The county court house in Seattle is located at the south end of downtown.  It is situated next to a park that has long been a place where people who live on the street pass their time.  As Seattle’s homeless population has grown in recent years, the demand for open air living space has exceeded the park’s capacity.  As the number of full-time residents living without sanitation has increased, human waste that would otherwise have entered the sanitary sewer system has found its way onto the public sidewalks that provide access to the courthouse.

Two judges have complained vocally.  There are reports that some jurors try to avoid service at the courthouse because of odors and other conditions related to health and safety.  The sheriff is asking for funds to hose down the affected sidewalks to reduce odors, if not improve sanitation.

I saw a report that a member of the County Council – an elected official – has complained that the use of hoses is inappropriate.  He recalls that water cannon were deployed against peaceful marchers during the civil rights movement, back in the 1960s.  He fears that the use of high-power hoses on the courthouse sidewalk would trigger painful emotional reactions to people sympathetic to the victims of those oppressive actions by governments decades ago.

I won’t repeat the name of the council member because the views attributed to him might be a hoax.  There is no point in adding to his unnecessary embarrassment.  However, if the story is true, I can imagine a future news item along these lines:

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON.  Property insurers in King County, Washington report that 23 homes have burned to the ground during the past month as firefighters looked on due to a policy newly mandated by the King County Council.  Fearing that the use of high pressure hoses would trigger memories of actions by southern law enforcement officials against peaceful demonstrators during the civil rights era, the council adopted a policy requiring fire fighters to consult with property owners prior to employing such hoses to fight residential fires.

Firefighters report that they cannot obtain homeowner consent in situations where the homeowner is absent or has been taken to a hospital with injuries sustained in a fire.  The result has been that 23 homes have burned while crews search for a homeowner who can assure firefighters that the owner is prepared to accept the risk that the use of hoses will trigger memories of some of this country’s most regrettable events.

A spokesperson for the Association of King County Fire Districts and Departments stated that any new policy requires a period of breaking in as fire crews adjust to a new routine.  She also noted that more than 99% of residential structures in the county remain in a safe and habitable condition.

County Council members claim that their action was intended to be advisory only and have denied that the policy is responsible for the loss of property due to fire.

The Firefighters National Brotherhood has pointed out that seven firefighters and a local fire department have been sued by homeowners for failing to obtain consent before using high pressure hoses.  An association of trial lawyers emphasizes that there are many ways of fighting a fire that don’t involve the use of “risky” high pressure hoses.  The state Insurance Commissioner says her office will not approve any request by insurers for rate increases based on losses following adoption of “common sense restrictions on the use of these psychologically hazardous relics of the past”.