
READ MORE
READ MORE
Advertisement
https://www.livescience.com/how-long-coronavirus-last-surfaces.html 7/10
2/24/2020 How Document
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE long can the new19-15
coronavirus last on02/24/20
Filed surfaces? | Live Science8 of 10 Page ID
Page
___ #:482
SIGN M
Advertisement
https://www.livescience.com/how-long-coronavirus-last-surfaces.html 8/10
2/24/2020 How Document
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE long can the new19-15
coronavirus last on02/24/20
Filed surfaces? | Live Science9 of 10 Page ID
Page
#:483
2 Ripples in space-time could explain the mystery of why the universe exists
3 How ancient microbes could help save coastal cities from rising seas
Advertisement
https://www.livescience.com/how-long-coronavirus-last-surfaces.html 9/10
2/24/2020 Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDEHowDocument
long can the new coronavirus
19-15 last on
Filed surfaces? | Live
02/24/20 Science
Page 10 of 10 Page ID
#:484
Live Science is part of Future US Inc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site.
About Us
Privacy policy
Cookies policy
Accessibility Statement
Topics
Advertise with us
© Future US, Inc. 11 West 42nd Street, 15th Floor, New York, NY 10036.
https://www.livescience.com/how-long-coronavirus-last-surfaces.html 10/10
2/24/2020
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Spread of coronavirus
Document 19-16 underestimated, review finds --Page
Filed 02/24/20 ScienceDaily
1 of 4 Page ID #:485
Summary: The coronavirus probably has a stronger ability to spread than the World Health Organization has
estimated so far, according to a review of previous studies of the coronavirus' transmissibility.
Share: abegd
FULL STORY
The coronavirus probably has a stronger ability to spread than the World Health
Organization has estimated so far. This according to a review of previous studies of the
coronavirus' transmissibility performed not least by researchers at Umeå University in
Sweden.
"Our review shows that the coronavirus is at least as transmissible as the SARS virus. And that says a great deal
about the seriousness of the situation," says Joacim Rocklöv, professor of sustainable health at Umeå University
and one of the authors of the study, published in the scientific Journal of Travel Medicine.
The World Health Organization estimates that the coronavirus has a transmissibility, expressed as a reproduction
number, of between 1.4 and 2.5. A reproduction number is a measurement of how many people a contaminated
person transmits the virus to in a previously healthy population. The higher the number, the more transferable the
virus is and the higher the risk for rapid spread. When the reproduction number falls below 1.0, the epidemic is
likely to die out.
Researchers in Umeå in Sweden, Heidelberg in Germany, and Zhangzhou in China have carried out a review of
several scientific studies of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. In total, the researchers found twelve studies of
sufficiently high quality. The studies consisted of estimations of the growth rate based upon the cases observed in
the Chinese population, and based upon statistical and mathematical methods.
The earliest studies of the coronavirus indicated a relatively low transmissibility. Thereafter, the transmissibility
rose rapidly to stabilise between 2-3 in the most recent studies. The reproduction number in the studies summed
up to a mean of 3.28, and a median of 2.79, which is significantly higher than the World Health Organization's
estimation of 1.4-2.5.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/02/200214111519.htm 1/4
2/24/2020
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Spread of coronavirus
Document 19-16 underestimated, review finds --Page
Filed 02/24/20 ScienceDaily
2 of 4 Page ID #:486
"When looking at the development of the corona epidemic, reality seems to correspond well to or even exceed the
highest epidemic growth in our calculations. Despite all intervention and control activities, the coronavirus has
already spread to a significantly higher extent than SARS did," says Joacim Rocklöv.
Story Source:
Materials provided by Umea University. Original written by Ola Nilsson. Note: Content may be edited for style and
length.
Journal Reference:
1. Ying Liu, Albert A Gayle, Annelies Wilder-Smith, Joacim Rocklöv. The reproductive number of COVID-19 is
higher compared to SARS coronavirus. Journal of Travel Medicine, 2020; DOI: 10.1093/jtm/taaa021
Umea University. "Spread of coronavirus underestimated, review finds." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 14 February
2020. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/02/200214111519.htm>.
RELATED STORIES
Coronavirus Breakthrough: Protein Mutation Affects Spread and Virulence of Respiratory Virus
Nov. 10, 2015 — Researchers have discovered that a mutation in a coronavirus protein slows the spread of the
virus in the central nervous system and reduces its neurovirulence. It is the first time that this ... read more
Below are relevant articles that may interest you. ScienceDaily shares links with scholarly publications in the
TrendMD network and earns revenue from third-party advertisers, where indicated.
