What's New?

What's Going On Now? 

Elections

Election 2004 

Make a Difference

Contribute to DogPAC 

Other Sites

San Francisco DOG 
Fort Funston Dog Walkers 
Ocean Beach DOG 

Email us at:

dogpac@hotmail.com

Miguel Bustos

DogPAC Questionnaire
District 9

1. What have you done on behalf of the dog owning community and what will you do in the future?
   

   I have met with numerous dog owners and discussed their concerns. I want to work with dog owners and with their expertise, develop a workable plan for the use of our city parks. My partner owns a dog and has been active in the dog community for many years (rescue work, PAWS, obedience trainer, pet therapy, and national liaison to the American Kennel Club as well as president of two different local dog clubs). He has convinced me of the importance of off-leash areas for our dogs. Responsible dog owners should not be denied the use of city parks. If I am elected, you will have a true dog lover and advocate in City Hall.

2. The only real oversight mechanism the Board of Supervisors has with regard to the operating departments is the power of the purse: that is, the Board must approve the budget. Would you be prepared to withhold portions of a Department's budget if the Department was managing the money poorly, reporting to the Board inadequately, or failing to develop reasonable public consensus? Please describe.
   

   I am a strong believer that the city should be accountable to its constituents. I will always hold department heads accountable to make sure that money is being managed properly and reporting is done with absolute due diligence and in a timely manner. I am a strong advocate and believer that true public process is essential to achieve balance and social justice, therefore only good faith efforts to include the public in the decision making process with get the green light from me.

3. Currently, the Recreation and Park Department has 10-15% of the city's playing fields locked up and chained shut. RPD is in the process of claiming hundreds of acres of parkland as natural habitat areas where public access will be very restricted if allowed at all. Critics have said that the goal of the Rec & Park Department is Parks without People. Will you work to promote public access to public parkland? How?

   I am advocate for preserving as much open space as possible. I also feel that it is important to maintain and care for our Natural Areas. Having said that, I also think it's important to remember that we are living in a very densely populated urban setting and that having access to as many of our green spaces is essential to living a sustainable and healthy lifestyle. For many people in San Francisco, especially renters, our parks are their backyards and we must make sure that we allocate space for the wide variety of recreational activities that exist in our city.

4. Will you work to promote tolerant, multi-purpose, shared-use of parks? How?

   Most definitely! I think that most San Franciscans can agree that our parks and open spaces are what makes our city great. I have much experience in bringing people together, and mediating through difficult decisions. I would advocate for a comprehensive Recreation Needs Assessment, which would help determine what the recreational needs are in each neighborhood. Many of our city parks and recreation facilities are way behind the curve in meeting the needs of its neighborhoods.

5. Most of us believe that it is reasonable to regulate certain incompatible uses of public spaces. For example, most of us would agree that horses should not be allowed on the golf course and dogs should not be allowed in children's playgrounds. Would you feel differently if you discovered that the dogs in a children's playground belonged to the parents and their kids?

   The solution to this problem is not based on who owns the dog, but rather needs based on a uniform and fairly applied set of guidelines. I would be open to a discussion of family pets accompanying their owners into a playground area.

6. Do you think the Recreation and Park Department provides adequate public process for park policies? Would you be willing to intervene in Rec/Park business if there were inadequate public process?
   

   I think for the most part, no. The department has had much difficulty reaching out to the public and most times it has been reactionary, rather than proactive public process. I think it is the duty of the Board of Supervisors, if not now, it will be once I am elected, to make sure that the public process be more than adequate. My experience has shown that if the public does not gain ownership of an initiative through public process, ultimately much time, money and trust is spent and lost.

7. Have you ever visited on or more of the original 19 dog exercise areas approved by the RPD over 20 years ago? Which ones? How would you characterize the conditions you saw?

   Yes I have, and frankly, they are in extremely poor condition. Take for example the dog run area in Golden Gate Park. It is brown and barren and dusty. It is obvious that although dog owners try to spruce it up themselves, it is in poor condition.

8. Statistics show that children are more likely to grow up with a family dog than with both parents; that dog owner/guardians have lower blood pressure and cholesterol levels; and that elderly pet owner/guardians are more active and less depressed. Do you believe that dogs play an important role in society? What is your personal experience with dogs in your life - now or in the past?

   Absolutely! I had a dog as a child and can remember many fond moments with him. My partner's dog has found her way into my heart (see photo). I understand the importance of a family dog (or any pet) especially with the elderly, disabled, or cognitively delayed. My partner has described extremely moving situations of his work with pet therapy in the pediatric setting. Many studies have shown empirically that owning a pet increases your life span, and enriches the life you have!

9. San Francisco's dog population is estimated by the Dept. of Animal Care and Control to be between 100,000 and 120,000. Roughly 25% of the city's households includes a dog. Many dog owner/guardians are single and/or elderly, and recreation with their dog is their primary or sole form of socialization, recreation and exercise. Do you believe that off-leash recreation can be viewed as a benefit for people - not just for their dogs?

   As stated above, I am convinced of the therapeutic aspects of pet ownership. A man with advanced HIV/AIDS told me that his pets (a dog and a cat) give him reason to get out of bed every day. Is there anything more powerful than that?

10. Do you believe that walking a dog off-leash is a valid form of recreation on a par with picnicking, Frisbee, hiking, bird watching, soccer, etc.?
    

    Yes. It's a great form of exercise for both people and dogs..

11. What positive things do you see about off-leash recreation in our parks?

    It is a great way to increase the love and bond between people and dogs. It is also a wonderful way for dogs to exercise, and to "let off steam". A well-exercised and happy dog is far less likely to be a problem dog, i.e. barking and engaging in destructive behavior while his owner is at work. I have also seen how walking your dog at a neighborhood park increases a sense of community, where new friendships are made and people know each other's and their dog's names.

12. Do you believe that public authorities should make regulations to accommodate people who are afraid of dogs?

    It is a great way to increase the love and bond between people and dogs. It is also a wonderful way for dogs to exercise, and to "let off steam". A well-exercised and happy dog is far less likely to be a problem dog, i.e. barking and engaging in destructive behavior while his owner is at work. I have also seen how walking your dog at a neighborhood park increases a sense of community, where new friendships are made and people know each other's and their dog's names.

13. Some people have fears, phobias, and dislikes of other people in our society. Gays, African-Americans, Asian Americans, dog owners, and teenagers are some targets of such fears. Is it appropriate to restrict the access to public places of such groups simply because some people are afraid of them or dislike their behavior in public?

    Being a gay Latino man familiar with being marginalized and facing other people's fears, phobias, dislikes and out right isms, I must point out a very clear difference in being Gay, African-American, or Asian American - the fact that none of us had a choice in the matter, that's who we are, that's the way we were born. Now that doesn't mean that I don't understand the fears, phobia and the dislike that dog owners face, on the contrary, I understand deeply. Like with most struggles, it is going to take outreach, education, dialogue and respect not restrictions to truly solve this issue.

14. If you answered questions 12 and 13 differently, please explain.

    N/A

15. Most people agree that there is too much rudeness in public these days, which sometimes escalates into violence, such as "road rage". There is certainly more rudeness than we would like in our public parks these days between joggers, bicyclists, dog owners, parents, etc. Conflict and rudeness may occur when people share limited park resources. What is the appropriate response by public agencies to individual conflict or reported "rudeness" in parks?

    Most conflict stems from misunderstanding. We need to have open, respectful and constructive dialogue to reach a mutual level of understanding. This is San Francisco; there is no place for "rudeness" here!

16. San Francisco's dog bite rate is about 40% of the national average - and most bites occur in or around the home - not in public spaces. Many, many more children are injured in sports and playground accidents than by the family or neighborhood dog. Sergeant Herndon of the SFPD "Doggy Court" attributes SF's low bite rate to increasingly responsible dog owners who socialize and exercise their dogs off-leash. Is this a surprise to you? Does it change your concept of the value of adequate off-leash areas for everyone, not just dog owners and their dogs?

    No, this does not surprise me. It only reinforces my position.

17. Through its Natural Areas Program, the Rec/park Department is spending thousands of dollars cutting down healthy Eucalyptus trees because they are not native. At the same time, through its Construction Program, Rec/Park is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars (almost $200,000 in Holly Park alone) to purchase and plant Canary Island palm trees. Does this make any sense to you?

    While, cutting down any healthy trees does not make sense to me, I think that each community around a park should have the opportunity through public process to determine the activities, features and plant life that ultimately get implemented. Although, one community may go for the expensive trees, another may chose more benches and a people/dog water fountain.

18. A book-length study conducted and published by the Urban Land Institute shows that the San Francisco Rec/Park Department is among the 3 best-funded big-city Rec/Park Departments in the country. Nonetheless, even in strained economic times such as these, when city heath and other services are being cut, the Board of Supervisors added $1 million to Rec/Park's budget. Do you think this is good government?

    I don't believe that any kind of waste is good government. While I agree that Rec and Park has been less than laudable in its management of maintenance and capital funds, I don't think that Rec and Park has the resources to adequately maintain and acquire parks and open space to meet present and future needs. Especially as our population is projected to dramatically increase over the next 20 to 50 years, we need to make sure that our Rec and Park Department as well as our health and human services are well funded to meet the growing need for these vital services and resources. We, as a world-class city must get in front of the curve rather than continue to be reactionary in addressing these fundamental city issues.

19. Supervisors are particularly susceptible to what looks like bribery by city agencies. If a city agency offers to build or acquire a new park or renovate an old one, or to change a street-cleaning schedule in a Supervisor's district, in return for loyal support of the agency, many Supervisors go for the deal. How do you think we can curtail this kind of bribery?

    I think by electing representatives that are dedicated to and invested not only in the issues faced by their respective districts but also committed to making San Francisco a better place to live, work and play. I think that we all need to remember that elected officials and civil servants are just that, servants of the people, doing the work of the people in open light and with due public process. I am a strong supporter of the Sunshine Ordinance and of government accountability.