沈阳看皮肤 肤康认真(沈阳市皮肤瘙痒哪里医院较好) (今日更新中)

SAN DIEGO (CNS) - San Diego County public health officials reported 3,252 COVID-19 infections today, while virus-related hospitalizations continued to increase as the first batch of Moderna vaccines arrived in the area.The number of daily infections reported Monday marked the third- highest daily increase since the pandemic began, following only Friday's 3,611 and Saturday's 3,493. Together with Wednesday's 2,807 cases and Thursday's 2,604, the top five-highest daily case counts have all occurred in the past week.Monday's total also marked the third time the number of daily infections has surpassed 3,000 and the 21st consecutive day with more than 1,000 cases. It was also the 14th day overall with more than 2,000 new cases.The new cases gave the county a cumulative total of 129,717 confirmed cases from throughout the pandemic. The county also announced three more COVID-related deaths, raising the overall death toll to 1,283.Another 32 people were hospitalized as of Monday, with one additional person sent to an intensive care unit. A total of 1,296 people were hospitalized due to the virus, with 334 of those in ICUs -- both records.A drop of 43 non-COVID patients in the region's ICU freed up space Monday. Roughly 22% of ICU beds were available in San Diego County, compared to 19% reported Sunday.Rady Children's Hospital reported Monday it has received a second batch of the Pfizer vaccine, along with the first vials of the Moderna vaccine. ``We began vaccinating our highest risk team members last week,'' according to the hospital. ``This latest shipment is another big step forward, allowing us complete our highest risk staff and to begin offering the vaccine to those in our high risk categories. We are in the process of notifying the next wave of team members who are eligible to schedule their vaccination.''The new batches of vaccines will join the 28,275 Pfizer doses that arrived last week in the region, with first priority going to civilian acute health care workers. San Diego County is home to 82,623 health care workers working in hospital or psychiatric facilities, and 39,755 of them are considered ``highest risk'' and will first receive vaccines.An undisclosed number of vaccines for military personnel arrived at Naval Medical Center San Diego and Naval Hospital Camp Pendleton last week as well.With intensive-care unit capacity still officially considered to be zero across the 11-county Southern California region, Gov. Gavin Newsom said Monday the regional stay-at-home order imposed by the state for the entirety of Southern California will almost assuredly be extended beyond next week's expiration date.``We are likely, I think it's pretty self-evident, going to need to extend those regional dates,'' Newsom said. ``... Based upon all the data and based upon all these trend lines, it is very likely based on those current trends that we'll need to extend that stay at home order, (which) you recall was a three-week order when we announced it.''The stay-at-home order took effect at 11:59 p.m. Dec. 6, and was originally set to end on Dec. 28. Newsom did not give an indication of exactly when a decision on extending the order will be made, or much long the order will remain in place.Of 28,383 tests reported Monday in San Diego County, 11% returned positive, raising the 14-day average to 9.5%.There was one new outbreak reported, which brings the total number of outbreaks within the last seven days to 40. 3469

SAN DIEGO (CNS) - The San Diego City Council is slated to vote next week on its intent to forward an initiative to the November ballot that would create an independent commission on police practices, which is available for review by the general public Thursday.The proposed Commission on Police Practices would review all deaths stemming from interactions with San Diego police, as well as all police shootings.Investigations into these matters would be conducted whether or not a complaint has been made against a particular officer or the department as a whole. Commission staff or contractors operating independently of the police department would conduct the investigations.(Read the proposed initiative text here)The commission may — but would not be required to — investigate complaints against officers not involving deaths or officer-related shootings, according to the proposed measure's language. The proposed body would have subpoena power to call witnesses or request records related to its investigations.The latest version of the proposed initiative, released Wednesday night, includes the addition of an appeals process for any officer the commission finds committed sustained incidences of misconduct. Appeals would be handled by the city's Civil Service Commission.RELATED: San Diego looks to Baltimore Police for de-escalation policy reformsOther incidents the commission could consider investigating include use of force by officers resulting in great bodily injury, "dishonesty" by an SDPD officer relating to "the reporting, investigation or prosecution of a crime," incidents that have "generated substantial public interest or concern," patterns of misconduct by officers or patterns of "inappropriate policies, procedures or practices by the police department or its members."The commission could also make recommendations to the police department on disciplinary decisions for officers, though the chief of police "retains authority and discretion to discipline subordinate employees in the police department."RELATED: Push for new independent commission on police practices in San DiegoThe parameters of the commission, including the number of members, term length, qualifications and method for appointing members, will be determined by the city council. Additionally, the body would replace the city's Community Review Board on Police Practices, which the lacks the investigatory powers of the proposed commission."I am looking forward to giving voters the opportunity to bring more transparency and accountability to public safety in San Diego," said City Council President Georgette Gomez. "A truly independent commission is essential to making law enforcement officers more responsive and more accountable to the people they serve. I thank my colleague, Councilmember Monica Montgomery, for her persistent leadership on this critical issue."RELATED: District Attorney talks about transparency and independent police review boardThe San Diego City Council will vote at its June 23 meeting on two actions related to forwarding the measure to the November ballot. These include a resolution ratifying an agreement between the city and the San Diego Police Officers Association to establish the commission and a resolution stating the city council is declaring its intent to submit the measure to voters.A statement from Gomez's office says further council action will be needed before the measure can be officially forwarded to the ballot. 3475

