'It takes a team': Former Mayor Coniglio praises Palm Beach's early COVID-19 response
The longtime public servant, who was halfway through her fifth term as mayor when the pandemic got underway, confronted an increasingly complex situation amid rising concerns about public health and safety.
By early March 2020, Florida had confirmed its first case of the illness, prompting Gov. Ron DeSantis to declare a state of emergency on the ninth of that month.
That same day, the town published a webpage to keep residents informed about the coronavirus. It included information on how the illness is transmitted, its symptoms, ways to prevent being exposed, and links to the websites for the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Florida Department of Health, and Florida League of Cities.
"All we were trying to do is kind of get our feet under ourselves," Coniglio told the Daily News. "Because it was certainly a catastrophe and uncharted territory."
Coniglio and town officials quickly took action, agreeing to develop preventive measures and emergency response plans to protect the public, particularly those who were more vulnerable to serious illness.
In consultation with staff, department heads and local health officials such as Palm Beach County Health Department Director Dr. Alina Alonso, the town closed beaches, canceled public meetings and other large-scale events, implemented mask mandates and issued a town-wide curfew.
Those measures were intended to ensure public well-being, Coniglio said, but they remained flexible in the early days of the pandemic as guidance frequently changed.
"Alina was able to guide us probably moment by moment, because the protocols were very fluid," Coniglio said. "Once the decision was made to go through lockdowns, the town then took the steps to manage that even in Town Hall. We held meetings by Zoom for the first time ever. Once we started to reopen, there was social distancing. There were measurements that people had to stay within."
While some people resisted the COVID-19 restrictions in their communities, Coniglio said Palm Beach residents expressed few concerns. "I think there was a total buy-in from our community," she said. "All of the residents understood that."
The town's first vaccine distribution event, which occurred near the end of Coniglio's term, was one of its most important achievements during the pandemic. Held Jan. 5, 2021, the clinic drew 800 residents to the South Fire Station on South County Road.
Two more events brought the total number of residents who took part in the town's vaccination program to 1,200.
Coniglio praised the efforts of town administrators, led by then-Fire-Rescue Chief Darrel Donatto, to secure vaccines for residents.
"I think it takes a team, and it was an effort, not only from the perspective of the elected officials and town staff, but the community at large," Coniglio said. "We all rallied together to make that happen."
Reflecting on the start of the pandemic, Coniglio praised the town's efforts to protect the community's health and safety.
When asked if there was anything the town should have done differently, she responded with a firm no.
"I don't want to say we did everything right," she said. "But we checked all the boxes to make sure we were staying within the protocol and the measures that kept everyone safe."
Jodie Wagner is a journalist at the Palm Beach Daily News, part of the USA TODAY Florida Network. You can reach her at jwagner@pbdailynews.com.
This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Daily News: Former Mayor Coniglio praises Palm Beach's COVID-19 response efforts
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
What to know about COVID this week: Where are the most cases, vaccine guidelines
New COVID-19 cases continue to crop up nationwide as new variant XFG makes gains both domestically and abroad. Some regions of the United States are experiencing higher rates of positive COVID tests than others, though reporting has slowed down enough nationwide that the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has begun allowing more time to pass between certain types of updates, such as those on variant prevalence. However, amid the confusion of new strains, changing vaccine guidelines and cuts to vaccine development funding, the CDC continues to track cases, hospitalizations and deaths on a weekly basis. Here's what to know about the latest data. How many COVID cases were reported nationwide? During the week ending on Aug. 9, 8.9% of the 28,051 Americans tested were positive for COVID, according to the CDC's latest data. This was a 0.6% increase from the week prior. During the same period, 0.4% of cases resulted in death and 1% resulted in an emergency room visit, a 0.1% increase from the week prior for both categories. Where are the most COVID cases being reported? See map Western and southern states, including Washington, Oregon, Idaho, California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana, as well as Alaska, had higher percentages of positive COVID tests during the week ending Aug. 9. What is the most common COVID variant? The CDC has moved to using longer data timeframes for COVID tracking due to low reporting from states. According to the latest data for the two weeks ending June, variant NB.1.8.1 remained the most common, accounting for 43% of cases, followed by LP.8.1 at 31% of cases and XFG at 14%. NB.1.8.1 experienced a meteoric rise to becoming the predominant variant, accounting for 0% of cases in April and only 10% in the last week of May, up to 24% at the beginning of June and 43% by the end. XFG, a combination of variants F.7 and LP.8.1.2, is on the rise as of late, having been responsible for 0% of U.S. cases through March, 11% by early June and 14% by late June. What are current COVID vaccine guidelines? Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said on May 27 that the COVID-19 vaccine would no longer be included in the CDC's recommended immunization schedule for healthy children and pregnant women, a move that broke with previous expert guidance and bypassed the normal scientific review process. Under the changes, the only people who will be recommended for COVID-19 vaccines are those over 65 and people with existing health problems. This could make it harder for others who want the COVID-19 vaccine to get it, including health care workers and healthy people under 65 with a vulnerable family member or those who want to reduce their short-term risk of infection. State health departments and national professional organizations, including the American Medical Association (AMA) and American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), have broken from RFK and HHS on these guidelines, agreeing to publish their own guidelines. These recommendations have remained consistent with those maintained by the World Health Organization (WHO), which said that currently approved COVID-19 vaccines are expected to remain effective against new variants. WHO, AMA, AAP and existing standards recommend that people who have never received a COVID-19 vaccine, are age 65 and older, are immunocompromised, live at a long-term care facility, are pregnant, breastfeeding, trying to get pregnant, and/or want to avoid getting long COVID, should get the vaccine, especially. What are the symptoms of current COVID-19 strains? While some people report symptoms like hoarseness or "razor blade throat" being more common with some variants, health agencies, including the CDC and WHO, note that there is no evidence of certain symptoms being unique to different strains. The CDC outlines the following as common COVID-19 symptoms: The CDC advises seeking medical care if you experience any of the following symptoms:
Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
Doctors divided over new diet trend that has babies licking butter and gumming ribeye steak
Some parents are swapping puréed fruits and vegetables, oatmeal and yogurt for butter, bone broth, sardines and chicken liver as part of a controversial new "carnivore baby" trend – but experts are urging caution. As carnivore and protein-packed diets gain popularity among adults, many of whom are rejecting ultra-processed foods, some are passing them on to their kids. Some doctors are even sharing that they feed their babies meat-forward meals, The Wall Street Journal recently reported. Facebook groups are catering to carnivore families and parents are sharing tips on school lunches – rotisserie chicken, pork rinds and hard-boiled eggs among them. Meanwhile, others seek insight on trying to conceive while eating only meat. Dariya Quenneville, a mother in Ontario, Canada, told the publication that she started feeding her daughter raw egg yolks and puréed chicken liver as soon as she could eat solid foods and then moved on to sardines, bone broth ice pops, leg of lamb, beef heart and tongue. Lorraine Bonkowski, a registered dietitian from Michigan, and her one-year-old daughter are both on carnivore diets, Bonkowski told The Wall Street Journal. The little girl licks butter off a spoon, gets a bottle full of bone broth and uses her four teeth to gum ribeye steak. Bonkowski said she introduced fruit to her daughter's diet because her baby was getting constipated from all the meat. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends feeding children over 12 months a variety of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, proteins and dairy products. While the carnivore trend has been firing up – U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recently shared that he follows it – others have been pushing it for years. In 2021, Dr. Robert Cywes, a Florida-based pediatrician, and his wife, Janae, said in a YouTube video that they started giving their son meat at 4 months old. His first real meal, they said, was a ribeye steak. "From a functional perspective, from a milestone perspective, he's right on target," Cywes claimed at the time. Dr. Shawn Baker, the Washington-based author of the book "The Carnivore Diet," boasted in a YouTube video last year that his baby ate a carnivore diet for six months, was walking at 10 months old and grew to be "strong and tall." "The first food for a baby, when it was ready to wean off the breast, was meat." Some doctors claim the practice has been used for centuries. "This is actually the original way that humans fed their babies 100 years ago, 500 years ago, 5,000 years ago," Dr. Ken Berry, a family physician in Tennessee, told Fox News' Dana Perino on "America's Newsroom." "The first food for a baby, when it was ready to wean off the breast, was meat … gnawing on a bone," Berry said. Meat ensures that babies get certain nutrients, vitamins, minerals, fatty acids and amino acids, he added, slamming puffs and other kids' snacks as "junk." However, Berry did recommend moderation by pairing meat with whole foods like berries. Fox News' senior medical analyst Dr. Marc Siegel said introducing kids to meat gets them plenty of protein and iron, yet without fruits and vegetables, the diet can become an "addiction." "It's a high-inflammation diet, which means later on, when you get to be an adult, you end up with heart disease, you end up with cancer, you end up with diabetes and you end up with obesity," Siegel said on "The Faulkner Focus." "This is a very bad diet to get addicted to as a kid," he said. Lauren Manaker, a registered dietitian nutritionist and mom in South Carolina, told Fox News Digital that while the carnivore diet provides "many options" that are "fantastic for babies," she said it "isn't ideal for little ones." "Babies need a variety of nutrients to grow and thrive, and a diet that cuts out or limits plant-based foods like fruits, veggies and grains can leave some big nutritional gaps," she cautioned.
