I'll tell you why not and it isn't as simple as "That's a stupid idea."
This story hit my feed awhile back and I ignored it, mainly because I was convinced it was satire.
Nope.
On his blog, self described community activist, and clearly tax payer, Michael Petrelis learned that the San Francisco Fire Department was budgeting to repair bathroom and shower facilities at most of the firehouses around the City. He then goes on to make the following suggestion:
"I am proposing that the city consider making those taxpayer-funded facilities available to the homeless on a limited basis, for use to urinate and defecate and also regain or maintain good hygiene."
I see where you're going with this...but no.
Mr Petrelis was also striving very hard to demand that Fire houses open the ground floor restroom to anyone who asks during business hours. Unfortunately for him, this was policy prior to his efforts. What he seems to be missing is that not all those restrooms are serviceable, usable or safe for the public...hence the need for all the repairs.
While I have been witness to more than a few "sidewalk steamers" in broad daylight, the bulk of the public urination and defecation happens outside of the hours Mr Petrelis suggests. Add to this the fact that the firehouse will likely be vacant and the idea falls apart. More on why the station is vacant in a moment.
According to their website, the SFFD has some firehouses that were built in the 1930s and 1940s and have been repaired, re-repaired and updated slowly but are still in disrepair. Mr Petrelis would like to add a few homeless folks dropping by to shower to the mix.
So let's dissect why his plan will not only not work but is a recipe for disaster and avoids the true problem.
Firstly, the homeless population is not spread out equally over the San Francisco area. Anyone who visits can see the bulk of the almost 10,000 Urban Outdoorsmen are in the downtown corridor, specifically South of Market, along 6th Street and in the Tenderloin neighborhood. For grins and giggles, let's use Mr Petrelis's estimate of 6,500 homeless in SF. In those three neighborhoods I just mentioned there are 3 Firehouses.
3.
Two of them are among the busiest in the country and overlap calls for service on a regular basis. If we line up all 6,500 homeless and let them take a 5 minute shower, we are in a drought after all, and taking into account 5 minutes to strip down and redress after the shower (We'll make them hurry) That is 65,000 minutes of showering.
A day.
That equates to 45 days worth of showering, non stop. 15 if we can somehow organize them to walk to another fire house.
Now, before I go any farther, I am pro shower for the homeless. They are human beings and deserve respect and the chance to get out of the situation they are in. A shower is not what they need long term, but let's stay on topic here.
Mr Petrelis would like to open the facilities during "reasonable hours" likely the same business hours the restrooms are already available. This limits access even more, meaning that the 45 days around the clock to shower everyone just became 90 days.
Should we make people wait 90 days to take a shower at a firehouse?
Now on to the part of the equation that is often overlooked: Station security. When 2 of the busiest fire houses in the country go on over 30 calls for service in a day (A good deal of them dealing with this same population), the station is often vacant and locked closed. This restricts access even further than 90 days and now we are likely pushing 120-200 days to get everyone showered.
Just because tax payer dollars fund something does not mean that it is free for public consumption. If I walked up to a Police Officer and asked to use his car, or even gun, by claiming that it is tax payer funded I would be laughed at and ignored.
Mr Petrelis, I admire your efforts to help these people, but opening firehouse showers isn't the solution these folks need. Having been ankle deep in human waste more times than I would like to ever recall helping people in that situation, the decades of mental strife, substance abuse and neglect (Not to mention easily half of the population we're discussing are not natives to their location instead bused in or come looking for a wealth of free services) many don't want to change. It is an embarrassing reality. For every person wishing to escape the streets I'll find 3 more that want nothing to do with shelter or aid. It is a sad state that is almost too late to impact but some local programs have a chance.
Showers are a great idea, but hopefully Mr Petrelis now sees that only if he personally drives people to far flung firehouses can we realistically get all the homeless showered inside a week.
But now when do the firefighters shower?
This story hit my feed awhile back and I ignored it, mainly because I was convinced it was satire.
Nope.
On his blog, self described community activist, and clearly tax payer, Michael Petrelis learned that the San Francisco Fire Department was budgeting to repair bathroom and shower facilities at most of the firehouses around the City. He then goes on to make the following suggestion:
"I am proposing that the city consider making those taxpayer-funded facilities available to the homeless on a limited basis, for use to urinate and defecate and also regain or maintain good hygiene."
I see where you're going with this...but no.
Mr Petrelis was also striving very hard to demand that Fire houses open the ground floor restroom to anyone who asks during business hours. Unfortunately for him, this was policy prior to his efforts. What he seems to be missing is that not all those restrooms are serviceable, usable or safe for the public...hence the need for all the repairs.
While I have been witness to more than a few "sidewalk steamers" in broad daylight, the bulk of the public urination and defecation happens outside of the hours Mr Petrelis suggests. Add to this the fact that the firehouse will likely be vacant and the idea falls apart. More on why the station is vacant in a moment.
According to their website, the SFFD has some firehouses that were built in the 1930s and 1940s and have been repaired, re-repaired and updated slowly but are still in disrepair. Mr Petrelis would like to add a few homeless folks dropping by to shower to the mix.
So let's dissect why his plan will not only not work but is a recipe for disaster and avoids the true problem.
Firstly, the homeless population is not spread out equally over the San Francisco area. Anyone who visits can see the bulk of the almost 10,000 Urban Outdoorsmen are in the downtown corridor, specifically South of Market, along 6th Street and in the Tenderloin neighborhood. For grins and giggles, let's use Mr Petrelis's estimate of 6,500 homeless in SF. In those three neighborhoods I just mentioned there are 3 Firehouses.
3.
Two of them are among the busiest in the country and overlap calls for service on a regular basis. If we line up all 6,500 homeless and let them take a 5 minute shower, we are in a drought after all, and taking into account 5 minutes to strip down and redress after the shower (We'll make them hurry) That is 65,000 minutes of showering.
A day.
That equates to 45 days worth of showering, non stop. 15 if we can somehow organize them to walk to another fire house.
Now, before I go any farther, I am pro shower for the homeless. They are human beings and deserve respect and the chance to get out of the situation they are in. A shower is not what they need long term, but let's stay on topic here.
Mr Petrelis would like to open the facilities during "reasonable hours" likely the same business hours the restrooms are already available. This limits access even more, meaning that the 45 days around the clock to shower everyone just became 90 days.
Should we make people wait 90 days to take a shower at a firehouse?
Now on to the part of the equation that is often overlooked: Station security. When 2 of the busiest fire houses in the country go on over 30 calls for service in a day (A good deal of them dealing with this same population), the station is often vacant and locked closed. This restricts access even further than 90 days and now we are likely pushing 120-200 days to get everyone showered.
Just because tax payer dollars fund something does not mean that it is free for public consumption. If I walked up to a Police Officer and asked to use his car, or even gun, by claiming that it is tax payer funded I would be laughed at and ignored.
Mr Petrelis, I admire your efforts to help these people, but opening firehouse showers isn't the solution these folks need. Having been ankle deep in human waste more times than I would like to ever recall helping people in that situation, the decades of mental strife, substance abuse and neglect (Not to mention easily half of the population we're discussing are not natives to their location instead bused in or come looking for a wealth of free services) many don't want to change. It is an embarrassing reality. For every person wishing to escape the streets I'll find 3 more that want nothing to do with shelter or aid. It is a sad state that is almost too late to impact but some local programs have a chance.
Showers are a great idea, but hopefully Mr Petrelis now sees that only if he personally drives people to far flung firehouses can we realistically get all the homeless showered inside a week.
But now when do the firefighters shower?
Comments