SAN DIEGO (CNS) - San Diego's utilities future remains undecided after the City Council debated terms for a franchise agreement for its electric and natural gas provider this week.The council was asked Thursday to agree on the terms it was looking for in the agreement for one of the city's most valuable assets, valued at more than .2 billion.San Diego Gas & Electric has been the sole provider of natural gas and electric utility services for San Diego since 1920. The current franchise agreement, finalized in 1970, is set to expire Jan. 17, 2021. San Diego is California's largest city to have franchise agreements with its utilities.The terms, had they been approved Thursday, would have opened the bidding process for any interested entities to bid on the franchise agreement. They were presented to the council for input and did not technically require council approval.In the coming weeks, the city will release the final terms of the bid document, which will include input received from the public and the council, and the bidding process will begin, officials with Mayor Kevin Faulconer's office told City News Service on Saturday.Once bidding is concluded and a franchise is awarded, the agreement will go to the full council, requiring two-thirds approval.Howard Golub, a consultant for JVJ Pacific Consulting, which the city hired to analyze its needs, recommended the minimum bid in the terms should be million -- low enough to encourage bids but not so low the city and its residents are suffocated by high rates and later surcharges with no money back to show for it, he said."This is the floor, not the ceiling," Golub said.Golub also recommended franchise fees of 3.5% for natural gas and 3% for electric and a 20-year term with the bidder the city chooses.SDG&E is owned by Sempra Energy, an international corporation based in San Diego. Warren Buffett-owned Berkshire Hathaway has expressed interest in the bidding process.An initial proposal by Council President Georgette Gomez was rejected 6-3. It included a provision similar to that of Chula Vista, with a 10-year deal with an automatic renewal if the franchisee had been a "good partner."An amendment by Councilwoman Monica Montgomery raised the minimum bid from the 1% of total value of million to 5%, or 0 million. It also included a climate equity fund and the provision to make the highest bidder subject to collective bargaining from employees who were working for SDG&E -- in case that company does not win the bid."We can't be working toward a just climate future if our partner undermines that," Gomez said.Councilwoman Jennifer Campbell then proposed terms to accept all of JVJ's recommendations with the option to "explore" the climate equity fund. This failed 5-4, with multiple council members switching votes during discussion as amendments were added and removed.Councilman Chris Cate asked for a provision to see and consider all bids for the franchise agreement regardless of the bid offered -- dependent on how closely each bidder met the city's terms.Councilwoman Vivian Moreno said the lack of concrete plan to establish and fund the climate equity fund -- which she said would be funded by the minimum bid and would add "green" elements to portions of the city often underserved -- was automatically unacceptable for her.The council's lack of consensus prompted some speculation about the possibility of municipalizing the city's gas and electric services."I recommend a franchise agreement first," Golub said. "And if that's not feasible, move to a publicly owned utility."High interest rates in 1970 prevented the city from seriously examining that route, but much lower interest rates now make a public-owned utility more feasible, Golub said.According to valuations by business process management company NewGen, the city could buy out SDG&E's infrastructure at a fair market rate of just over billion.According to Golub's recommendations, the city should not do what it did in 1970 -- accept a franchise agreement it wasn't happy with because SDG&E was the sole bidder.More than 80 members of the public called in to the meeting to express support for a franchise renewal of SDG&E or for municipalization.The callers were fairly evenly split, with many of the calls in support of extending the existing franchise agreement with SDG&E coming from employees with the company or those representing the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers local representing SDG&E workers.They claimed maintaining jobs, 100 years of history with the city and "keeping it local" as reasons to renew the franchise as soon as possible for 20 years or more.Opponents to moving any franchise agreement forward claimed SDG&E's perceived lack of reliability, its high utility costs and its parent company's involvement in fracking are all reasons to avoid franchising with SDG&E.Some of them made impassioned pleas to municipalize the city's gas and electric, essentially making the city take on the burden of providing the utilities.One man urged the council to vote no and do further study on the potential of municipalization and the ramifications of not doing so."When this goes sideways, and it will, you can't say you didn't know," he said. 5295

