5:35 PM

 

1. Call to Order and Roll Call

 

Present Commissioners, Pam Hemphill, Angela Padilla, Laurie Kennedy-Routhier, Philip Gerrie, Andrea Brooks, David Gordon DVM, Rebecca Katz – ACC

 

Absent Commissioners, Sally Stephens, William Herndon SF Police, Bob Palacio – Rec. & Park.

 

2. General Public Comment

 

L,Danyielle Yacabucci – Disappointed that ACC did not involve the SPCA with the cats at the crime lab until after the fact. Hopes that as soon as ACC hears of a problem with feral cats, will involve the SPCA.

 

Richard Fong – Big problems coming up for ACC including depletion of funding from the State. Concerned  about enough money to care for animals not euthanized  under no-kill policy.

 

3. Approval of Draft Minutes from March 11, 2010 Meeting

 

Cynthia Cox – Clarifies comments about Vinnie  deemed vicious by ACC not SPCA. SPCA had a great cat behavior program  that made it possible for Vinnie to make it out of ACC alive.

 

Minutes approved unanimously  with correction from the public.

 

4. Status and tracking of letters of recommendation approved by the Commission, requesting action by the Board of Supervisors.

 

A) Update  on resolution passed by ACWC to recommend that the Board encourage all SF restaurants and retailers not to sell eggs from birds confined in “battery” cages.

 

Comr. Gerrie – Resolution was passed on Tuesday , April 6^th by the Board. It was introduced by  Supervisor Sophie Maxwell. She also introduced a resolution for meat-free Mondays.

 

No public comment.

 

5. New Business

 

A) Discussion/action  to recommend to the Board that they pass an ordinance prohibiting the sale of dogs and cats in pet stores. Ordinance is intended to stop the sale of dogs and cats from puppy mills.

 

Comr. Gerrie – Our Commission  has been struggling for several  months to formulate a no-kill policy to possibly become an ordinance  to make SF a no-kill City. Comr. Padilla  expressed doubt last month that our Commission could agree on no-kill legislation.  Such a policy requires people and resources, two factors that change over time. I wonder if Richard Avanzino could have accomplished what he did then today? I am proposing an ordinance that could reduce euthanasia rates by stopping the sale of companion animals in pet stores. A similar ordinance has passed in three other California cities. The first city to act was South Lake Tahoe  who wanted to preempt  a large pet store, Petland,  from opening in their town. Petland is a major Hunte. Corp outlet. Currently SF has only two stores that sell puppies and has nothing to stop a Petland from moving into SF. Allowing the sale of dogs and cats in SF is inconsistent  with the City’s goal to care about animal welfare. Eliminating the retail sale of dogs and cats from pet stores will encourage  pet guardians to adopt  from shelters , thereby saving animals’ lives and reducing shelter costs. Two questions I would like to decide if our Commission approves this recommendation are how long to allow  existing pet stores to phase out selling their animals and to consider broadening the ordinance to include other animals from pet stores that wind up at ACC. I have invited two speakers to speak on this matter. Rebecca Katz from ACC and Dr. Elliot Katz from IDA, In Defense of Animals.

 

Rebecca Katz  - Not many pet stores sell puppies in SF. However in other counties it has been a problem. As a model animal welfare community we would want to support only selling rescue animals in pet stores. Do see a problem with other companion animals  sold more frequently in SF. Including hamsters, mice, rats, and guinea pigs. People buy two unsexed animals that  wind up breeding and their off spring is dropped of at ACC. ACC charges more than pet stores for those animals to discourage  using them as food so people do not adopt them from ACC. Would appreciate any effort to reduce numbers of small companion animals coming in.

 

Dr. Elliot Katz – President In Defense of Animals – Has been dealing with puppy mills for 15 years. When puppies cannot be bought in stores, far fewer animals will be killed in the nation’s shelters. Female  breeding dogs at puppy mills are viewed as commodities and often kept in horrible conditions. They are kept in cages piled on top of each other and forced to breed twice a year. They are spent after 4 or 5 years and killed by a bullet to the head. On the consumer end, the puppies being sold often have genetic, viral, and parasitic problems. They are often returned because of those problems and are put down as a result. The scale is horrific. Thousands  and thousands of female dogs and puppies. Supports passing an ordinance preventing the sale  of puppies in SF.

 

Comr. Routhier – Are you familiar with the small animal trade?  Who are the sellers of guinea pigs and rats, etc.?

 

Dr. Elliot Katz – It’s probably not as bad as for dogs.

 

Comr. Routhier – What happens to the small animals when they do not sell?

 

Dr. Elliot Katz – They are returned and killed.

 

Comr. Hemphill – We haven’t mentioned small birds such as parakeets.

 

Rebecca Katz – Would be open to including them as well.

