To the Editor,
On July 28, I sent the following information to the San Marcos Mayor and city council members. It has become apparent that we cannot rely on our unvaccinated neighbors and community members to do us no harm. Half of our population is willing to risk not only their own health but the health of everyone else out of some twisted and perverse notion of their personal freedom. It has been said often that one person’s freedom ends at the point of contact with another’s nose. This is particularly apt for a virus that first begins infecting us through our noses.
COVID-19 cases have been surging in recent weeks in both San Marcos and Hays County. Yet city employees who have regular contact with the public are not required to be vaccinated or wear a face mask, two actions that have been recognized by the CDC as important, if not essential, ways to defeat this epidemic.
We all have the freedom to decide about what risks to take in life. What we should not have is the freedom to risk the lives of other people, which is exactly what is happening when those who are in contact the public — librarians, staff at the city's Activity Center, police officers, EMTs, and more — refuse vaccinations and face masks. This applies also to those who enter municipal facilities without wearing face masks and without being vaccinated.
Health regulations require those who handle food to be certified so they don't make others sick; children are required to be vaccinated against measles and several other diseases; drivers must be licensed; and our personal freedom is constrained by countless other laws and regulations. Businesses regularly restrain the freedom of patrons to dress in any manner or behave in unacceptable ways. Our local government must be responsible to protect the health and welfare of our residents by requiring protective actions.
This is about how we as a community are treating those who in the name of their “freedom” are putting everyone else at risk. We should take every step possible to prevent those who actively refuse to participate in a mutual effort to prevent each other from getting sick and dying from doing more harm.
The Texas Disaster Act of 1975 gives the governor the authority to take actions to ameliorate the affects of an epidemic. That Act does not give him any authority to prevent local governments from protecting the public health. His latest extra-legal Executive Order should be ignored and the San Marcos City Council should fulfill its responsibility to protect the citizens of San Marcos in the ways suggested earlier.
You are duty bound by Section 1.03 of the City Charter "to safeguard the health, safety and welfare of the city's residents."
You ignore this plea at the risk to the health of our neighbors and friends — a risk that is unnecessary and inexcusable, if not immoral. If you are devoted "to the best interest of the City of San Marcos and the public," you will take actions to protect the public and, thereby, help end this epidemic.
Lamar W. Hankins
San Marcos