Reframe their chronic pain treatment with a Schedule III long-acting opioid
Sponsored by BioDelivery Sciences
Calculate patient doses with this quick and easy opioid calculator
Sponsored by BioDelivery Sciences
Schedule III opioids provide pain relief that patients need with less potential for abuse than Schedule II
opioids
Sponsored by BioDelivery Sciences
Powered by
Free Subscriptions
Get the latest science news with ScienceDaily's free email newsletters, updated daily and weekly. Or view hourly
updated newsfeeds in your RSS reader:
Email Newsletters
RSS Feeds
Follow Us
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/02/200214111519.htm 3/4
2/24/2020
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Spread of coronavirus
Document 19-16 underestimated, review finds --Page
Filed 02/24/20 ScienceDaily
4 of 4 Page ID #:488
Keep up to date with the latest news from ScienceDaily via social networks:
Have Feedback?
Tell us what you think of ScienceDaily -- we welcome both positive and negative comments. Have any problems
using the site? Questions?
Leave Feedback
Contact Us
About This Site | Staff | Reviews | Contribute | Advertise | Privacy Policy | Editorial Policy | Terms of Use
Copyright 2020 ScienceDaily or by other parties, where indicated. All rights controlled by their respective owners.
Content on this website is for information only. It is not intended to provide medical or other professional advice.
Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily, its staff, its contributors, or its partners.
Financial support for ScienceDaily comes from advertisements and referral programs, where indicated.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/02/200214111519.htm 4/4
2/24/2020
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Coronavirus
Document impact:19-17
France sees tourism
Filed numbers fall by
02/24/20 30% to
Page 140%
of 5 Page ID #:489
BREAKING Futures are extending their losses before the open, with the Dow now s
TOUR I S M
Abigail Ng
@ABIGAILNGWY
SHARE
KEY POINTS
The drop off in tourist numbers is an “important impact” on France’s
economy, Bruno Le Maire, the country’s finance minister, said.
France is one of the most visited countries in the world, and tourism accounts for
nearly 8% of its GDP.
Le Maire said France welcomes around 2.7 million Chinese tourists to the country
each year, but it “won’t be the same” in 2020.
MARKETS
WATCHLIST
CNBC TV
MENU
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/23/coronavirus-impact-france-sees-tourism-numbers-fall-by-30percent-to-40percent.html 1/5
2/24/2020
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Coronavirus
Document impact:19-17
France sees tourism
Filed numbers fall by
02/24/20 30% to
Page 240%
of 5 Page ID #:490
BREAKING Futures are extending their losses before the open, with the Dow now s
VIDEO 01:02
France’s tourism sector has taken a beating following the coronavirus outbreak,
according to the country’s finance minister.
“We have less tourists, of course, in France, about 30%, 40% less than expected,”
Bruno Le Maire told CNBC’s Dan Murphy on Sunday at the G-20 Finance Ministers and
Central Bank Governors’ Meetings in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
The new coronavirus infection first surfaced in late 2019 in the Chinese city Wuhan,
and the disease has since killed nearly 2,500 people in China.
Amid travel bans and trip postponements, demand for air travel has fallen, leading to
more than 200,000 flight cancellations.
France is one of the most visited countries in the world. According to the country’s
Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs, 89.4 million visitors toured France in 2018
and tourism accounts for nearly 8% of its gross domestic product.
It also welcomes around 2.7 million Chinese tourists each year, Le Maire said. “It won’t
be the same, of course, in 2020.”
France has reported 12 confirmed cases of the virus and one death, according to a
WHO report dated Feb. 22.