 

Comr. Hemphill  - Wonder how it would play out. Would people just go to the East Bay?

 

Comr. Gerrie – That was a concern with the declawing ban. We can’t control where  people go but we have to start somewhere.

 

Comr. Padilla – Pet stores could, instead, partner with rescue groups for animal adoptions.

 

Comr. Routhier – Historically , the Commission has played two roles. One, passing resolutions and legislation to be adopted by other communities.  A snowball effect. Puppy mill legislation would play well into that.  As for small animals, wonders what  the fall out would be from a ban. More sales on Craig’s list? Pet stores make most of their money  in pet accessories. Not sure if banning the sale is the best way to lower the breeding.

 

Comr. Padilla – Does ACC get called when there is, for instance,  a dead hamster at Petco? Does ACC inspect pet stores?

 

Rebecca Katz – We do have the authority to do that. We usually respond to complaints.

 

Comr. Brooks – What is the percentage of revenue small animals have at pet stores? If we move forward on this would pet store owners come out against it?

 

Comr. Gerrie – The current  SF Health Code sec. 49  allows sales of birds, fish, turtles, hamsters, domestic dogs, cats, rats, and mice, and guinea pigs. Two factors. One is lessening the work load of ACC. Two, stopping the pet trade in SF.

 

Comr. Routhier – Rabbits are not sold?

 

Rebecca Katz – There is a prohibition on the sale of rabbits and chicks.

 

Comr. Routhier – Heard from SaveABunny that they are being flooded with rabbits from the Serramonte pet store.

 

Rebecca Katz – Rabbits adopted from ACC, come spay and neutered  which helps.

 

5 A) Public Comment

 

Bill Hamilton – Supports a ban on sale of puppies. A few years ago Potrero Center  Petco offered to have a permanent adoption section for small animals from nearby ACC. ACC refused because, at the time, ACC was suing Petco for mistreating their small animals. Both parties settled out of court. That allowed ACC to accept Petco’s offer. ACC leaders said they couldn’t enter into private agreements with retailers. Yet the Health code allows  ACC to have agreements with private retailers to sell dog licenses. And, accept sponsorship from private  retailers on Pet Pride Day. The endorsement objection is bogus.  ACC should make an agreement with Petco to have their small animals there.

 

Justin Pinkerton – Supports ban. Would like it extended to small animals. Rescues should establish more relationships with  pet stores.

 

Laura Fairbanks – Supports ban. Would like it extended to small mammals  if not further. Interested that one of the two animals banned for sale in SF are rabbits. Because they are  a popular rescue  animal thanks to SaveABunny.  Second point is if the animal is not in the store, there is not impulse buying.

 

Julene Johnson – fixsanfrancisco.org/ACC volunteer – Supports ban. Best Friends has identified “Puppies aren’t products” is one of four main issues they are focusing on now.  Suggest contacting Gregory Castle to see what other legislation is happening around the country.

 

Lisa Vittori – Supports ban. When animals are for sale in stores they are seen as commodities.

 

L,Danyielle Yacabucci – Supports ban. Thinks ACC should partner with pet stores. Perhaps have educational materials on why pet stores are not selling small animals from ACC. Pet stores make their money on supplies not on selling the animals.  Use to have a deal if you adopted an animal from SPCA you could go to nearby Sammy’s pet store and get a discount on their products.  Pet stores want to do the right thing. They don’t want to support puppy mills. Breeding is worse than dog fighting.

 

Richard Fong – Sees problems with a ban. Doesn’t think ACWC has the authority to close down small businesses. Small pets promotes, among young people,  responsibility,  by needing to take care of and clean up after their pet. Perhaps better to sell older animals from puppy mills.

 

Public comment closed

 

Comr. Gerrie – Two pet stores in SF currently sell puppies. Visited both recently. One didn’t have any at the time. The other, in Chinatown had six. I talked with a clerk there who said they only sold about 5 or 6 a month.  He said it wasn’t a big part of their business. This proposed ordinance is more of a preemptive measure.  Question is if to expand it, where to stop. Such a birds? Many more birds are sold in pet stores and so those pet shop owners should be heard before approving an ordinance  ban. Turtles are another  consideration.

 

Comr. Brooks – Would like birds included as well as small animals.  The wild bird trade is another concern about its cruelty practices.  As well as tropical fish. Many birds and fish captured from the wild  die on the way to pet stores. It sounds like there is support for passing it as is. Or, consider including other animals and passing it as one package.  Another  aspect  is mice sold as food to feed pet reptiles.

 

Comr. Hemphill – Turtles could be a problem when owners grow tired of them and are released. As well as snakes being released.  Supports small animals being included but  there are a lot of mechanics to work out.

