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

Renee Saucedo

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 am a dog-owner and greatly value the importance of free and open public space for individuals to enjoy our parks with their dogs, for non-dog owners to have free access, and for families to have free access. I believe that a great challenge in San Francisco is the increasing restrictions placed on our public spaces. As a civil and human rights advocate in the Mission and Bernal Heights, I have always focused on addressing the needs of some of the most vulnerable members of our community, including immigrants, low-wage workers, women facing issues of domestic violence, our youth, and the homeless. Often these interests of these various sectors of the community intersect. They also intersect with issues faced uniquely by dog owners. For example, the accessibility of our public parks is an issue that families, homeless, dog owners, and low-wage people all face.

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.
   

   Most definitely. I would be willing to withhold portions of a Department's Budget or uphold the passage of the City budget if it failed to prioritize the needs of our community, or if it failed to be fiscally responsible or responsive to community interests. As an active member of the People's Budget I have advocated strongly that the Board of Supervisors should be more aggressive in exercising their budgetary powers. For many years, I have lobbied the Board of Supervisors to hold up budgets which were not reflective of the community's priorities.

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?

   Yes, I would strongly advocate for public access to our parkland. This is an issue that currently is faced by many low-income members of our community. Working families and individuals are not allowed sufficient access to our parks. There is no valid reason to lock most open spaces, or for the City to charge usage fees. For example, Soccer fields are locked and gated, while immigrant workers and youth are forced to play in a graveled parking lot. This issue affects the entire community and I would gladly advocate for free public access. To do so I would be willing to work with other Supervisors to convene public hearings holding the Rec & Park Department accountable. I would be willing to hold up their budget if necessary, and bring as much public attention to the issue as possible.

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

   Yes. I would work to ensure that such use of parks is part of any City plan or any plans generated through the Rec & Park Department. I would also strongly advocate for as much community input into any plans regarding the use of our parks. When community members come together and are able to voice their needs for use of parks, I firmly believe that we are all better able to make informed decisions.

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?

   Frankly, I do not have as many concerns about mixed use of spaces for both dogs and children. Many families have dogs. Dogs that are socialized with other dogs and children, I believe, are safer and easier to be with.

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 believe that there is not sufficient public process for park policies. Greater public process would include multilingual notice, multi-location and timed meetings, and policies that ultimately reflect the needs and desires of the community. Yes, I would be willing to intervene if there were inadequate public process.

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?

   I am unfamiliar with which dog exercise areas were approved 20 years ago. However, the parks that I've taken my dog to include Dolores Park, Stern Grove, Fort Funston, and Golden Gate park. I have found all parks to be great places to visit with friends and with dogs. I have let my dog off-leash at Dolores Park and at Stern Grove. The only park that I notice suffers in conditions is Stern Grove because the park space is used as a parking lot during the summer concert series.

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?

   Dogs play a huge role in society and in my life personally. I have been a dog owner since my childhood and have always felt this to be one of the most important and joyous parts of life. I used to take my dog, Coco, to visit my grandmother in Laguna Honda specifically because of the therapeutic effect she had for all the patients there. I regularly take my dog to the San Francisco Day Labor Program because she eases stresses and issues of depression that many homeless day laborers feel. I often take Coco to work meetings and events when appropriate. I am a firm believer in the importance of dogs in our lives and how much dogs can help those who are feeling vulnerable.

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.

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.

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

    Off-leash recreation is a great joy not only for the dogs, but also for the people with the dogs. I greatly enjoy running and playing with my dog in the park. It is a great form of recreation.

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

    I am opposed to penalizing or criminalizing behavior to accommodate the fears or prejudices of others. A public education campaign would effectively address people's fears and concerns.

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. I have spent almost my entire life fighting against prejudice and discrimination. I As a civil rights lawyer and a community organizer, I have worked tiredlessly on issues ranging from the survival and implementation to affirmative action programs in education and employment to enforcing the civil rights of minority groups. I worked against the state law which criminalized young people for "hanging out" in groups, as if all young people were gang members. We must not allow people's fears and misinformation to dictate public policy. I would like to continue to take my dog Coco to as many public places as possible. See my answer to #12 above.

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 do not believe it is the business of public agencies to regulate or get involved with "rudeness" in parks. It would be an ineffective strategy. Issues such as this one should be tackled through public education campaigns and public awareness efforts. We must take the time to create a culture, or environment, which values tolerance and patience. As Supervisor, I will assist in spearheading these types of campaigns through the allocation of resources, publicity, etc.

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 and is consistent with my beliefs regarding the need for free accessible public park space.

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. This does not make sense to me and seems to me to be an area of public waste worth exploring.

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?

    No. My funding priorities would be very different from those currently reflected in the City's budget. This is one of the reasons I chose to run for the Board of Supervisors. I believe that the City's budget should not be balanced on the backs of some of the most vulnerable members of our communities while other areas are over funded, or while downtown corporations do not pay their fair share.

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?

    In all my years of community activism, I have earned an impeccable reputation as being uncorruptable, open and accountable to the people whose interests I serve. I will not "sell out" my responsibility to my community to favor city bureaucrats. I believe that we need to hold our elected officials accountable to the community they are charged with representing and serving. When an elected official is irresponsible, corrupt, or neglectful of community needs, as a community we need to remove them from office. City agency budgets should be determined through community input processes that are open, accessible, and understandable to the community. Budget accountability would also lessen the risk of corruption.