MARKETS
WATCHLIST
CNBC TV
MENU
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/23/coronavirus-impact-france-sees-tourism-numbers-fall-by-30percent-to-40percent.html 2/5
2/24/2020
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Coronavirus
Document impact:19-17
France sees tourism
Filed numbers fall by
02/24/20 30% to
Page 340%
of 5 Page ID #:491
BREAKING Futures are extending their losses before the open, with the Dow now s
TRENDING NOW
Futures are extending their losses before the open, with the Dow now set lose
900 points
1
Warren Buffett interview highlights: ‘Good’ when stocks fall, likes Apple a lot,
coronavirus impact
2
Op-Ed: Bernie Sanders is the front-runner because of how we raised our kids
Coronavirus live updates: Buffett warns of virus impact, global markets roiled
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/23/coronavirus-impact-france-sees-tourism-numbers-fall-by-30percent-to-40percent.html 3/5
2/24/2020
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Coronavirus
Document impact:19-17
France sees tourism
Filed numbers fall by
02/24/20 30% to
Page 440%
of 5 Page ID #:492
The Dead Giveaway
BREAKING That
Futures are Tells Youtheir
extending When Amazon’s
losses beforeGiving Youwith
the open, A Better Pricenow
the Dow Than
s
Wikibuy
News Tips
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
GET IN TOUCH
CNBC Newsletters
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
MARKETS
WATCHLIST
SIGN UP NOW
CNBC TV
MENU
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/23/coronavirus-impact-france-sees-tourism-numbers-fall-by-30percent-to-40percent.html 4/5
2/24/2020
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Coronavirus
Document impact:19-17
France sees tourism
Filed numbers fall by
02/24/20 30% to
Page 540%
of 5 Page ID #:493
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
BREAKING Futures are extending their losses before the open, with the Dow now s
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes. Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data and
Analysis.
MARKETS
WATCHLIST
CNBC TV MENU
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/23/coronavirus-impact-france-sees-tourism-numbers-fall-by-30percent-to-40percent.html 5/5
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-18 Filed 02/24/20 Page 1 of 4 Page ID #:494
ree-wv
19 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California
20 that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed thiszjday of at Costa
21 Mesa, California.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-
FURTHER DEC. OF JASON DEMPSEY IN SUPPORT OF EX PA RTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY
RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 1 of 22 Page ID
#:498
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 2 of 22 Page ID
#:499
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 3 of 22 Page ID
#:500
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 4 of 22 Page ID
#:501
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 5 of 22 Page ID
#:502
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 6 of 22 Page ID
#:503
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 7 of 22 Page ID
#:504
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 8 of 22 Page ID
#:505
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 9 of 22 Page ID
#:506
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 10 of 22 Page ID
#:507
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 11 of 22 Page ID
#:508
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 12 of 22 Page ID
#:509
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 13 of 22 Page ID
#:510
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 14 of 22 Page ID
#:511
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 15 of 22 Page ID
#:512
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 16 of 22 Page ID
#:513
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 17 of 22 Page ID
#:514
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 18 of 22 Page ID
#:515
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 19 of 22 Page ID
#:516
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 20 of 22 Page ID
#:517
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 21 of 22 Page ID
#:518
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-19 Filed 02/24/20 Page 22 of 22 Page ID
#:519
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-20 Filed 02/24/20 Page 1 of 3 Page ID #:520
9
10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SOUTHERN DIVISION
12
13 CITY OF COSTA MESA, and Case No. 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE
KATRINA FOLEY,
14
DECLARATION OF BRYAN
15 Plaintiff, GLASS IN SUPPORT OF EX
PARTE APPLICATION FOR
16 vs. TEMPORARY RESTRAINING
17 ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
18 AND HUMAN SERVICES, THE
19 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE, THE UNITED STATES
20 AIR FORCE, THE CENTERS FOR
DISEASE CONTROL AND
21 PREVENTION, THE STATE OF
22 CALIFORNIA, FAIRVIEW
DEVELOPMENTAL CENTER
23 (FAIRVIEW), THE CALIFORNIA
GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF
24 EMERGENCY SERVICES, and THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
25 GENERAL SERVICES,
26
Defendants.
27
28
9
10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SOUTHERN DIVISION
12
13 CITY OF COSTA MESA, and Case No. 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE
KATRINA FOLEY,
14
DECLARATION OF DIEDRE
15 Plaintiff, THU-HA NGUYEN IN SUPPORT
OF EX PARTE APPLICATION
16 vs. FOR TEMPORARY
17 RESTRAINING ORDER AND
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE
THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY
18 AND HUMAN SERVICES, THE INJUNCTION
19 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE, THE UNITED STATES
20 AIR FORCE, THE CENTERS FOR
DISEASE CONTROL AND
21 PREVENTION, THE STATE OF
22 CALIFORNIA, FAIRVIEW
DEVELOPMENTAL CENTER
23 (FAIRVIEW), THE CALIFORNIA
GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF
24 EMERGENCY SERVICES, and THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
25 GENERAL SERVICES,
26
Defendants.