 

Comr. Routhier – Appreciated  remark  from Ms. Fairbanks that removing animals from the stores  also removes the impulse buying factor. Good idea to contact the various bird and other rescue groups to see what markets may exist for them. If they could put their rescued animals in pet stores in place of existing stock the pet stores may support it.

 

Comr. Padilla – Currently places  rescue dogs through pet stores. Typically requires  written application for a dog , a home visit, proof of home ownership,  or a lease that states the landlord allows dogs. All this helps to mitigate on-the-spot adoptions . Dogs are advertised in advance. Most applicants are pre-screened.  We can approve the concept and let the City Attorney work out the fine details.

 

Comr. Gerrie – It’s good to remember we are just advising the Supervisors.

 

Comr. Routhier – Suggests having more details worked  when advising them. Such as who the supporters are.

 

Comr. Gerrie – We need to do this right and as broadly as possible. Don’t want to rush through it. It needs more time. Commends  most pet stores in SF for not selling pets.

 

Comr. Routhier – Summer camp at the SPCA is approaching involving 100’s of children. A big topic that is taught  is adopting and not buying. Could get letters of support from those children if the Supervisors are considering the ordinance this summer.

 

Comr. Gerrie – Would like to wait until next month  to consider  voting on this in order to gather more information about the other animals.

 

Comr. Brooks – Contacting the rescues would be good to see what groups are most overwhelmed.

 

Comr. Gerrie – If considering birds, would like to contact  those pet stores and give them an opportunity  to speak.

 

5 B) Discussion about expanding/increasing the Behavior & Training division at ACC to meet shelter animals needs. Possibly recommending to the Supervisors that the Annual Salary Ordinance be amended to include a classification for Senior Animal Behaviorist/Trainer.

 

Rebecca Katz – The current head of the Behavior/Training program at ACC, Belinda  is here to answer any questions.

 

Comr. Brooks – The reason for putting this forth is obvious. More resources are needed to address behavior problems at ACC. Has questions for Belinda on who the current team is working on behavior issues at ACC.

 

Belinda Ryder-Loomis  – Is head of the program. Has two other staff members. Works about 24 hours a week. The two other staff members, 7 to 9 hours a week each.  Making a total of about 40 hours a week. Funding covers dog behavior evaluations five times a week. Dog volunteer training twice a month. Doggy play groups three times a week. Funding includes some admin and miscellaneous  services.

 

Comr. Brooks – To accomplish this does your staff go beyond the hours allocated for?

 

Belinda Ryder-Loomis – Yes. Spends more hours volunteering to get those things done.

 

Comr. Brooks – If this could move forward and get funded, how would that play out at ACC?

 

Belinda Ryder-Loomis – Biggest problem now is not being able to train our dogs. Has seen an increase of owner-surrendered dogs that is stretching us to our limit. Need to train incoming dogs to make them more adoptable. Rescues  have helped but they are also overwhelmed.  Extra funding would go to training dogs with minor behavior issues. Extra              funding would also go towards  play-groups.  Play-groups  decrease stress and anxiety  for the dogs. Would like to have it 5 times a week. Extra funding would help towards a behavior hotline. Could  prevent owner-surrenders for minor behavior issues over the phone with a few tips. Extra funding would towards foster programs. Many under-.aged puppies have been surrendered recently.

 

Comr. Brooks – What about cat programs?

 

Belinda Ryder-Loomis – Would like to expand cat evaluation program.

 

Comr. Hemphill – What about working with cats after they have been adopted?

 

Belinda  Ryder-Loomis – Most common problem is litter box issues which can be talked about over the phone.

 

Comr. Routhier  - Would this be an amendment to the Annual Salary Ordinance?

 

Rebecca Katz  - The Annual Salary Ordinance  is used to add positions to an existing department and the Board would have to approve funding.  Current funding for hours Belinda works is coming from Friends of ACC and some from SPCA which has been reduced from past levels.

 

Comr. Routhier – This would definitely fund the work Belinda has described? 

 

Rebecca Katz  - It would and it would be easier if the City had more money.

 

Comr. Padilla – Could we make a case that providing for these two positions would be a cost saver in the long run? It’s obvious that the sooner a dog or cat gets out of the shelter

The less financial burden it would be. It is a fiscally sound policy.

 

Rebecca Katz – Agrees but uncertain if that case would work. It definitely does cost more to euthanize and keep them for adoption in every sense. Not sure how to measure that however. Could do after the fact to show success but not ahead of time. Maybe if other cities had done that to show results.

 

Comr. Hemphill – Is there a credential for an animal behaviorist? Could ACC have such a program for people to volunteer their time and ultimately  earn a credential?

 

Rebecca Katz – Have a lot of volunteers now but need long time people to be consistent and dedicate their time.

