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

Dan Kalb

DogPAC Questionnaire
District 5

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

   I love dogs - always have, always will. I want to make sure that dog owners have plenty of open space to walk their dogs-including substantial space to allow dogs to go off-leash. I have the credibility to take an effective mediating role on this issue.

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.
   

   Yes - absolutely. The overarching theme of my campaign is to restore and improve the public's confidence and trust in our local government. If city departments are not being managing properly, the Board must take immediate and effective action to improve the situation. I will not be afraid to stand up to agency heads if they are performing poorly.

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 would not support a goal of having Parks without People. That would be absurd. I do support some setting aside of open space land as sensitive habitat-as long as it meets relevant state and federal guidelines as to genuinely being critical habitat land. I believe that there is sufficient parkland available to accommodate competing interests. Recreation fields that are chained up should be renovated if necessary and used in the smartest way possible-especially by nearby residents.

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

   Yes, of course. I will work with the Rec and Park Department and all relevant stakeholders to make sure all park users are accommodated.

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?

   If there are other children in the immediate vicinity, then I would prefer that the dogs be on a leash. This might also depend on the size of the 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?
   

   No, they often bring in the public way too late in the process.

   Yes, I would absolutely be willing to intervene in these situations. In fact, earlier this year during the Randall controversy, I participated in community hearings and made my views known to the Commissioners and the Mayor. I also took the lead in getting San Francisco Tomorrow to draft and submit a resolution in opposition to that semi-privatization proposal.

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?

   No, I have not visited any of them. But I'd be happy to have someone take me on a tour of a few of them.

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?

   I grew up with dogs throughout my childhood. I love dogs and I plan to own one when I eventually settle down and get married.

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?

   Yes - absolutely. Recreating with dogs is fun, puts a smile on people's face and can often be good exercise for dog owners who take advantage of this opportunity.

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.?
    

    It certainly can be. Letting a dog walk/run on its own must be monitored by the owner. I think many parks can accommodate several forms of recreation including off-leash dog walking.

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

    Many parks and open spaces are supposed to instill a sense of outdoor freedom. Responsible dogs and dog owners should be allowed to take advantage of that freedom just like any other resident of our city.

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

    No.

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?

    No, of course not.

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?

    I've experienced this as a mountain biker. Some people let their unfounded fears get the best of them, leading to overreactions and occasional rudeness. I would strongly suggest that these situations be referred to groups like Community Boards. I have over ten years experience as a neighborhood mediator with Community Boards.

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?

    This is not a surprise to me. As long as the dogs have present owners (and the required shots), allowing them off-leash in some larger shared open spaces seems fine in most situations.

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?

    No, it doesn't make sense. I do support the selective removal of eucalyptus trees for worthwhile long-term environmental reasons. However, to then spend monies on planting other non-native trees seems odd to say the least.

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 would have to review where specifically that additional $1,000,000 went to. I am a big supporter of adequate funding for park maintenance-if the monies went there, then I would support it. I need additional info to know for sure.

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?

    Good question. First of all, we need to elect people who will hold themselves to the highest ethical standards. Second, the Board should be required to disclose ex parté communications with senior department representatives on issues that are not subject to allowable confidentiality under our sunshine ordinance.

I would be honored to have the support of DogPAC. If/When I am elected to the Board of Supervisors, my door will be open to you to discuss any and all issues of concern to your organization. Thank you for your consideration.