5:35 PM

 

1.Call to Order and Roll Call

 

Present Commissioners, Angela Padilla, Sally Stephens, Pam Hemphill, Andrea Brooks, Laurie Kennedy-Routhier, Philip Gerrie, Vicky Guldbech – ACC, David Gordon – DVM

 

Absent Commissioners, William Herndon – SF Police

 

2.General Public Comment

 

Richard Fong  - Concern over possible animals used in new stem-cell research. Wonders if committee will be formed to provide oversight. Had been concern, in the past, about the humane treatment of animals used at UCSF.

 

Dori Villalon – Vice-president SF/SPCA – SPCA opened up their old kennels last summer to house 49 kittens with ring worm. Reads letter of thanks from SPCA and ACC volunteer Linda Willard for use of space. Special thanks to Dr. Scarlett and Laura Mullen. Kittens would have been euthanized due to lack of space at SPCA, ACC, and foster homes. All kittens recovered and were adopted. Good example of agencies working together. SPCA and Purina One will we giving away 1000 bags of dog and cat food at a food bank being set up at the SPCA on February 3, 2010 from 2PM to 7PM. Everyone is welcome to get a free bag of food.

 

3. Approval of Draft Minutes of Nov. 12, 2009

 

Julene Johnson – Correction to statement made as to number of cats euthanized in California being those in shelters not in people’s homes.

 

Minutes approved unanimously with correction from the public.

 

4. Chairperson’s report and  opening remarks

 

A) Update on Joint Zoo Operating Committee

 

Comr. Stephens – Joint Zoo (JZ) met on Jan 11. Presentation by Dr Spinelli, vet on JZ, about earlier visit to the bear exhibits. Met with the bear keeper. All agreed that the bear grottos should be better but concerned over doing renovations with and for the existing aging bears. Bears are in their 20’s now. Dr Spinelli thinks they are too old to be relocated. Maybe possible to use unused space behind existing grottos. Also maybe able to rotate bears into other exhibits, such as grizzly gulch for enrichment. Ulu was orphaned when her mother was killed and likes to dig in the dirt. The other two bears were hand raised and don’t like the dirt. Dr Spinelli suggested that effort be made to not hand raise captive born animals but have a foster mom do so. Also requested by self and Dr. Spinelli that there be discussions of future capital plan projects. Both large and small projects. The bear grottos should have a priority. One possibility is electric fences which are much cheaper and easier than whole new grotto enclosures.

 

Comr. Hemphill –  Concern over a tiger being in an inside enclosure during a recent visit. Doesn’t know how long she was in there. Tiger was observed pacing a lot. Also, does the zoo have a back up electrical generator?

 

Comr. Brooks – Does the zoo have a process for prioritization discussions?

 

Comr. Stephens – Unsure of an answer on both questions. Will be discussed at next JZ meeting in February on possibly converting the new rhino/hippo to just a rhino exhibit. Zoo has no hippos. That would require stronger fencing. Also, possibly putting the Baird’s taper in that enclosure.

 

Comr. Gerrie – Would it be possible to notify us when the next JZ meetings will be?

 

Comr. Stephens – JZ meetings are on line at Rec & Park website. Information is available to the public that way.

 

Comr. Gerrie – Is it the first or second mondays?

 

Comr. Stephens – It has been Mondays. Unsure if there is a pattern. Asks Bob Jenkins if is always on a first or second Monday.

 

Bob Jenkins – SF Zoological Society - For the past year it has been scheduled for the first Monday but the meeting schedule is set by the Chair with the other meeting members. Three meetings were scheduled at the zoo in May and September. An additional meeting, at the zoo, was scheduled, last year, in November on a Thursday. The new chair, David Lee, anticipates will set the schedule which will probably revert to schedule of two years ago in which the meetings were based on the second Rec & Park monthly meeting which falls on the Third Thursday which starts at 4 PM. Anticipates JZ, then, starting at 2 PM before the Rec & Park meeting at City Hall.

 

Comr. Hemphill – Can you tell us anything about the tiger being kept inside?

 

Bob Jenkins – Will look into it. When a tiger is inside they have access to three or four cages in order to move back and forth. Careful planning is done for rotation during enclosure cleaning for the big cats as well as the bears. Also, there are back-up batteries as well as generators in case of a power outage.

 

 

 

5. New Business

 

A) Discussion and possible action to send a letter to Rec & Park and Board of Supervisors regarding proposed soccer field development at west end of GG Park requesting a full evaluation and not be fast tracked.

 

Comr. Hemphill – Became aware of plan in December. Currently there are four grass soccer fields. Site is known as Beach Chalet. Plan is to replace grass in the four fields with artificial turf and pave pathways around them, install a grand stand and install 60’ tall lights. They will be on until 10 PM at night year round. Eventually two more soccer fields are planned that, together ,will stretch across almost the width of GG Park. Water from these areas will be diverted into the sewer affecting the ground water aquifer. The plan will also affect wildlife including migratory birds. Notification to the public, locally and city-wide, has been incomplete. Issue is not about whether or not to have soccer for SF kids. But to fully understand the impact of rebuilding soccer fields in that sensitive location.

 

Daniel Mauer – Project Manager of Capital Improvement Division of Rec& Park – Introduces Patrick Hannan from City Fields Foundation, who will also be speaking. Program exists because in 2004 department looked at what was needed for existing activities at 35 soccer fields and 30 baseball fields to meet current demand. Determined that renovating current fields and adding lights was one way to minimize deficit of playing fields. Highest demand is after school from 3 PM to 6:30. Completing proposed project would meet the demand. Computerizing archaic hand-written permit and ledger system in 2006 has also helped the program run better. Why synthetic turf? To increase playability of play fields. With synthetic turf, playing fields do not close due to rain nor rest so that the grass can recover from heavy use. Every field can be used year round. It provides a clean safe level surface for the public to use. Synthetic also save apx 1.5 million gallons of water per field per year. Synthetic also reduces need for maintenance from staff. Shows slides of several completed fields throughout the city. Proposed fields at western end of GG Park have existing soccer fields that have been used for 75 years. Fields are heavily used currently. 1500 kids and 600 adults use it every week. Currently one of the four fields is always not in use for renovation and re-growth. Playable fields are closed every Monday for maintenance and all are closed 4 months in winter. Currently fields are uneven, often wet, and has gopher holes. Recently young girl broke her ankle because of those conditions. Facility also lacks place for spectators to view the games. Renovations will triple amount of play time available. Currently fields provide 4700 hours annually. With renovations, playable hours will be apx. 9500 hours. Plan is to install synthetic turf, lighting and seating around the fields, and renovate existing restrooms and parking lot. Also, install safely lit walking paths to and around the fields. Lighting will be 60’ field lights, also, pathway and parking lot lighting.  60’ foot lights have been controversial. Walked around the proposed area in all directions to see how visible the lights might be. Lights will only be visible along the Great Highway. New facility will have a front entrance plaza area on the west side of the fields. Currently lacks a “front door”. Also needs new restroom facilities.  Additionally will be added a protected children’s play area, a picnic area with barbeque pits and about 1000 sq ft to the parking lot, adding about 20 parking spaces. Next steps, after tonight, is to go to Rec & Park for approval next month. Develop construction documents and bidding process. Hope to start work at middle of the year. Construction should take about ten months. The City Fields Foundation has worked with the Neighborhood Parks Council for a grant to work with the adjoining communities to become more involved. Has worked will all agencies, City, State, and Federal to comply with all health and safety standards for artificial turf.

 

Comr. Hemphill – Will other areas besides the soccer fields be artificial turf?

 

Daniel Mauer – No, just the soccer fields.

 

Comr. Hemphill – The area around the picnic tables?

 

Daniel Mauer – That will be natural turf.

 

Comr. Hemphill – Why does the ground water go into the sewer?

 

Daniel Mauer – The water percolates through the fields and goes into a pipe system. Depending on the municipality, that water can go into a storm-drain system, percolate back into the ground, or be reused for irrigation.

 

Comr. Hemphill – Understands that the PUC is planning to pump water from our aquifer to mix with our drinking water. Was that issue considered?

 

Daniel Mauer – PUC is moving forward with a recycled water treatment facility. Treated water from the West Side sewage treatment plant would be recycled for irrigation in GG Park. Plan is to take GG Park  and Lincoln Park off of potable water and use recycled water for irrigation. Water going into the storm drain system would be reused for irrigation.

 

Comr. Hemphill – Are there toxins running off the fields?

 

Daniel Mauer – An environmental task force was convened in 2008 to look at that issue. Artificial turf is recycled tires. Studies have shown that high levels of zinc run off from that material. Zinc is not hazardous to humans but is to aquatic life.  To prevent problems task force recommend that fields not be in a flood plan and are above the ground water table which is one of the criteria looked at during planning for new fields. If water goes into the storm drain system, that water can be treated without issue.

 

Comr. Gerrie – How do you determine existing fields are not meeting demand?

 

Daniel Mauer – Demand comes from permits and reservations and the 2004 report that showed being short of ground support facilities.

 

Comr. Gerrie – What is involved in installing artificial turf? How far down in the ground do you need to go? Thinking of the life that is in the top foot or two of soil that is lost.

 

Daniel Mauer – Generally about six inches.

 

Comr. Gerrie – What is put underneath the turf?

 

Daniel Mauer – First an aggregate base. Then an engineered tile.

 

Comr. Gerrie – What is the life of the artificial turf before needing replacement?

 

Daniel Mauer – Most turf companies warranty for 8 years. Some for 10. We asked that question when we began. The oldest field in the U.S. is in Washington State. It is 15 years old and is currently being replaced. Also depends of level of play. Have determined that SF will use the fields 2 or 3 times more than other municipal fields. Locally, oldest field is at Franklin Square and is 7 years old and is still being used.

 

Comr. Gerrie – What happens to the worn out material when it is replaced?

 

Daniel Mauer – The 2008 task force addressed that issue. Important to look at posted content when installing to make sure it is acceptable to recycle. Have worked with Dept. of the Environment and recycling companies to make sure 100% of the product can be recycled. The company that sells the product will recycle it entirely.

 

Comr. Gerrie – I imagine a bull dozer leveling the site and killing in animals that are in the soil. Are there any contingencies for what is being killed?

 

Daniel Mauer – Have installed 4 fields locally and have not come across a dead animal. Have found that natural fields that have gophers will migrate to adjacent fields once construction activity starts.

 

Comr. Hemphill – Learned that Oceanview Playground has 15,000 kids. There are in GG Park  about 8,000 kids. Why not put it at Oceanview Playground where the kids are more underserved?

 

Daniel Mauer – There was an examination of all potential sites. Oceanview made it on the list of possible sites based on qualifying criteria. However the configuration of the field was not as advantageous as Crocker-Amazon or Beach Chalet. Most completed projects have been in the eastern and southern parts of the city. Trying to even out the distribution. Residents in the north side of the City have been traveling across town to Crocker-Amazon on the southside.

 

Comr. Stephens – What % of GG Park will be taken up by this project, turf and parking?

 

Daniel Mauer – GG Park is over 1100 acres. This project is less than six. So, less than .06% of GG Park.

 

Comr. Stephens – Will the lighting be similar to what is at Sunset Playground?

 

Daniel Mauer – Worked with lighting designers. Original design called for 70’ poles. Computer models showed it could be minimized to 60’ and put on the field itself to lessen impact to surrounding neighborhoods.

 

Comr. Stephens- Will they be on every night? Or just during games?

 

Daniel Mauer – Park is open everyday from 6AM to 10PM. Experience at other parks has shown heavy usage when first opened. Worked with neighbors at Garfield and agreed to turn lights off a little earlier and not use them on Sundays. Willing to work with neighbors and address their issues and concerns. New system is operable on line versus turned on and off manually. So, lights are turned off right at 10PM versus now when someone needs to physically come and turn them off, often a half hour later. Computerized system is set for seasonal shifts and daylight savings, so is more fine tuned.

 

Comr. Stephens – What about impact to migrating birds?

 

Daniel Mauer – Worked with Lisa Wayne of the Natural Areas Department and consulted with Josiah Clarke, natural areas specialist. He gave a list of bird species that are found there throughout the year. No species listed were on the endangered species list. Gave due diligence. Experience at Crocker-Amazon was on nesting birds in the trees adjacent to the lights both before and were there after installation.

 

Noreen Weeden – Chairperson Conservation Committee Golden Gate Audubon –  GGA active since 1917. Mission is to protect native bird life and protect and restore native wildlife habitat. GG Park and adjacent ocean beach are part of the Pacific flyway. Night lights can cause migrating birds to become confused & disoriented because those flying at night use the moon to navigate. In book by C Rich & T Longcore called “Ecological consequences of artificial night lighting” says artificial night lighting effects critical behavior. This lighting will effect birds that nest and roost in western end of the park. Woodpeckers create cavities in trees used by other species. GG Park provides habitat for wildlife. In 1930 the Science Academy published a handbook of birds  of GG Park. 111 species were listed. GG Audubon was involved in the artificial turf task force. It was felt that conclusions were predetermined. So far Rec & Park has completed 6 fields with artificial turf, some with lights. Three more are planned, all with lights. Met with Phil Ginsburg on August 7, 2009 with a letter expressing concerns. On September 14^th, GG Audubon sent a letter to Supervisor Mirkarimi supporting his resolution to stop construction of fields until more information was available. On Dec 9, 2009 wrote to the  Planning Dept. and Rec & Park regarding application of the California Environmental Quality Act, CEQA, Attended community meetings about this project. At one meeting, learned that Rec & Park claimed a categorical exemption for this project. On Jan 12, 2010, GG Audubon filed a CEQA appeal with the clerk of the Board of Supervisors. Rec& Park had filed a class 1 exemption, “no change of use”. Project will have environmental impact. Increased human use. Increased trash. Increase of predator animals attracted to food waste and trash. Decrease of the grass fields which provides foraging habitat for many species of birds. Night lighting will affect the character of the west end of the park. Replacing grass with artificial turf will increase runoff of zinc, cadmium, and lead into the sewer and aquifer. City claims to be green. Replacing fields with green plastic and reducing habitat is not green. Supports ACWC contacting Rec & Park and the Board requesting more information and study on this project.

 

Katherine Howard – Golden Gate Park Preservation Alliance – Which is dedicated to keep GG Park free from inappropriate development. Is a landscape architect. Helped save trees in front of the band shell when the new underground garage was built. Supports an EIR for this project. GG Park was created as urban retreat. In 1873 William Hammond Hall laid out the park to create pastoral views and banish all urban objects. He divided the park into two sections. The eastern part was meant to be very active with institutions, playgrounds, and gardens. The western part was to be a sylvan pastoral landscape. In continues to be the intent in the GG Park Master Plan. The plan intends to slow down random developments in GG Park. Most spaces are designed for a wide variety of recreational uses. The historic relationship between forest and meadow, solid and open spaces should be maintained for the next century.  The Master Plan seeks to preserve wildlife in a variety of habitats. Quotes from William Hammond Hall are preserved in the historic preservation registration application form written and submitted by Rec & Park in 2004 to the Dept of the Interior. We strongly disagree that this project is part of the Master Plan. To give a % of the park that comprise this project doesn’t mean anything. Large %’s of the park are roads, buildings, etc. The western side of the park was designed to be open and natural. The proposed lights are 60’. Surrounding trees are apx. 30’. If one goes to see the sunset at Ocean Beach, 10 minutes before sunset the lights will turn on as if the mother ship had landed. Any lighting along paths involves digging through tree roots. We don’t get the same results of the minimal effect of the lighting by the field  project. The project’s lighting and artificial turf is not a natural habitat. GG park is too important to do this project without a full EIR. We need the public process to proceed.

 

Nancy Wuerfel – member of Sunset Parkside Education and Action Committee, SPEAK– SPEAK approved a resolution to put this project on hold for 6 months so questions about its potential impacts could be resolved before proceeding. Resolution was also adopted by  Coalition for SF Neighborhoods an umbrella group of 45 neighborhood associations. At the Coalition’s Nov. meeting,,  representatives of groups throughout the City were upset by the lack of outreach done by Rec & Park. Since May, there has been outreach to soccer groups but only two public meetings were held in December to inform everyone else in SF. Attended both meetings. Officials failed to mention, at those meetings, of the expansion from 4 to 6 fields. They also failed to mention impacts to the park and Ocean Beach. People care about such proposals to important parts of the City and don’t want to be left out of the decision making process. Public also needs facts about environmental impact to make informed decisions. Four soccer fields exist there now. Minor renovation and gopher control are possible solutions but this has not been offered by Rec & Park. Matter is changing from a children’s playfield to a super sport complex. Impact of this project are not known. The park is also home to wildlife. We don’t know how this project will impact them. Supports request to Supervisors for a full EIR and to hold many more public meetings. Upset to hear tonight that the Minnie & Lovie Ward Ocean View Recreation Center was put on hold in order to focus on this project. Fifteen sites have been identified as locations that actually want these artificial fields.

 

Jamie Ray – ROMP – Has been a neighbor to soccer fields for many years. There are pending lawsuits as what actually leaches out from this artificial turf. December’s two  public meetings brought up concerns about toxicity. Concerned about fencing in an area with zero habitat value is not good for wildlife, The west end of GG park is the quiet naturalistic part of the park. Doesn’t believe there would not be significant impact of birdlife from all the lights. Concern about nocturnal wild mammals such as raccoons  being affected by the lights. Dan had mentioned time play time for the kids was from 2 to 6 PM. Late night is not when the kids will be out there. Doesn’t know who would actually be playing at night. Considers that area to be the prime wildlife habitat in SF. Has seen many paw prints there in the mud after a rain. Concern about lighting impact. Hopes it is an issue that will be discussed. Would like to see well-drained fields with natural grass and with gopher exclusion along the perimeter of the fields. Supports request for more input and study.

 

Comr. Stephens – Why would the lights impact nesting? A lot of birds are cavity nesters.

 

Noreen Weeden – It makes them visible to predators and interrupts their normal sleep patterns. It will make the area undesirable for them.

 

Comr. Stephens – Why can’t they just move?

 

Noreen Weeden – Where? There are not anymore nesting sites nearby. There is no plan for mitigation. There is a lack of cavities in trees. Old trees with cavities are removed. Those further away already are occupied.

 

Jamie Ray – The lights will also affect their sense of time of seasons. Can they move somewhere else? Some birds are territorial. Trees that are old have been cut down in efforts to reforest the park. Cavities are lost when the old trees are cut. It takes many years for the new trees to mature and provide suitable habitat.

 

5A) Public Comment

 

Paul Koski – Long time resident of the west end of the City. Has seen decrease in types of wildlife in the park in those years. One of the reasons for that is loss of habitat. Fencing, lighting, and installing artificial turf will permanently  eliminate any animals that called that area home. Should work to increase biodiversity in that area. Rec & Park’s own analysis shows there are better places to play that serve more students. Leave the west end of the park alone.

 

Kelly Watts – Francisco Heights Association – Synthetic turf is ground up tires. They contain a variety of carcinogens . Common misperception is that they are green because they use ground up tires. Tires come from all over the world. They are pulverized to make the turf. They need to be replaced every 8 years. According to the Washington State Dept. of Ecology, the installation in GG Park will require 24,000 tons of pulverized tire waste. City depts. claim they have a shortage of playing surfaces. In the past few years they have installed 30 acres of synthetic turf. Public support has been recently waning. They are being investigated by CA and three other States for health and environmental risks. Signs posted at such fields restrict the consumption of food and sugar drinks. The signage rules are ignored by evidence of mold and bacterial blooms in existing fields. Food waste mixes with the turf to provide lethal food for small mammals and birds. Waste runoff goes into the storm system.

 

Edward Birget – Lives near Silver Terrace Playground  who’s grass field was converted to artificial turf. Experienced with living with it. Smells like old tires. Is not being maintained properly. Cleaned by air blower which doesn’t get much. Water has been used to cool the artificial field down. Natural grass absorbs heat. Since organic waste doesn’t break down, fields are washed with water and anti-bacterial soap. There is a natural grass area adjacent to the artificial field but has little rubber pellets in it. Doesn’t allow own child to play there.

 

Hope Johnson – Supervisor Eric Mar is under pressure for supporting this from his environmental supporters. Rec & Park’s plan is to privatize sections of the park taking away oversight by ACWC. Free-time use of the fields may be restricted reducing the general public’s access.

 

Leah Grant – Friends of Potrero Hill – Has been to all meetings for Beach Chalet Project. Concerned  about harm to environment in field preparation - in removing one to two feet of existing surface will get rid of roots that anchor sand dunes, therefore nothing will stop blowing sand, increasing erosion in GGP.  Sand blowing in from the beach will not be stopped by the artificial turf and fewer trees. Crocker-Amazon project removed one of few remaining old-growth trees. Jerry Brown outlawed artificial turf with over 40 parts per million of lead.

 

Dr. Elliot Katz – In Defense of Animals – Reminds Commission of its name. Has not heard testimony that this project is for the welfare of animals. Commission’s role is to protect animals. Heard testimony from Audubon, etc, that this project is harmful to native species. Commission’s duty is clear.

 

Lisa Vittori – Supports  Audubon’s position. Feels the public process is often fixed. Sometimes in favor of GG Audubon and against companion animals, and sometimes fixed in ways GGA opposes as in this case. Yet meetings should still be attended. Should support open dialogue discussions. Commends Commission on public process being open for no-kill discussions.  Sees other playing fields not being used, or rarely being used, that would be suitable.

 

Richard Fong – Topping of artificial turf is rubber which is flammable. Bromide is used as a fire retardant which will get into the plants around the fields. Appears to be a choice between playing fields for kids and wildlife. Unsure of which to support.

 

L,Danyielle Yacabucci – Thanks Comr. Hemphill for bringing this issue and the fencing issue of the Outside Lands Concert up. Upset that the City never considers the animals. Park should be for people during the day and animals at night. Commission is doing its job on bringing these issues up. Feels encouraged by these hearings.

 

Nadine May – Lifelong resident of the Sunset and the Richmond. Has not received notice of this project. In favor of sending the letter asking for an EIR.

 

Julene Johnson – Opposes project and support sending letter asking for further evaluation.

 

Martha Hoffman -  Feeds the ferals in GG park. Loves the wildness of the west side of the park. Feels project is deplorable.  Thanks Comr. Hemphill for bringing it forward.

 

Public comment closed

 

Comr. Hemphill – Makes a motion to send letter for an EIR to Rec & Park and to the Supervisors. Seconded by Comr. Gerrie

 

Comr. Stephens – Questions if a motion for an EIR is okay. An EIR was not mentioned in the agenda description of what was proposed.

 

Comr. Routhier – What was written was for a full evaluation of the project which, for a park project, is an EIR.

 

Comr. Gerrie – What is the difference between CEQA and an EIR?

 

Comr. Stephens – CEQA is the standardized process and an EIR is the actual report. The letter will read, “ Requesting a full evaluation of the project including its impacts on wildlife and an EIR

 

Motion passes unanimously.

 

6.Unfinished Business

 

A. Discussion only of no-kill.

 

Comr. Padilla – Met with ACC and SPCA. Heard their objections and suggestions. Comr. Stephens, Brooks, and self met with Richard Avanzino and staff. Heard from them about what it would take to make no-kill a reality in SF., Invited, also, the non-profit interested in facilitating the conversations of the different parties and pulling together the resources.

Learned that the reason why Maddie’s fund could not fund no-kill in SF comprised of shelters, rescue groups, and interested parties, was because ACC refuses to provide statistics of all animals coming into the City shelter in the format required by Maddie’s Fund. Maddie’s fund needs those statistics to start funding and to measure progress after being funded. Was surprised and disappointed after counting on Maddie’s fund money to make it all happen. Avanzino said they could provide millions of dollars but have to report statistics the way they want. Haven’t given up. Will be meeting with Rebecca Katz again to understand their position. SPCA is willing to provide statistics in the required format. Also talked forming a community matrix to come up with standards of what is a savable animal? What is a treatable animal? Standardized behavioral and medical assessments. Still working on legislative draft with input from ACC, SPCA, and rescue groups. Hope to have it back to the Commission and the public next month. Talked about getting rescue groups together to talk about unmet needs. Feels depressed. Expected more progress to report.

 

Comr. Stephens – Feels optimistic. Things are in flux at the moment. Feels it is still doable.

 

Comr. Gerrie – Unclear to what ACC can do to what Maddie’s fund is requiring.

 

Comr. Padilla – Is equally befuddled. Doesn’t understand why ACC is reluctant to provide what Maddie’s fund needs.

 

Public Comment

 

Kathleen McGarr – Fix San Francisco – Thanks Comrs. Padilla, Stephens, and Brooks for not giving up.

 

Lisa Vittori -  Also thanks Comrs. Would like rescue groups to be considered as ad hoc shelters.

 

Dr. Elliot Katz – IDA – Why doesn’t the Commission pass a resolution forcing ACC to fill out reports as required? The Board has authority over ACC. Offers to meet with Rebecca if that would be helpful.

 

Julene Johnson – fixsanfrancisco,org – Talked with Jane Hoffman, Mayor’s alliance of NYC. They started with 5 rescues that went to the mayor. Convinced him to work with Maddie’s fund. Wouldn’t cost the City any money. Their ACC got on board. Now, 140 groups are working together. May have to by-pass ACC at first. It can be done.

 

Cynthia Cox – fixsanfrancisco.org – ACC is a city agency and we as taxpayers should be in control. Supports Dr. Katz. Millions of dollars are at stake. Hopes SF becomes a no-kill city in 2010.

 

Hope Johnson – Sees no-kill as having a lot of components which creates a lot of problems. Lack of resources to separate opinions from assumptions from facts. Suggests require shelters to report outcome of all animals that go to shelters, rescues, etc. Give hard data. Example of assumptions of owner-surrendered animals to SPCA. SPCA changed the definition of owner-surrendered. How much did that change the statistics? Another confusion is separating care of wildlife and companion animals in no-kill movement. Don’t not do something with companion animals because wildlife is not adequately addressed.

 

Nadine May – Thanks for not giving up. Need to keep going to save animals. Likes idea of rescue groups being considered as shelters. Foster homes playing a big part in helping rescues do their work.

 

Richard Fong – Encourages Commissioners to improvise and be creative to find solutions.

 

L’Danyielle Yacabucci – Is optimistic. ACC is set in their ways and needs a push to change. The SPCA also needs to change.

 

Public comment closed

 

Comr. Guldbech – ACC does report their statistics. Asks that ACC be respected and be given an opportunity to tell their side. Wait before passing judgment. Give Rebecca a chance first.

 

Comr. Hemphill – Asks that wildlife be considered. We need a rehab center in SF.

 

7. General Public Comment  None

 

8 & 9 Calendar Items and task allotments

 

Comr. Stephens – Continue no-kill. Also consider changing roles of Chair,
Vice-Chair, Secretary. Comrs., in current positions, can  tell what their position involves.

 

Comr. Routhier – Had voted two years ago to have election terms change from June to January every year but appointments are up in March. Doesn’t know if that should be agendized.

 

10. Adjournment  7:55 PM

 

Respectfully Submitted by

Philip Gerrie

Commission Secretary