 

Belinda – Ryder-Loomis  - There  is a credential for a behaviorist. There is a difference between a dog-trainer and a behaviorist.  It takes an enormous amount of resources to have an accreditation program. Marin Humane has. SFSPCA used to have one as well. Unsure if ACC could have resources. Explored bringing in people to become behavior volunteers versus just dog volunteers.  It took a lot of time. Unable to provide now.

 

Comr. Gerrie – Wonder how often the Annual Salary Ordinance is amended. Is making a case worthwhile?

 

Rebecca Katz – It is reviewed about the same time as the budget. During the year departments can ask for supplementals  as well.  Helpful to have a Supervisor as a sponsor. Then goes to sub-committee.

 

Comr. Brooks – Would like to get going on this tonight . It is a tough sell due to the economic climate.  It is a tangible solution . Funding for ACC is under the Public Protection Department budget.  ACC funding has not had any increases in recent years. There are good reasons to try.

 

5 A) Public Comment

 

Bill Hamilton – Supports ACC hiring an animal behaviorist.  Unsure if ACWC is best forum to go through for that. Vicky Guldbech was  captain in charge of animal control officers. Before Carl Friedman left, he created the new position of Operations Manager for her. That position did not come before this Commission nor was there public input. Carl may be able to advise how Rebecca could obtain a new animal behaviorist  position.

 

Kathleen McGarr -  Thanks Comr. Brooks for bringing this forward. Volunteer’s at ACC. Finds current evaluation methods scary. Would love to see standardized behavior evaluation for cats at ACC.

 

Laura Fairbanks – ACC needs someone to oversee the cat behavior program . Is currently run by former SPCA volunteers.  Animals deserve consistent treatment.

 

Julene  Johnson – From Kat Brown’s statistics, a few months ago, about half the animals killed at ACC are because of behavior  problems.  Consistent evaluation would save more animals.

 

Lana Bajsel – Agrees with previous speaker.  Currently inexperienced staff members are making life and death decisions. Animals need standardized behavior assessments. Certified behaviorist is needed to train volunteers.

 

Laura Massa – Supports new position. ACC needs one qualified individual  to set up programs and to evaluate the animals.

 

Justin Pinkerton – Supports having a qualified behaviorist.   System is now  designed to fail the animal.  System focuses now on possible un-adoptable  behavior. 

 

Lisa Vittori – In the dog room at ACC the conditions are very stressful with the barking. It’s hard for an animal to pass a behavior  test in those conditions.  Today’s solution can be tomorrow’s problem if the behaviorist doesn’t have a no-kill ethic.  ACC is a uniformed agency  as is the fire and police departments. Supports non-uniformed  ACC staff doing public education.

 

L’Danyielle Yacabucci -  Supports a new position at ACC. No talk, so far, about cats. Just dogs. Cats are underserved compared to dogs.  Cats are the most often surrendered animal.

Could ACC have a volunteer development position?  The SPCA used to. Volunteers are ready to help.

 

Nadine May – ACC needs a behaviorist position and standardized evaluations.  Cites example  of a cat rejected  for adoption by ACC & SPCA for hissing. Was rescued by Lana and taken to Pet Smart . Was adopted with 48 hours. Rejects SPCA’s feline-ality  categorization program. Can’t  simplify behavior into a few types.

 

Richard Fong – Needs to hear from William Herndon on this subject. Has sat in on a few of the dangerous dogs hearings. Dog is sent out of county  for behavior testing. There are only about 10 registered animal behaviorists in California.  Unclear  exactly what this position would be. Needs a job code. Will be dealing with deviant behavior in dogs.

 

Public comment closed

 

Comr. Brooks – Glad to hear support from the public. Comments were helpful for ACC, especially  concerning cats.  A training staff person is another important  position to obtain funding for. Would like to move ahead.

 

Comr. Hemphill – Is there a downside to having an unfunded position?

 

Rebecca Katz – There are several vacant positions in the City that are unfunded. Would help this position would be funded. If funding does not happen, would hope a creative way could be found to pay for it.

 

Comr. Hemphill – Can volunteers manage volunteers?

 

Rebecca Katz – Already have that. They are called mentors.

 

Comr. Padilla – Makes a motion for a resolution to recommend to the Board to fund the two positions . Seconded by Comr. Routhier.  Passed unanimously.

 

Comr. Brooks – Open to talking to people about  qualifications for the position  and about standardized procedures.

 

6. Unfinished Business

 

A) Discussion of response from Office of Contract Administration, OCA,  about guidelines for goat companies. 

 

Comr. Hemphill – Received a reply from OCA agreeing on points from last Commission meeting; fencing should not enclose more than an acre in size and not be up for more than two days, goat herders should be present, provide two containers of water at both ends of the enclosure.  Also, notify ACC when a goat contract is signed and when work will commence.  Hopes feral cat feeders can work with goat herders in allowing feeding of ferals.