SAN DIEGO (CNS) - San Diego Gas & Electric warned its customers Tuesday that a new wave of scammers is targeting them and threatening to cut off their service unless they pay their utility bills immediately with prepaid cards.The most common tactic reported is scammers impersonating SDG&E's billing department and asking for payment via Green Dot MoneyPak, a way of sending cash via prepaid or bank debit cards.According to the utility, in these scams criminals typically threaten immediate power shutoffs to scare customers into making an immediate payment. Once customers purchase prepaid debit cards or make wire transfers based on the scammer's instructions, they are asked to call another phone number to provide the card information, which allows the thieves to steal the money.It can be especially confusing for victims, according to an SDG&E statement, as the phone number scammers use might play a recorded message and menu options that mimic SDG&E's official customer service line, which is 1-800- 411-7343. When victims call the number provided by scammers, they might hear a recorded message that tells them they are calling SDG&E's business line. They are given different menu options, including one to pay their bill or to report a gas leak or power outage.Utility officials say SDG&E will never:-- call a customer to proactively ask for payment information during the call. Customers may receive communications directing them to pay their bill via their MyAccount at sdge.com, use the Billmatrix system, or to call and use the automated pay-by-phone option at 1-800-411-7343-- request that a customer use pre-paid debit cards for payments or cryptocurrencies to pay their bill-- send emails with an online payment method with a QR codeIf a customer is asked for payment over the phone, it is a scam and they should hang up immediately.Utility officials say people should only provide financial information by telephone if the customer initiated the call. If asked to do so by a suspected scammer, they should hang up and call SDG&E directly to verify information about the account. Customers can also view their account status, including bills and payments, through SDG&E's mobile app or via sdge.com/myaccount."Criminals work year-round to come up with new ways to defraud people," according to a company statement. "SDG&E works hard to make sure customers know what to do if they are targeted. Unfortunately, scams are on the rise, especially during times of uncertainty and crises like with the pandemic."Victims of fraud are urged to call SDG&E immediately at 1-800-411-7343 to report it. 2656

SAN DIEGO (CNS) - The family of a 19-year-old San Diego State University student who died after falling from his bunk bed and striking his head following a night of drinking has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against several defendants, including the university, the fraternity he was pledging for, and the manufacturer of the bed he fell from.The lawsuit filed last week in San Diego Superior Court alleges Dylan Hernandez was hazed by members of Phi Gamma Delta just prior to his death, and that fraternity members not only failed to obtain medical attention for him after he became extremely intoxicated, but also attempted to hide evidence of misconduct following his fatal fall.Hernandez fell from his bed on Nov. 7, 2019, and died in a hospital the following day.RELATED: Investigation completed into death of SDSU student who died after fall from bedThe lawsuit alleges he attended a "Big Brother, Little Brother" fraternity event that had pledges "screamed at and demeaned, beaten with paddles and hands, and forced to consume shots of vodka and rum to the point of intoxication."Following his hospitalization, the lawsuit alleges Phi Gamma Delta members instructed others to remove incriminating material from their cell phones and in group chats, members were told to "Keep your mouths shut!" and "Just remember, Silence is Golden!"Representatives with Phi Gamma Delta did not respond to a request for comment.RELATED: Autopsy report of SDSU student who died after fall from bed releasedIts national office permanently suspended its SDSU chapter in August and SDSU expelled the fraternity until 2030.In July, it was announced that no criminal charges would be pursued in connection with Hernandez's death, which was ruled accidental. A joint statement released by the university's police department and the San Diego County District Attorney's Office stated there was "no basis" for manslaughter or hazing charges.Investigators said there were no injuries on Hernandez's body "that appeared consistent with hazing, and no evidence of student group activities likely to cause serious bodily injury or death, which is statutorily required to prove hazing." Other than Hernandez's "devastating head injuries," the only other wound to his body was an abrasion on his thigh, officials said.RELATED: San Diego State suspends 14 fraternities after student is hospitalizedOne month after that statement was released, Rob Caudill, the fraternity's executive director, sent SDSU a letter announcing the chapter's closure, stating the SDSU chapter had been found guilty of violating fraternity bylaws, including hazing, drug use and violations related to alcohol misuse.SDSU representatives said the university could not comment as it had not yet seen the lawsuit, but pointed to steps the university has taken to combat hazing activities on campus in the wake of Hernandez's death. These include the formations of two task forces examining student activities and alcohol/substance abuse. Task force recommendations led to the implementation of a Good Samaritan Policy, in which student organizations are encouraged to report concerns about student health and safety, and a Hazing Prevention Task Force that held its first meeting this fall.Hernandez's family alleges SDSU was aware of prior hazing issues involving Phi Gamma Delta and failed to properly discipline the fraternity for such activities. The family alleges SDSU was aware of prior instances when Phi Gamma Delta pledges were hazed or hospitalized for excessive drinking.The family also alleges the school created an unsafe environment in the Tenochca Residence Hall where Hernandez suffered the fatal fall by furnishing its rooms with bunk beds that didn't meet minimum safety standards.In suing SDSU and the bunk bed manufacturer, Foliot Furniture Pacific, the family alleges the beds featured "safety rails" that were defective, and contributed to 550,000 deaths nationwide over a 16-year period and 10 injuries at SDSU between 2017 and 2019. 4015

来源：资阳报