May 30th, 2024

Mask bylaw extended

By Lethbridge Herald on November 30, 2020.

Councillor Rob Miyashiro speaks with reporters Monday after council voted to extend the current masking bylaw and seek public input to the Community Safety Standing Policy Committee. Herald photo by Ian Martens @IMartensHerald

Tim Kalinowski
Lethbridge Herald
City council has extended its temporary Mandatory Face Covering and Masking Bylaw until Feb. 23, and will hold a public consultation to debate the wisdom of extending the bylaw into even later in the new year at the Feb. 11 Community Safety Standing Policy Committee meeting.
The motion passed 6-3 during Monday’s city council meeting with Councillors Joe Mauro, Blaine Hyggen and Ryan Parker opposed. All three men expressed support for public consultations on the issue, but were not in favour of extending the current bylaw, which was originally set to automatically expire on Dec. 31, until after such consultations were held.
Mayor Chris Spearman called the masking bylaw extension “prudent.” He said the current out-of-control increase of COVID-19 in the community, which topped 1,000 cases overall on Monday, should be a wake-up call for everyone.
“I think we need to do more,” Spearman stated. “We need to take personal responsibility. There are numerous reports of people not adhering to the health guidelines.
“People are thinking it won’t happen to me, and there are people exposing each other to various risks.
“I have had relatives who have tested positive who don’t live in the City of Lethbridge. It can happen to anybody. It is heartbreaking, and I know families who have had a family member die. I know people who have been under severe health stress, and they weren’t people in their 70s, 80s and 90s. This is a challenge. I think we need to deal with it as a community. Every death is a tragedy, and I know people who have had it who have not fully recovered. We all have to make sure we are doing our best.”
Deputy Mayor Rob Miyashiro sponsored the extension to the masking bylaw during Monday’s council meeting. While having absolutely no doubts about the ongoing public health necessity of masking, Miyashiro said the public consultation process at the Community Safety Standing Policy Committee on Feb. 11 should allow the space for those in favour as well as those opposed to a further extension of the bylaw to be heard at that time.
“The process we put in place today is a sound one,” he said. “We advertise. We have the public consultation in February. That is so committee can come back to council with its recommendations based on what they heard. Council then decides: ‘Do we want to pass that? Or do we want to continue the masking bylaw or not?’”
Miyashiro said City staff would have to devise a process in which everyone who wants to take part can be included, but would obviously limit those who wish to make submissions in person to a number which would respect provincial health restrictions on public gatherings.
Follow @TimKalHerald on Twitter

Share this story:

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The socialist six have spoken despite rising cases with a mask bylaw. Throw jello at wall and hope something sticks. Prudent. CYA liability n


More like the moronic, anti-Science three have opposed. Its embarrassing that we have the proportion of COVID we do in Alberta, the highest of which is in the South. This opposition gives license to the idiots out there who will try and defy public health orders because they have a faulty understanding of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Move South if this isn’t working for you.


It isn’t jello, It’s a common sense health approach. Or what do you suggest Dr. Buckwheat?


Less cases before masking up. Common sense dr. Waterfield.


You didn’t answer the question, anonymous knob.

Not An Oldman Yelling at the Clouds

Every post of yours is more nonsensical than the previous one. The “socialist six” actually care about the people of Lethbridge and don’t buy into the false narrative of the conservatives…or nitwits. Masks don’t cause the spread of COVID-19 and there is no liability to the City if there is no mask bylaw. Stop posting such drivel and go back to bowing to your Kenney shrine.


I wish the Herald would post the actual names of cowards like ‘buckwheat’ for spewing garbage.


As this post suggests, it’s up to all of us, regardless who we are.

Last edited 3 years ago by meanders

Notice any aberrations.


This has no statistical validity. You might as well compare these with Tostidos sales.


Actually it came from the John Hopkins News Letter courtesy of Genevieve Briand, program director of Applied Economics Master’s Degree at Hopkins who analyzed the effect of COVOD 19 using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in her Webinar titled “Covid 19 Deaths: A look at U.S. Wouldn’t hurt for you to check it out before you shoot your condescending mouth off. You too Waterfield.


Screw you, coward.


You might be interested to know that the interpretation of Briand’s data was not by Briand.

I have no doubt that attributing a heart death to Covid is complicated. But to suggest that Covid played no part in precipitating these deaths, or worse, the implication, Buckwheat, that Covid risks and deaths are somehow ‘fake news’ is specious.

Seth Anthony

Fescue said: I have no doubt that attributing a heart death to Covid is complicated.

When someone’s heart is just about to fail, and then they contract Covid and die, did Covid kill them or their bad heart?

The failing heart would have killed them with or without Covid. But, if they didn’t have the failing heart and contracted Covid, the chances of them dying would be extremely low. As such, I would say that in such cases, if you had to choose one cause of death, then it would definitely be the failing heart.

If such cases are being classified as Covid deaths, then it’s disturbing due to the repercussions on society by making such an erroneous claim.

Disclaimer: I’m only about 90% certain that my logic here isn’t flawed 🙂

Last edited 3 years ago by Seth Anthony

I think your logic is fine, Seth. There is likely a range of people with heart conditions (or none) who submit to Covid19 with heart failure. (

I was responding more to the innuendo that there is no risk (or that there is some sort if conspiracy … enter phlushie). It seems that the Covid 19 virus focuses both on the lungs and the heart and affects the ailing, the compromised and the healthy alike.

I support the Science-informed Six in taking precautions for the public health.

Seth Anthony

As I was writing that post, I did come up with one possible rebuttal, but then dismissed it.

In regards to a healthy person getting permanent damage following a Covid infection:

I’ve been following the reports quite extensively for the past year, and I haven’t seen any significant evidence that healthy people who contract Covid, could get some sort of permanent damage. What the evidence does say, is that if you’re even reasonably healthy, Covid will have little to no affect on you.

Granted, there is the occasional report here and there that alleges a healthy person contracted Covid and now has some sort of permanent damage. These incidences are so rare, that one would have to question the validity of the claims. If however, the claims are correct, then due to the extreme rarity, they would be considered “anomalies”. They should not have any bearing on anything. In addition, said anomalies occur with just about any type of similar illness.

To conclude, I submit that all the people who try to make a point by claiming, “Healthy people die from Covid too!”, might as well claim, “It’s possible to get struck by lightening 3 times”.

Last edited 3 years ago by Seth Anthony

Hoping for the best that it is only Stockholm Syndrome being suffered by the 6. If so, longterm psychotherapy might help if they still have any ability for independent thought. Based on their past episodes of “no say for you!” I fear that may be optimistic. And Miyo declared a future pseudo-public review in Feb 11/2021 will be adequate public consultation for what they do now? Some of us are not that stupid or forgetful.


Voting against the advice of medical experts is ‘independent thinking’? It seems that some people are just that ‘stupid’.