 

6 A) Public Comment

 

L’Danyielle Yacabucci – Disappointed in the two days. Jamie Ray and SPCA do not recommend the two days. Developing relationships with goat companies  is very difficult. Goats R Us was helpful. Sycamore farms was not. Avoid problems by just asking them to put food down for the ferals. Inhumane to not feed for two days.

 

Lisa Vittori – Solutions can become problems.  Example of using goats, 10 to 15 years ago, viewed as the solution to weed management.  Now, using them creates new problems with fencing etc. Cautious about  trusting any new solution solving  a problem. 

 

Public comment closed

 

Comr. Hemphill – Doesn’t see this as the answer but it will help.  At Outside Lands concert, animals were fenced for 10 days. This isn’t perfect but happy with it as being better than what we had.

 

Comr. Routhier – Requests rereading the lines regarding two-day fencing and contacting ACC.

 

Comr. Hemphill – “Notify ACC when a goat grazing contract  is signed and when work will commence.”  So, there will be notification that will come down to the feral cat feeders. “Fencing shall not be up for more than two days to enclose a particular area.”

 

Comr. Routhier  - Will that be sufficient , by contacting ACC, to notify the feral cat feeders in time?

 

Rebecca Katz – Believes it would.

 

Kat Brown – Believes contract would be signed by the City and the goat company. That would not initiate any response unless there was a complaint.  We would not know who the feeders are which is my concern.  We would notify if we knew  who they are.

 

Comr. Routhier – This, so far, is the reply to our proposals from last month from OCA so what would be our next steps?

 

Comr. Hemphill – Next steps will be that this is the language in new contracts.  Some goat companies already  do these practices. Don’t see a problem with  having it written in a contract.

 

Comr. Brooks – Will you be following up with this to make sure it happens?  To see that it is abided to in the contract and the feral feeders are notified?

 

Comr. Hemphill – Yes.

 

6 B) Discussion only of no-kill policies in SF shelters. Dori Villanon  of the SPCA will present  2009  SFSPCA-ACC partnership statistics . Bill Hamilton will present a new draft ordinance.

 

Comr. Routhier – Speaking  for the SPCA, as an employee,  Dori will not speak tonight  so that there be time to reflect and hear feedback  on the draft ordinance presented by Bill Hamilton.

 

Comr. Brooks – So that will be on the agenda next month?

 

Comr. Routhier – Believes so.

 

Comr. Padilla – Intention and understanding last month was for SPCA to come and explain what  was objectionable and problematic to the Companion Animal Protection Act, CAPA. Puzzled why she didn’t come to address that issue.

 

Comr. Routhier – Thinking was  that there would be new pieces brought up tonight and it all should be considered together especially with community feedback tonight.

 

Comr. Padilla – Would hope that the SPCA would come to every  meeting. Troubled by SPCA wanting to wait. Specific question was, “What is unworkable in the CAPA?” Disappointed that SPCA seems to be ducking the issue. (applause) Especially since Rebecca Katz came  from ACC to speak to that question.

 

Comr. Routhier – Asks that there not be applause to the statement  that the SPCA is ducking the issue. Trying to be as communicative as possible.  Apologizes  for the SPCA. Does not see it as the SPCA ducking out.

 

Comr. Padilla – Would like a firm commitment that the SPCA be here next month to answer proposals around no-kill. Understands if Director Katz would prefer to demure.

 

