Seattle has announced it will stop prioritizing low-level traffic violations because they place an undue financial burden on low-income people [“Seattle police will no longer enforce some minor violations, including biking without a helmet,” Jan. 14, Local News]. Does that mean the city will also stop enforcing parking violations which impose a similar burden? I think we all know the answer to that.
I’m looking for some consistent logic here. We’re going to stop enforcing laws that have a public-safety component, but we’re going to continue to enforce something that has nothing to do with public safety (parking violations)? Confused? As they say, “Follow the money.”
Richard Schwartz, Seattle