The Hill
4 hours ago
- The Hill
Credible scientists can't hold up Kennedy's charade for much longer
How much longer can responsible people work for President Trump's Department of Health and Human Services under the leadership of Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.? That question arises every time Kennedy pulls funding for vaccine research or purges respected scientists at the Centers for Disease Control, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force or the Food and Drug Administration. For a while, it looked like even vaccine critics weren't safe in the Trump administration. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Dr. Vinay Prasad established his reputation as a contrarian, expressing reservations about pediatric vaccination and several common mitigation measures. It was thus no surprise when he was appointed director of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, which covers vaccine policy. Prasad didn't last three months on the job. He resigned abruptly in late July following attacks by right-wing figures such as Laura Loomer, who labeled him a 'progressive leftist saboteur.' A Health and Human Services statement cited Prasad's desire to spend more time with his family. It has been widely reported, however, that Trump himself forced Prasad's departure, despite the objection of FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary. In another abrupt move, only 10 days later, Prasad abruptly returned to the FDA, evidently at Makary's request but otherwise without explanation. While some of Prasad's views remain quite controversial among many highly regarded physicians and scientists, it is certainly reassuring to see Loomer's malign influence diminished at the FDA. Nonetheless, Kennedy is still in charge of the entire department, and it is likely only a matter of time until he resumes appointing resolute anti-vaxxers, if not widely discredited would-be 'scientists,' to key committees. Makary and Prasad, and other well-credentialed scientists, no doubt believe they can overcome Kennedy's destabilization of medical research, while still contributing to public health. Maybe they are right, and the wisest course is to hold on as long as possible, trying to do good. After all, there is no telling who would replace them. On the other hand, it seems inevitable that Kennedy's pronouncements will increasingly become intolerable. Some CDC employees already worry that the recent deadly attack on their building in Atlanta was motivated by 'RFK Jr's lies about vax safety and CDC scientists.' Meanwhile, Trump has announced that political appointees will soon take over scientific research grant approval, displacing actual scientists, i n order to 'advance the President's policy priorities.' At some point in the degradation of science, there must be a line that ethical administrators will not cross. There is no single answer to whether an official should stay or withdraw from a compromising position, but history does provide cautionary tales. In 1854, a Massachusetts judge named Edward Loring reached a sincere but tragic decision. I described the events in my book, ' Fugitive Justice: Runaways, Rescuers, and Slavery on Trial.' Late that spring, a fugitive from slavery named Anthony Burns, was arrested in Boston and brought before Loring, a federal commissioner under the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, as well as judge of the Massachusetts Probate Court. Burns's arrest sparked mass protests in Boston, where anti-slavery sentiment was strong. Many Bostonians called upon Loring to resign from the federal commissioner's position. As a probate judge, he administered the estates of widows and orphans, which required compassion, and it was intolerable for him to be involved in the heartless business of slave-hunting. Loring took the criticism to heart, responding with a published statement. 'It is said that the statute is so cruel and wicked that it should not be executed by good men,' he wrote. But that would create a paradox. If humane judges were all to resign, 'then into what hands should its administration fall? Will those who call the statute merciless commit it to a merciless judge?' Although he had deep misgivings about the Fugitive Slave Act, Loring believed he had a duty to preside. Otherwise, judging would 'be confined to those who are reckless of that right in others, or ignorant or careless of the means given for its legal defense, or dishonest in their use.' Those who wish this, Loring continued, 'are more cruel and wicked than the statute, for they would strip from the fugitive the best security and every alleviation the statute leaves them.' Despite his protestations, Loring ruled in favor of the slaveholder, holding that it was required under the law. He sent Burns to Virginia in chains, where he was starved and abused. Burns's supporters, meanwhile, demonstrated the true meaning of humanity by raising funds to obtain his freedom. Burns returned to Boston and later studied theology at Oberlin College, no thanks to Loring. It turned out that a 'good judge,' as Loring believed himself, could not honorably enforce a pitiless law in a racist regime. He was dismissed from the Harvard Law School faculty, and the Massachusetts legislature removed him from the Probate Court. Loring is remembered today, if at all, as an enabler of slavery. Perhaps health officials are currently echoing Loring's lament. 'If I resign, someone very bad will take my place.' But sometimes, complicity is complicity.