27
28
9
10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SOUTHERN DIVISION
12
13 CITY OF COSTA MESA, and Case No. 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE
KATRINA FOLEY,
14
DECLARATION OF LORI ANNE
15 Plaintiff, FARRELL HARRISON IN
SUPPORT OF EX PARTE
16 vs. APPLICATION FOR
17 TEMPORARY RESTRAINING
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW
THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF
18 AND HUMAN SERVICES, THE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
19 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE, THE UNITED STATES
20 AIR FORCE, THE CENTERS FOR
DISEASE CONTROL AND
21 PREVENTION, THE STATE OF
22 CALIFORNIA, FAIRVIEW
DEVELOPMENTAL CENTER
23 (FAIRVIEW), THE CALIFORNIA
GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF
24 EMERGENCY SERVICES, and THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
25 GENERAL SERVICES,
26
Defendants.
27
28
1 Emergency Service and Communications Center for the City. The department
2 operates from the Police main facility (99 Fair Drive) and two substations (South
3 Coast Plaza Substation at 3333 Bristol Street and the West Side Substation at 567
4 W. 18th Street. The Department’s full-time staffing is comprised of 136 sworn
5 police officer and 76 professional staff positions. In 2019, the department
6 responded to 137,384 calls for service. The Communications Center is a public
7 safety answering point (PSAP) responsible for answering calls to an emergency
8 telephone number for police, fire, and ambulance services. In 2019, the
9 Communications Center received 48,476 911 emergency/public safety calls and
10 205,404 telephone calls. The department is a part of the Orange County Mutual
11 Aid Agreement for mutual aid assistance when needed and contracts air support
12 services with the City of Huntington Beach. The FDC is only one mile away from
13 Costa Mesa City Hall and the main Police facility, which included the City’s
14 Emergency Operation Center and Communications Center.
15 10. Costa Mesa also has its own Police Department and a Fire and Rescue
16 Department. Costa Mesa also serves as a public safety answering point responsible
17 for answering calls to an emergency telephone number for police, firefighting and
18 ambulance services. The Fire Department has six fire stations and serves the
19 public 24 hours a day, seven days a week and responds to 13,000 calls for service
20 each year including calls for emergency medical services. When the City requires
21 additional police, fire and/or medical mutual aid, it relies on its neighboring cities,
22 as well as the Orange County Sheriff’s Department and the Orange County Fire
23 Authority.
24 11. As a full-service city with police and fire operations, the City is subject
25 to compliance with numerous federal and state statutes related to emergency and
26 disaster preparedness and response in order to ensure the protection of the
27 community, as well as the protection of the 220 First Responders and city staff
28 called to participate in the response. Among the many laws the federal, state,
3
DECLARATION OF LORI ANN FARRELL HARRISON IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-22 Filed 02/24/20 Page 5 of 11 Page ID
#:530
1 county and local governments are subject to is the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
2 Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act).
3 12. The Federal Stafford Act authorizes the delivery of federal emergency
4 technical, financial, logistical, and other assistance to states and localities. The
5 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) coordinates administration of
6 emergency and disaster relief resources and assistance to states. The President can
7 declare an emergency without first receiving a gubernatorial request if the
8 emergency involves an area of federal primary responsibility. A Stafford Act
9 declaration can be used to trigger other public health emergency response
10 authorities in the case of a national public health emergency such as a pandemic.
11 13. To ensure that all 50 states and all of their localities provide uniform,
12 standardized and coordinated emergency responses consistent with applicable
13 laws, the Federal government created the National Incident Management System
14 (NIMS).
15 14. According to the FEMA website, “NIMS provides a common, nationwide
16 approach to enable the whole community to work together to manage all threats
17 and hazards. NIMS applies to all incidents, regardless of cause, size, location or
18 complexity.” The FEMA website further states “NIMS guides all levels of
19 government, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and the private sector to
20 work together to prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from
21 incidents. NIMS provides stakeholders across the whole community with the
22 shared vocabulary, systems, and processes to successfully deliver the capabilities
23 described in the National Preparedness System. NIMS defines operational
24 systems, including the Incident Command System (ICS), Emergency Operations
25 Center (EOC) structures, and Multiagency Groups (MACS) that guide how
26 personnel work together during incidents. NIMS applies to all incidents, from
27 traffic accidents to major disasters.”
28
4
DECLARATION OF LORI ANN FARRELL HARRISON IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-22 Filed 02/24/20 Page 6 of 11 Page ID
#:531
1 15. On January 7, 2020, the national Centers for Disease Control and
2 Prevention (CDC) announced that it was monitoring an outbreak of a novel
3 coronavirus in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China that began in December 2019.
