Following backlash from local business owners after passing a mask mandate that would subject them to penalties for noncompliance, the Webster County Board of Health amended the regulation Thursday, suspending civil penalties.

“They’re suspended to see how the public reacts and complies,” said Webster County Attorney Darren Driscoll, saying the Board of Health did not want to be too “heavy-handed” in their approach.

The mask regulation passed by the board on Dec. 3 would have added teeth to weaker rules at the state and city level with a civil penalty of up to $750 for the first offense and up to $1,000 for second or subsequent offenses. The regulation, which would apply to nearly all indoor and public areas, must still be cleared by Webster County Supervisors to go into effect.

The amendment passed 3-1 along the exact same line as the first vote earlier this month, with Supervisor Mark Campbell dissenting.

Though the board made it clear in their last meeting that businesses acting in good faith would not be impacted, board members said some were still not satisfied with the proposed rules.

“The majority of things we heard before were (from) businesses (that) wanted support from us to put (the onus) on the government when they didn’t want unmasked people in their stores,” said Supervisor Nick Carlson, a member of the board.

But after, he said they heard from many more who didn’t like it.

As previously drafted, the regulation stayed away from individual fines to ensure law enforcement would not be burdened by an influx of calls reporting the average unmasked Joe around town. To find a compromise with dissatisfied business owners, the board said they will suspend the civil penalty and evaluate how things go without it, using pandemic metrics that show how quickly the coronavirus is spreading and how burdened hospitals are.

In the weeks since the Fort Dodge City Council’s mask mandate passed and the Board of Health met to pass their first iteration of one, the positivity rate in Webster County has dropped several points to 16%. But with Christmas around the corner, public health experts say holiday gatherings could once again bring a similar spike, putting hospitals near or at full capacity.

Dr. Kelli Wallace, medical director for Webster County Public Health, said that while there’s no specific time set for the regulation’s penalty provision for be reevaluated, it would likely be around a month after it goes into effect.

“We haven’t set a time frame in stone. We did that on purpose,” Wallace said.

Due to the nature of the virus and the incubation time it needs for symptoms to manifest, it would be two weeks, at the very least.

“This is a happy medium,” said member Luke Becker. “This isn’t going to please everyone, but it’s a great way to try to meet in the middle.”

He was correct on at least one count. It didn’t satisfy many who spoke at the meeting, from those in support of the penalty to enforce mask use to those who still questioned the overwhelming bodies of science touting the effectiveness of masks in slowing the spread of COVID-19.

“What number makes it enough? How many community members have to die before we mandate this?” said Megan Secor, co-owner of Soldier Creek Winery and vocal advocate of public mask mandates. “When you take out the teeth, this is back to a ‘strong recommendation.’ You’ve taken a stand, keep going with it.”

In the two weeks between the Board of Health’s first and second December meeting, 14 people died from COVID-19 in Webster County – an average of one person every day – as the death toll ticked to 53.

“It’s a balancing act,” Driscoll said. “We’re all going to have to suffer to some extent to (protect the community.)”

But in any case, he said the county “has got to get a handle on this.”

The county attorney and medical director were on the defense through most of the Zoom meeting as citizens claimed masks actually spread the virus more, showed skepticism of the constitutionality of mask mandates and questioned the real goals of the public health measure.

“Are you willing to go to court and waste taxpayers’ money if someone is willing to challenge (the regulation?” asked Robert Higgins.

“I have not seen any compelling argument that it’s a (constitutional) violation,” Driscoll replied, citing the code that the Board of Health derives its authority from on the matter.

Some were more belligerent than others, but a three-minute speaking limit was strictly enforced. Others had more balanced views, like business owners who believed masks would slow the spread but penalties would punish innocent business owners doing their best in a difficult economy.

“The scenario of a business owner who, by no fault of their own, is going to get a fine is not a reality. That is not our vision of enforcement,” Driscoll said, personally promising to act as a filter for bona fide actors. “Those acting in good faith are not going to be fined. Your average impact on businesses acting in good faith is going to be minimal to zero.”

Some business owners, at least those speaking at the meeting, still favored a civil penalty mechanism.

“We lose people every time somebody has to quarantine because of this virus,” said Amy Von Bank. “I’m worried (that) with no fines, no teeth to it … we’re going to continue to see business owners ignore (mask usage.)”

Others opposed to the civil penalty claimed that mask adherence was already up significantly in the days following Fort Dodge’s mask mandate passage from what they saw anecdotally, though that mandate does not apply to the rest of the county.

“I’m going to challenge businesses to provide an alternative,” said Nedra Conrad. “If you don’t like enforcement at the business level, what do you propose?”