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

Lillian Sing

DogPAC Questionnaire
District 1

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

   I have owned five dogs, two from animal shelters. I believe dogs should have places where they can exercise freely.

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 believe each Department must handle its money management, reporting and responsiveness to the public in a manner that shows it honors the public trust.

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 believe that fields should not be locked up by the Recreation and Park Departments because these areas provide entertainment, peace and keep the public in touch with nature. The only two major native habits in San Francisco are Fort Funston and the Presidio. I will work to provide public access to more areas of the parkland by working together with the department to provide more areas that the public can access.

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

   I will work for these goals by cooperating with Recreation and Park Departments to help change the attitudes of people who are hostile to these goals.

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 a dog belongs to the family it should be allowed with the family in a children's park. I do feel, however, the dog should be on a leash to create feelings of safety for other children who might fear dogs.

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 we can always open up more dialogue and public input in all areas of government. I will intervene if necessary to keep this dialogue open.

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 have visited some of the dog exercise areas. I have, however, walked in areas that allow dog exercising, such as Golden Gate Park, and they seemed to be in good 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?

   Dogs provide good companionship, especially for the disabled, who rely on them for support. They are certainly needed for their support in guiding the blind, deaf and elderly. I saw how much my dogs meant to my children, and how having dogs encouraged compassion, good exercise and family recreation.

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?

   Off-leash recreation brings dogs and people more closely together and also provides entertainment.

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.?
    

    Depending on the area, I think it is best to have dogs off leash because it provides freedom to the dogs.

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

    I think off-leash recreation gives dogs more freedom and provides more exercise. Off-leash recreation also provides entertainment and better interactions between owner and dog.

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

    I do not believe that we need regulations to accommodate people who are afraid of dogs.

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?

    I believe that all people should have access to public areas and should not be discriminated by gender, ethnicity, age or sexuality.

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?

    Rudeness is something that cannot be overcome by legislation, but can be lessened by public education efforts such as posters that encourage more positive interactions

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?

    I am not surprised that our low bite rate is because of the increased public awareness of good dog exercise behavior. I am not surprised that most bites are in or around the home because many dogs are trying to protect their territory when bites occur. This knowledge does not change my conviction that we need adequate off-leash areas for everyone.

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?

    I am aware that eucalyptus trees can grow very rapidly, take over a large area and stop the growth of native vegetation. This is probably the reason for these actions. Instead of cutting the existing trees, I would prefer to see the Department prevent their extension into new areas and plant native plants instead

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 think the increases in Recreation and Parks Department budget is generally a good thing, but we must ensure that critical services are not impacted as a consequence of the budgetary increase.

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 am opposed to all forms of bribery. There should be transparency in government. I would call for a thorough investigation and that all guilty parties be handed the strongest possible penalty.