4 The CDC established an Incident Management System to coordinate domestic and
5 international public health response. On January 21, 2020, the CDC activated its
6 Emergency Operations Center (EOC) to provide ongoing support to the COVID-19
7 response.
8 16. On January 31, 2020, the Federal Department of Health and Human
9 Services declared a public health emergency for the United States related to
10 COVID-19.
11 17. Subsequently, and over the next few weeks, the Federal government
12 began transferring Americans infected with or exposed to the Coronavirus to
13 military bases throughout the United States, including the State of California.
14 18. The transfers were exclusively to military bases and military installations
15 throughout the nation including military bases in the State of California. No non-
16 military facilities were identified or used for the quarantine, isolation or treatment
17 of Americans exposed to or testing positive for Coronavirus.
18 19. It is unclear whether the Federal Department of Health and Human
19 Services activated its Emergency Operations Center or created an Incident
20 Management System for each state that received patients testing positive for
21 COVID-19, including California, as required by Federal law to ensure proper
22 tracking, coordination, planning and emergency response.
23 20. Additionally, the California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES),
24 despite having dozens of Americans testing positive for this infectious and
25 contagious disease with no immediate cure, has not declared a public health
26 emergency, activated its Emergency Operations Center, created a robust Incident
27 Management System or otherwise followed its normal protocols for each
28
5
DECLARATION OF LORI ANN FARRELL HARRISON IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-22 Filed 02/24/20 Page 7 of 11 Page ID
#:532
1 information they had been able to obtain was the same scant information provided
2 on the conference call held by Cal OES the day prior.
3 25. At approximately 12 P.M., Fire Chief Dan Stefano and Acting Chief
4 Bryan Glass conducted a site visit of FDC to identify the location being considered
5 by Federal and State officials for the quarantine.
6 26. On Friday, February 21, 2020, the City Manager directed the CMPD
7 Office of Emergency Management to activate the City of Costa Mesa’s Emergency
8 Operation Center in an abundance of caution for the safety of Costa Mesa
9 residents, First Responders, and overall public safety preparedness based on the
10 limited information that had been received and the actions taken by Federal and
11 State officials to prepare FDC to quarantine 2019-nCoV virus patients within as
12 little as 48 hours.
13 27. Also on Friday, February 21, 2020, I requested a conference call with the
14 Director of Cal OES, Mark Ghilarducci, to discuss the planned transfer of patients
15 to FDC and the City’s serious concerns regarding the lack of preparation,
16 coordination, transparency and the overall non-compliance with Federally required
17 procedures and protocols for a nationally declared public health emergency such as
18 this. The City’s opposition to the use of this site, as it would be the only
19 community-based, non-military facility housing positive testing COVID 19
20 patients in the entire country was also planned to be discussed. We never received
21 a reply to our request for a call.
22 28. I have completed many hours of training through the FEMA Emergency
23 Management Institute and earned several certifications. Federal and State laws and
24 guidelines for emergency management have at their core the coordination,
25 preparation and documentation of plans and protocols at the federal, state and local
26 levels of government related to both potential and actual emergency or disasters,
27 both man made and naturally occurring. I have assisted in the overall management
28 of emergency responses and disaster cost recovery over the course of my career in
7
DECLARATION OF LORI ANN FARRELL HARRISON IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION
Case 8:20-cv-00368-JLS-JDE Document 19-22 Filed 02/24/20 Page 9 of 11 Page ID
#:534
1 specified in both the Federal and State responses to the temporary restraining order
2 obtained by the City.
3 36. As of this date, it is unclear the objective, data-driven and scientific basis
4 for the selection of a community-based, non-military facility within 200 yards of
5 residences for this purpose. Fairview is the only facility of its kind in the nation on
6 the national list of sites for the transfer of COVID-19 patients. A facility located in
7 the middle of a densely populated area bordering six cities with a combined
8 population of one million residents is not appropriate or feasible.
9 37. If called upon, I would and could competently testify to all of the facts
10 contained within this declaration based upon my personal knowledge, except
11 where stated upon information and belief.
12 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that
13 the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 24th day of February at Costa
14 Mesa, California.
15
16
17 LORI ANN FARRELL HARRISON
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
10
DECLARATION OF LORI ANN FARRELL HARRISON IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION