2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000
5:45 PM
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
Present Commissioners, Laurie Kennedy-Routhier, Angela Padilla, Sally Stephens, Philip Gerrie, Pam Hemphill, Rebecca Katz – ACC, William Herndon – SF Police, David Gordon – DVM
Absent Commissioners, Bob Palacio – Rec & Park
2. General Public Comment – None
3. Approval of Draft Minutes for August 13, 2009
3. Public Comment
Cynthia Cox – Corrects statement about her time of 16 years as cat behaviorist at SPCA adding that there was only one cat they could not succeed with.
Public comment closed
Comr. Routhier – Was not present at last meeting can I vote on minutes?
Rebecca Katz – Yes. You can trust representation of the Meeting by fellow Commissioner or have reviewed tapes.
Minutes approved unanimously with correction from the public.
4. Chairperson’s report and opening remarks
Comr. Stephens – Four current Commissioners were reappointed by Supervisors. Two Joint Zoo meetings scheduled this month.
4. Public Comment – None
5. Status and tracking of letters or recommendation requesting action by the Board
A) Update Commission’s recommendation of ordinance banning declawing in SF.
Comr. Stephens – Supervisor Mirkarimi introduced it to the Board before they went on vacation. Assigned to City Operations and Neighborhood Services sub-committee. Date for hearing not set yet. Earliest would be September 28th. Committee meets second and fourth Monday of the month. Encourages public to let Supervisors know if they support the ban.
5 A Public Comment
Richard Fong – Was there a vote by Commission on banning declawing?
Comr. Stephens – Yes, in July we voted for it.
6. Unfinished Business
A) Follow up report on Outside Lands Festival. The impact on wildlife and efforts to mitigate that impact.
Comr. Hemphill – Reads report to Rec & Park. Asks Commission’s support for the report.
In August, 2008, a three mile long fence was installed for the first festival in GG Park for ten days trapping feral cats, their feeders, and wildlife. Concert promoters provided passes for the feeders to provide food and water. Nothing was done for the wildlife. In October 2008 ACWC sent a letter of concern about the wildlife. This year a request was made for a gap under the fencing to allow wildlife to water. Initial request was for six inches, which was denied. Then three inches, which was denied. Promoters claimed they needed the fence to be tight to the ground for security. Alternative plan was to provide wildlife with water inside the fence. Concert promoters provided water and access to several volunteers to provide water with in the fenced area at seven sites. SPCA provided dry food. Daily inspection showed that water and food were being used by wildlife inside the fence. The feral cats were feeding in normal locations so they were not looking for food. Future concerts are planned. There needs to be planning in advance to provide for wildlife. Animals can live about a week without water. Dehydrated animals may never recover to hunt successfully and die unseen. Planning needs to involve mapping the enclosed area to provide adequately for wildlife or a solution about the fence itself to allow for escape routes. Wildlife should not be ignored.
Comr. Routhier – Who was spearheading requests for services? And, how do you think the feeding effort went this year? Could it be improved upon?
Comr. Hemphill – I made requests to Rec & Park. The ideal solution would be to have gaps under the fence. In the future seeing the maps where the fence will go will help to identify wildlife areas.
Comr. Routhier – Thanks Comr. Hemphill for the work. Suggests adding in the first paragraph what is being requested which is well summarized at the end.
Comr. Hemphill – This is a report but could attach a request when sent.
Comr. Stephens – Did you find any resistance from the organizers?
Comr. Hemphill – They were very pleasant but didn’t understand about wildlife. Working with Security people were unaware.
6A. Public Comment
Richard Fong – Has personal concern about wildlife in concert area since last year. Wants mandate that water should be provided. Wants letter to support collaboration between Rec& Park, ACC, and ACWC. Wants ACC to monitor the Outside Lands festival during the event, paid for by festival organizers.
Julene Johnson – Supports sending letter. Supports Comr. Routhier suggestion to be more specific. Wants ACC to be involved.
Kathleen McGarr – Supports sending letter. Commends Comr. Hemphill. Expresses concern for wildlife.
Public Comment Closed
Comr. Routhier – Suggests setting a date to follow up for next year. Makes a motion to send the letter. Seconded by Comr. Gerrie
Comr. Stephens – Report will be attached to the letter? Thanks Comr. Hemphill for her work.
Motion passes unanimously.
6 B) Discussion only of no-kill
Comr. Padilla – This problem needs a two-pronged approach after much research and discussion. First prong is a form of legislation modeled after Companion Animal Protection Act, CAPA. Second prong is a City-wide working group of shelters, rescue groups, veterinarians, behaviorists, and other animal professionals gathering to work under an existing 501c-3, charitable animal foundation. Model it after the Best Friends Organization spoken about by Greg Castle. Will be traveling to Utah to meet with Greg with him and others of the No More Homeless Animals organization to get hands-on guidance and support. Afterward, hopes to meet with board of directors of local existing non-profit and present plan using existing resources. Intends effort will encourage cooperation among existing parties to reduce euthanasia rates in SF. Without a City-wide working group, legislation is meaningless.
Passes out draft of legislation.
Will take time for all stakeholders to look it over and make comments. Hopes it will provide a set of guidelines and rules for shelter groups and rescue groups conduct themselves to achieve higher levels of adoption.
This proposal differs from CAPA in the following: defines dangerous dogs as not only dangerous to humans but also to other dogs; original legislation included euthanizing puppies with just parvo virus, this includes euthanizing for distemper as well. Feels original CAPA had too great a detail in informing public of euthanasia statistics, this leaves more discretion to the shelters. This doesn’t include a private right of action by which a citizen can sue an organization or group for violation of this ordinance. The power to sue should be vested in the City Attorney’s office. Doesn’t think it is helpful to the animals to allow anyone to sue for anything they don’t like or if they are disgruntled.
State statutes on the books which already allows the public to sue. This is a draft proposal only. Invites feedback.
Comr. Hemphill – What about dogs that kill cats?
Comr. Padilla – Had considered it. Is open to including that as well. Some breeds of dogs are breed to kill cats and should never be off-leash.
Comr. Herndon – From Vicious Dogs Hearings, has seen many instances of different breeds killing cats even when on-leash.
Comr. Padilla – What about when a cat wanders into a dog’s backyard? Does that come up?
Comr. Herndon - Yes, it is a case-by-case evaluation. Many factors have to be considered.
Comr. Stephens – The reason you are defining “vicious dog” is for allowing it into a shelter or for euthanasia?
Comr. Padilla – There are two different levels “vicious” and “dangerous” for being made available to the public, to rescue groups, to be euthanized. It’s on page three of the ordinance.
Comr. Stephens – To the second prong, spoke with Gregory Castle, who will provide guidance and resources but no financial resources. They don’t provide that. A representative from Best Friends can come to SF and hold workshops to help people working together. He said it was better to work with an existing non-profit versus creating a new one. An existing non-profit can get grants.
Comr. Gerrie – Can this be posted on our website?
Comr. Stephens – Yes, it can be posted as a supporting document.
Rebecca Katz – Thanks all who have participated in this process. Thanks staff at ACC for their dedication and passion to saving animals. Is dedicated to the principals of no-kill. ACC has been fulfilling that pledge. Animals that are euthanized are only for medical or behavioral reasons. Have not done it alone. Helped by rescue partners and the community. Always trying to do better, especially for “other” animals who are euthanized for lack of space. No-kill movement is geared towards cats & dogs. Legislation would prioritize those lives over “others”. Troubled by the label “no-kill”. Community at-large does not understand it the same way as those in this room. Have heard many comments about ACC as a place where animals are put down and people don’t want to adopt there because it is a sad place. Most people believe no-kill animals are not put down, period. Would like a better phrase to have common usage. Had spoken to the Commission that what was needed was more money, better public education about ACC, more foster homes, and to come together as a community and work together. Have worked closely with SPCA for fifteen years. Wants to continue working with SPCA through collaboration not legislation.
Comr. Hemphill – Overwhelmed by the details of proposed legislation. Would like to see more prongs such as working on more spay/neuter efforts. 95% of dogs from Rescue Dog were still intact. Need to stop the inflow.
Comr. Padilla - The two prongs, I propose, are legislation and the road map to no-kill. They go together. One role of our Commission is to propose legislation to the Supervisors. Role of City Attorney is to assist Supervisors in reviewing, drafting and helping to decide if it is a good idea. Doesn’t think legislation alone is the answer. Proposed legislation has nothing in it about mandating any specific numbers.
Comr. Hemphill – The focus is still on cats and dogs.
Comr. Padilla – It’s all in the ordinance. Reminds Commissioners that it is a draft only and just a starting point for discussion. Welcomes future inputs and questions.
6 B. Public Comment
Richard Fong – Good time for this type of legislation looking at the health aspect because of national focus on healthcare. See problems with selective behavior programs such was done to pit bulls at ACC in which half were euthanized. Supports legislation that keeps more animals alive.
Julene Johnson – Fixsanfrancisco.org - Reason for legislation is that savable animals are still being killed. This is proven by the rescues that save many of those animals rejected by ACC & SPCA. If a rescue disappears, wants the City to provide resources. Talks about article in Northside Magazine by Susan Reynolds who researched it on her own. Article addresses issue of power differential in the City, spay/neuter, of out-of-county animals and the resource issue. (Hands out copies to Commissioners) Suggests also Commissioners look at last five years of data from ACC. Look for trends of spay/neuter, owner-surrendered and how many animals rescues are taking. Approach it analytically. How do we fine tune the needs for SF?
Dr. Siporti Himchai – Has written letters to landlords to support her patients needs for service animals. Dogs and cats help the health & fitness of their guardians. They help increase their longevity. Encourages everyone to consider all the positive roles companion animals play.
Hope Johnson – Fixsanfrancisco.org – Supports legislation. It would help educate public on definition of no-kill in a consistent way. SPCA in special position. Has non-binding adoption contract with ACC. Not obligated to maintain services because they are private. That is an unfair advantage. Legislation would level playing field. Supports only City Attorney’s office pursuing violations of the ordinance.
Fran Zapini – Has seen a change of policy at SPCA. They are now rejecting good dogs and cats. Needs to be corrected.
Diane Amble – We the People Pets - Is running a similar initiative State-wide. Supports legislation with some changes. Supports using the word, “no-kill”. Upset about section 6 number 9 “Unweaned animals impounded without their mother may be killed if foster care can’t be found.” Should prohibit killing any puppies or kittens. Individuals should also be able to sue. Not keen on using Best Friends. They are an outsider. Current head of SPCA is an outsider.
Kim Tso – Supports ban on cat declawing. Commends Commission for that and Comr. Padilla draft legislation. Need it because SPCA is taking dogs from other shelters and not upholding their part of Adoption Pact. Wants time of holding adoptable animals increased from two days in Part VII section 6 (b) 2& 3. Cites fostering a rejected cat that was later adopted. Would have been euthanized if had not been fostered.
Kathleen McGarr - Requests letter sent to the Commission, by fixsanfrancisco.org, on July 24, 2009 be added to the minutes for tonight and be part of the public record.
Comr. Stephens – If you want to read your statement as public comment it can be added. Letters sent to the Commission are public record. We can provide links to other websites.
Comr. Hemphill – Things are sent to us but are not available on our website.
Comr. Gerrie – In the past, when a letter was longer than three minutes, different members of the public would just read their three minutes worth.
Comr. Stephens – Wants to check with City Attorney for fairness that others that may not agree with you are given the same opportunity.
Nadine May – Points out that saving kittens and puppies is not more important than saving adult dogs and cats. Has had similar experiences to Kim Tso of fostering a kitten than getting it adopted into a good home. ACC called Lana Bajsel recently and was offered 17 cats. She couldn’t take that many. Thinks many were adoptable. Comment on a Commissioner’s recent statement that SPCA only takes out-of-county animals when there’s a shortage of local animals. Contends they are taking the place of local animals. No-kill must start with local animals first.
Tina Ahn – Director of Communications SPCA – Reads letter by Jan McHugh-Smith. “Has been difficult year economically. Animals number one priority. Took office two years ago. Increased save rate. Replaced outdated hospital to serve community better. Live release rate for last year is up to 87% with help from ACC and local rescue groups. Up 2% from 2007. Has gone beyond no-kill to save 1000’s of treatable animals. Adoptions of cats and dogs increased from 3602 in 2007 to 4265 in 2008. Taking animals from outside shelters helps to save as many animals as possible from euthanasia. Compassion for animals does not have City borders yet committed to local community. SPCA offers; animal assistance therapy at no cost in SF, offers through Humane Education program, animal safety & care, offers animals for adoption fees much less than cost as well as medical care.”
Cynthia Cox – Reads letter from FixSanFrancsico.org. addressed to Commissioners. “Thanks Commission for their work on no-kill. Supports legislation that would ensure that no savable animals are euthanized. Supports legislation on the Companion Animal Protection Act (CAPA) Commission offered at the July 9th meeting a document titled “One possible road map to no-kill in SF”. Several programs in that document are in place. Others need major reform. Programs listed need a legally binding framework such as; Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR), low cost spay/neuter, SF residents have access to low-cost dog training classes, provide free behavior hotline to SF residents, maximize several lifesaving programs such as adoption fairs, subsidized, medical care, education outreach, and foster programs. These programs need top priority to achieve no-kill.”
Pat Lotspeich - Continues reading letter. ‘SF has no excuse for killing 13% of our cats and dogs. Reno, NV and Charlottesville, VA kill fewer than 10%. Legislation would permanently change this. SF would kill many more animals without the help of the local rescues that take animals rejected by ACC and SPCA. Shelters need to develop programs that will save lives currently saved by rescue groups. Legislation will need cooperation towards common goal of saving sheltered animals. No-kill should apply to all companion animals not just dogs & cats. Shelter’s primary role should be saving SF animals first. SPCA brought in over 1000 animals last year. SF can mentor other communities to lower their kill numbers.”
Kim Durney – Grateful Dogs Rescue – Continues reading letter, “ Legislation requiring no-kill sends a strong message on how SF expects its animals to be treated. SF shelters should have standardized criteria of when to kill an animal. To reduce number of killed animals these items should be legislated: 1) SF shelter’s primary roll should be to save animals. 2) Comply with Hayden Law which requires shelters to transfer animals to rescues. 3) Make TNR SF City policy. 4) Establish uniform criteria for when to kill animals. 5) Give priority to SF’s own animals. 6) Prohibit killing animals based on arbitrary criteria such as breed. 7) Require notification of when surrendered animals will be killed. 8) Refuse to kill savable owner surrendered animals when requested by the owner unless is within criteria of #4 above. 9) Require shelters to report monthly their statistics rather than yearly. 10) Provide free and/or affordable spay/neuter for all low-income San Franciscans 11) Require all shelters to expand adoptions hours and services. 12) Require shelters to involve volunteers in all aspects of animal saving endeavors. Legislation is necessary to accomplish no-kill in SF. It is doable and within reach.”
Public comment closed
Comr. Gerrie - Questions how City can legislate what the SPCA, a private organization, runs their business.
Comr. Padilla- State and local governments can pass ordinances that compels or prohibits behavior of both public and private actors. Examples; private employers cannot discriminate in hiring or firing. Private schools cannot abuse children. Private actors can be sued for torts that public actors are immune from. One can sue private-practice doctors or vets. Most litigation is against private companies.
Comr. Hempill – Does this reach vets in private practice that are asked to put down a pet?
Comr. Padilla – This legislation only reaches public and private shelters.
Comr. Hemphill – When was the last time that happened?
Comr. Gordon – An agent of the deceased owner of an animal had wanted it euthanized. Would not do it. Animal was healthy but old. Agent may have gone elsewhere. Doesn’t think many vets would do it. Have not heard of cases from other vets for many years.
Comr. Hempill – SPCA is doing TNR work. Wants to make sure they get credit for it.
Comr. Gerrie – Question about the State law that goes into effect on Jan 1 which would prevent SF from passing the declawing ban. Would this proposed legislation be affected by that law?
Comr. Padilla – That has been an ongoing question as how local laws relates to Sate laws. If one supersedes the other. Doesn’t see a conflict as this ordinance provides greater protection than State law. City attorney will need to determine its legality.
Comr. Gerrie – The declawing ordinance will provide greater protection of cats than the State is willing to do.
Comr. Stephens – The State law is specific to regulating licensed professionals in the healing arts. Another example, in the newspaper, was that of banning of a plastic surgery procedure by a local law that was passed.
Comr. Gerrie – to Rebecca Katz, the State has passed a law temporarily reducing the holding time for animals from 6 to 3 days. Will that affect ACC?
Rebecca Katz – The law suspends the Hayden Bill mandate passed in 1999 requiring the holding period be a reimbursable six days. That holding time is what SF was already doing and we don’t intend to go backwards.
Comr. Hemphill – Is there a notification procedure for euthanasia to rescue groups?
Rebecca Katz – Rescues can place a request on any animal of interest to be notified if they will be euthanized. If the animal is not adoptable for behavior or medical reasons, will reach out to rescues before euthanization.
Comr. Padilla – SPCA has recently started a similar process. At ACC, it is an informal process. Many rescues don’t know about it. This legislation requires shelters to create a roster of 501c-3’s to reach out to. Creates two way communication. Rescues know they can do this. Shelters know who is out there by the roster.
Comr. Stephens – Does ACC euthanize an animal if an owner surrenders it and wants it done?
Rebecca Katz – Yes, once assessed if it is suffering. If it is in good health, we will not euthanize.
Comr. Padilla – That practice is consistent to what the legislation proposes.
7. General Public Comment
Cynthia Cox –Thanks ACC for not euthanizing a particular cat brought in a few months ago. It was tagged, “ORPTS”. Wondered what that meant. ACC Vet informed her it was, “Owner Requested Put to Sleep”. ACC would not do it.
Diane Amble – State resolution about no-kill was stopped. The governor didn’t like the Hayden Act which rewarded killing. The State pays, in their mandate fund, for killed animals. Thinks its about $70 a dog. Suggests, instead, there be a reward for adopted animals of $35. Would like the Hayden Act amended to reward adoption instead of for killing.
Public comment closed
8 & 9 items to put on the Calendar for future Commision Meetings and Task Allotments
Comr. Stephens – Homework will be to read through Comr. Padilla’s draft and bring suggestions and comments to the next meeting.
10. Adjournment 7:30 PM
Respectfully submitted by
Philip Gerrie
Commission Secretary