Rebecca Katz – Is prepared to respond. Many concerns over CAPA are shared by both agencies.  The CAPA drafted by Nathan Winograd essentially restates State law. Significant portions come from California’s Hayden Bill passed in 1998. It shifts philosophy of animal control from rabies and public protection to care and adoption of unwanted animals.  It codified many of the concepts laid out in the ACC/SPCA Adoption Pact. This proposed legislation would be more appropriate in States where such laws do not exist. Passing this local ordinance in SF or anywhere in California could present significant issues when shelters attempting to claim reimbursement funds under the State mandate of Hayden. Since Hayden was a mandate, the State was obligated to cover extra costs by shelters who  followed that law up to $24 million annually State-wide. If the State Controller determines that a local jurisdiction already required to perform specific tasks, reimbursement  would be invalid. In fiscal year  09/10, the Governor suspended the mandate  and would do so for fiscal year 10/11 as well. SF continues to follow these practices prior to the Hayden legislation.  If and when the suspension is lifted it is critical that  we reclaim the costs that are about  $500,000 annually.  In Addition some sections of CAPA diverge from California law around the Veterinary  Practices Act which would make the local law invalid since State law supersedes local law when a conflict exists. Other parts of CAPA already exist such as in the Public Records Disclosure  making CAPA redundant . Finally, some of the specifics, working with rescue agencies,  require more restrictive practices  than we now have. This legislation is not practical for SF animals nor address issues ACC is facing. The push to direct  or legislate the live-saving  efforts of SF’s animal shelters to obtain the evangelical  label promoted by followers of a venerated persona  perpetuates a power struggle and not a good way to use resources. Each time attending a meeting of ACWC in the past year and half, have heard, accusations,  rumors, perceived wrongs,  and insults hurled towards animal welfare providers and City agencies.  Have offered to meet with critics and meet with myself and staff to see what we do. To date only ones to avail of the offer are Commissioners  on this Commission. The policies advocated are not realistic. We are struggling just to maintain current levels of care and service. Door is open to anyone to discuss offers and hear suggestions to improve  operations.  Best way is to pull together to find resources to avoid euthanizing animals  that otherwise might be saved. ACC needs help of the community to foster and adopt. To found and support more rescue groups. To identify sources of sustainable funding. Rather than dictating by law that we foster under age kittens, volunteer to foster or help to find fosters. Rather than mandating that we  work with behavioral dogs identify funding for the behavior and training program. Rather than legislating to reduce the number of small animals euthanized,  help to push for laws such as introduced tonight , prohibiting pet stores sales of companion animals.  Have introduced a resolution for future community and Commission review  to possibly adopt. Hope tonight that anger and blame can cease and move to working together.

 

Comr. Padilla – Thanks Rebecca for her response . Was very responsive to what was asked for. Would like to hear Mr. Hamilton speak now.

 

Bill Hamilton – Proposal, The At-Risk Adoption and Welfare Act, AAWA, being presented has nothing to do with CAPA. It is a completely new proposal.  ACC is doing a good job now but could save more lives of animals. An ordinance can help ACC to do better to comply with State law which already states that no treatable animal  shall be euthanized.   Too many life and death decisions appear  arbitrary and open to question.  In most cases ACC is probably justified in its decision in euthanizing  a treatable animal.  Those decisions  are not transparent . It is natural therefore to assume the worst. My ordinance  is a requirement for more complete and public reporting.  Have received input  from attorneys, rescue groups, and other experts in animal welfare in drafting this ordinance.  From feedback, cut out a lot from original draft. For example this draft say nothing about feral cats, wildlife or custody animals.  ACC is doing a good job in those categories.  Proposed ordinance does not specify the means to reduce or eliminate  the euthanasia or at-risk or savable animals.  Hopes ordinance will  help what is best for the animals.

 

Comr. Brooks – Under definitions of unsavable  (medical) why  put in “multiple causes” versus a single cause?

 

Bill Hamilton – A vet could diagnose unsavable from one cause, multiple causes, too expensive,  and things not even on the list. Now decisions are made by non-vets at ACC.

 

Comr. Hemphill – Statistics for euthanasia of small animals and wildlife could be on the low side. Wildlife has the highest euthanasia rate of all but they excluded in your ordinance.

 

Bill Hamilton – They are included under  generic term “animals”.

 

Comr. Gerrie – Thanks Mr. Hamilton for his work.  Draft is the most doable  version  as it fits into the Health Code. Only concern is the funding of these recommendations.  We can make this into law but would the money to do it follow?  Would this actually help any  animals?

 

Bill Hamilton – Right now animals are not being euthanized  at ACC due to lack of money but due to suffering. There are many solutions that do not require more money. Money should not be a part of the decision process.

 

Comr. Gerrie – I would  assume that ACC is doing all it can with what it has. How would this do more?

 

Comr. Brooks – If money is not needed for some solutions is legislation needed?

 

Bill Hamilton – Legislation will motivate ACC to work with the community.  ACC has not been as cooperative as it could be. ACC is responsible for all the animals in the City. They could encourage SPCA to enforce the Adoption Pact.

 

Comr. Brooks – ACC does not have control of statistics and outcomes from the SPCA nor the rescue groups. The rescue groups take many animals out of ACC and into foster homes but we have no statistics for that .

 

Bill Hamilton – There is a huge difference between the SPCA and rescue groups. Rescues are as individuals, making euthanasia decisions privately with their vet.  SPCA is an institution that controls the lives of animals . People that decide whether  an animal lives  or dies are not always vets at the SPCA and at ACC. Cannot compare rescue groups and shelters.

 

Public Comment

 

Dr. Elliot Katz – Frustrated with everybody.  Maddie’s Fund has millions of dollars. NYC received millions recently from Maddie’s Fund by working together. No one is working together  here. Ludicrous that ACC, SPCA, and others can’t get together to create the plan. With the rescue groups, you will have Maddie’s Fund money.

