Story and photo by Johnathon Fitzpatrick
Reporting for West Seattle Blog
Last night the Seattle Parks Board took its first official look at a compiled list of potential rules designed to regulate the public’s behavior in parks.
The proposed Code of Conduct (see it here) includes explicit bans on smoking, spitting, cursing, and entering restrooms that are for the opposite sex, as well as more ambiguous language banning any “conduct that unreasonably deprives others of their use or enjoyment of the park or park facilities.”
“We’ve had to deal with these situations one by one and we thought we’d gather it all together in one place,” explained Parks spokesperson Dewey Potter. “We’re trying to suggest good behaviors that make the parks more enjoyable for everybody by putting one little extra piece of trash in the can or by refraining from swearing in front of a 2-year-old.”
But the proposals weren’t all a hit with board members.
After reading through the list of rules, board member Neal Adams warned that “some of this just pushes the boundary of being practical and enforceable. It’s getting into personal rights, and some of the rules leave a lot to interpretation.”
Parks Superintendent Tim Gallagher was quick to point out that the city’s Law Department has thoroughly vetted all of the proposed rules, but by the meeting’s end, there was an overall agreement that while some rules may be removed or added, the language would need to be clarified.
The Parks Code of Conduct is starting off with 31 items. Half involve existing state and municipal laws; the other half are new rules proposed by Parks’ policy staff. The final list would be posted on the city’s website and distributed to local media outlets, but, according to Potter, signage in parks will not be required because it would be unwieldy.
The Board predominantly discussed the smoking and spitting rules, with policy director Eric Friedli indicating that the spitting rule probably won’t make the final cut. Even board member Dana Kincaid, who strongly supports the spitting ban, was realistic about its chances “That’s the only thing that makes me gag, but (banning it is) going too far. I love (the rule), but I don’t think it would be regulated.”
The smoking ban had strong support from the entire board, as well as City Councilmembers Tom Rasmussen, Sally Clark, and Nick Licata, who sent a letter of support. Friedli says more than a dozen cities in Washington state already ban smoking in parks, as well as cities in California, New Jersey, and Iowa.
In a twist of convenience, the language of the smoking ban may change to make up for the likely-doomed spitting ban. Board member Terry Holme suggested broadening the smoking ban to cover “all tobacco products,” which would eliminate spittoon-averse dip users, the main targets of the spitting ban.
A solution was also found for the “no opposite sex in restroom” proposed ule. Board member Jourdan Keith suggested making single-occupancy restrooms unisex “to minimize social stress from going to the bathroom.”
First-time offenders would be banned from the park for 24 hours, second-time offenders for seven days, and third time offenders for a year. This is the same enforcement model used in Seattle’s public library system. Notably, all violators would be registered not only in a Parks Offenders database but also in the Seattle Police Department’s records database as well.
Gallagher says this is just a preliminary list and that “we’re just throwing it out there to get public sentiment.” A public hearing is scheduled for January 28; the hearing will be held in the Seattle City Hall council chambers, since a larger-than-normal turnout is expected. A vote is likely to happen two weeks after that, at the Parks Board’s February 11 meeting.
In the meantime, you can e-mail comments to sandy.brooks@seattle.gov; Parks Board chair Jackie Ramels (from Alki) says they’d already received a lot of e-mail even before last night’s meeting.
| 33 COMMENTS