 

Dori Villanon – Vice-president SF/SPCA – Was not invited to present tonight. Approached Comr. Brooks last week about presenting 2009 statistics tonight. Due to new information presented tonight decided to postpone presentation.   Agrees with Rebecca Katz’s comments on proposed legislation.

 

Rebecca Katz – Did receive an invitation to speak tonight  would not have otherwise known.

 

Julene Johnson – Fix San Francisco – Agrees with Dr. Katz that community can’t get together to save more lives. Communities across the country are getting together  with save-rates higher than SF. ACC & SPCA are not saving as many animals as they can.  Need legislation because nobody is willing to work together.  Maddie’s Fund is willing to provide the money.  Asked for input from ACC volunteers. Have not received 2009 statistics yet. Need monthly statistics to provide transparency in the City’s shelter.  Have examples  of evaluation matrices   developed by at least  nine communities.  Provides practical ways to define behavior to define what is savable and what is not.

 

Laura Fairbanks – fixsanfrancisco.org – Supports Bill Hamilton’s proposal.  Hopes Commission will examine it. Annoyed that Rebecca is tired of hearing community’s complaints.  ACC is supported by tax money therefore  we are owed  to be heard. Have brought no-kill issue for over a year to ACWC and it seems no progress has been made. Want answers.

 

L’Danyielle Yacabucci -  Disturbed and shocked  by # 6 on the AAWA which states that Pact transfers between ACC and SPCA have decreased from  80% to 32%. ACC & SPCA need to cooperate and work together again.  To volunteer at  the SPCA, you need to sign an agreement  stating that you will not say anything against  them. So people don’t volunteer with them. Supports Dr Katz’s statement.

 

Lisa Vittori – Shocked by Rebecca’s remarks. Group present tonight  is the group that does raise money.  We are going through a process of starting to work together again even though it seems like we are not. Even when times were flush ACC and SPCA rejected  adoptable animals.  This has nothing to do with money.  Definition of unadoptable is very narrow. This is an ethical issue not a money issue.

 

Nadine May – Thanks Dr. Katz for his statements.  Cites statement from Rebecca Katz  aired earlier today  in which she states about no-kill. “We are already there. When people hear ‘no-kill’ they think you don’t have to euthanize any animal but you do have to.” Many animals  are turned down for adoption at ACC for treatable conditions.   ACC is not doing enough.

 

Lana Bajsel – Supports legislation. No one in the major shelters have been proactive in resolving this problem.  Reno, Nevada  solved the problem without legislation  by motivated leadership.  Just need to save 600 more animals to make it to no-kill in SF. No option but legislation.

 

Cynthia Cox – Fix San Francisco – Angry  from last month’s meeting.  Pissed at SPCA for cutting programs and people such as the Cat Behavior Program. Or the Hearing Dog Program with two hours notice.  Angry that so many animals are declined from ACC in order to import out-of-county dogs & cats. Angry that the SPCA has abandoned the no-kill philosophy started under Avanzino’s leadership.  Angry at ACC for behavior testing that most cats cannot pass. Angry that  own adopted cats would have been euthanized for treatable medical conditions if not rescued.

 

Hope Johnson – Meeting is public forum to voice concerns.  Public comment is not ‘hurling accusations’ at ACC. Irony is demonstrated tonight  when  Comr. Padilla  requested something specific from the SPCA and they chose  to not do it . Weird logic that  having agreed to be on the agenda because they  were not invited by one specific person they had the option of not showing up. Whether intentional or not, that is where the complaints come from.

 

Kathleen McGarr – Fix San Francisco/ACC volunteer  - Agrees with pervious speakers. Supports legislation.  Impressed by Mr. Hamilton’s draft. Elements of which would like to see in any legislation.  Would like draft to include how many out-of-county animals are brought in. Local animals are killed to accommodate them. 

 

Justin Pinkerton – Supports all previous speakers statements. 

 

Sue Capezuto – Give Me Shelter Cat Rescue – Thanks Bill Hamilton.  Lot of bickering and insulting  so legislation is necessary.

 

Lurella Harris – Volunteered for many years at a humane group, Pets and Pals. Money from Maddie’s Fund should go to all the animals  and all the groups including the rescues.

 

Richard Fong – Bill Hamilton’s draft looks like a rewriting of the Public Health Code. Uncertain of the specific language of the draft.

 

Audrey Kimball – Cats at her store have been adopted.  Supports thinking out of the box as Reno did. Majority of customers believe SF is a no-kill city.  Saddened that we can no longer make that claim.

 

Karen Langley  –  Continues  Cynthia’s statements. Angry at ACC ignoring  volunteer notes about  a cat, Valentine,  making significant  progress yet euthanized anyway.  Angry for refusing to report statistics to qualify for Maddie’s Fund money.  Angry that ACC feels it is doing enough for animals and continues the killing. Angry at ACWC for not having the conviction and  determination to act.  By refusing to act ,Commission is continuing an outmoded philosophy of killing animals.  Request Commission endorse no-kill legislation.

 

Irena – Give Me Shelter volunteer – Request of Rebecca Katz if copy of her resolution  available on the web or some other way.

 

Public Comment Closed

 

Comr. Brooks – Addressed Maddie’s Fund idea at an earlier  meeting. Possibility was explored by Commissioners with Maddie’s Fund concerning requirements of reporting.

Did research with other humane shelters who complied with reporting requirements and had applied for Maddie’s money  but did not get it. It is not a guarantee that money will be given based on the experiences of other communities.  Has talked with friends and others working in no-kill shelters in NYC. Heard back that things were  not going well as it appeared. Some changes were being made but not confident in following their efforts. Tompkins County has been viewed as a leader but learned that they only accept animals by an appointment basis and is their shelter is full of caged animals.  Keep in mind when talking about different communities that rural ones have different resources such as more space for an owner to keep more dogs.

 

Comr. Gerrie – Have been working  on this issue for a long time. Comr. Padilla stated last month that nothing will get done with out the shelter’s approval.  This is not the way to save animals. If it was, we would have approved something by now.  Nothing is getting resolved. I would like to propose that we drop the legislative approach. There is too much disagreement.  Maybe those that want it can do a ballot initiative.  I would like to work on things that are doable such as banning the sale of dogs and cats. Criticizing people does not make  them change.  Would like to move on.

 

Comr. Hemphill  - Tend to agree with Comr. Gerrie. Also tired of listening to the comments.  We only need to save 600 more animals. That shouldn’t be too hard to do. Can’t do it by scrapping. 

 

Comr. Padilla – Not as interested in legislating no-kill as taking steps to make it operational.

Originally  thought CAPA was a good idea but after talking with Rebecca and others saw that it had a lot of problems.  It wasn’t as easy to draft and implement  as we thought it would be. Glad that Bill Hamilton  took up the invitation to draft something. Was personally stumped.  Not convinced  legislation is the answer either. What is it in legislation that will change an outcome?  Looked into Maddie’s Fund and learned there was no there there. It might work in other settings. Perhaps invite Berkeley  to come and tell us how they did it. Happy to look at Bill’s legislation more carefully but doesn’t believe any legislation will get off the ground.

 

Comr. Gerrie – How do we go about making a motion to decide not to continue  the legislative approach?

 

Comr. Padilla – Could make a motion that sitting Commissioners will not  entertain any methods of legislation.  Would vote against it because would not want to foreclose  any future possible drafts including Bill’s draft.

 

Comr. Hemphill – Could we table it for three months? Just talk about solutions that are doable?  Not legislation.  Hears comments from the public but they are not new.  Going round and round.

 

Comr. Padilla – Would like to consider the brand new proposal proposed tonight.

 

Comr. Gerrie – Propose to consider Bill’s proposal , wait  until Sally comes back and consider the matter next month.

 

Comr. Brooks – We also received a proposal from ACC which should also be looked at and discussed next month.

 

7. General Public Comment

 

LisaVittori – Doesn’t understand Commission”s relationship to the SF/SPCA.Seems schizophrenic.  Some ways it is public. Other ways is private.  In previous meetings  it was decided that SPCA issues were  not to be talked about.  The SPCA is an active partner in all of this. Not for or against  the SPCA but about accountability.  They are either a full partner or not. Uncomfortable with Comr. Routhier serving in two rolls, as Commissioner and as spokesperson  for the SPCA.

 

Dr. Elliot Katz – Would like to hear more about just why applying to Maddie’s Fund is hopeless. IDA is willing to put up $2500  to pay someone to spearhead doing this to know just what is expected from SPCA and ACC. If ACC is unwilling,  go to the Supervisors to spearhead the process. The effort to try to get the money would foster working relationships even if nothing comes of it. Sees a lack of clarity in not trying.

 

Bob Jenkins – SF Zoo – Thanks SaveABunny  for their participation during the spring break  building awareness about  all aspects of taking care of bunnies. SF ZOO will partner with Pedigree, the pet food company,  in “Meet your best friend Day” on May 22. They are recruiting 15 shelters and rescue groups  to come down to the zoo and set up for adoptions in the zoo parking lot. If any group is interested contact  Danny Latham at 415-753-7087.

 

8 & 9 Calendar items and task allotments

 

Comr. Brooks – There will be follow up on new business items 5 A & B as well as no-kill and a presentation about statistics.

 

Adjournment 8:25 PM

 

Respectfully submitted by

Philip Gerrie

Commission Secretary