To view graphic version of this page, refresh this page (F5)

Skip to page body
City and County of San Francisco
Commission of Animal Control & Welfare Archived Meetings

Meeting Information


2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 

San Francisco Commission of

Animal Control & Welfare

 

Meeting Minutes

Thursday, January 12, 2006

 

 

1.        Call to Order and Roll Call

 

Present:  Commissioners Laurie Kennedy, Joanne Kipnis, Mara Weiss DVM, J.R. Yeager, William Hamilton, Richard Schulke, Vicky Guldbech, William Herndon

 

Absent with excuse: Commissioner Sherri Franklin

 

2.       Public Comment

 

Richard Fong stated that the Park and Rec. Department has begun working on what to do with the old elephant habitat at the SF Zoo.  Reported about 3 cats located at the corner of Jackson and Powell.  Wondered if they were being cared for. 

 

Susan Wheeler, SPCA Feral Cat Volunteer, - was not at the November meeting but wanted to address comments made by Commissioner Yeager at the November Commission meeting.  Spoke about a feral cat colony on Minnesota and 24th . Wheeler stated that she had been contacted by a local business owner, who feeds that colony,   that a black cat may have a broken leg.  Wheeler contacted the SPCA about this cat., which was later euthanized at ACC.  The cat was not abandoned Wheeler will be back to further discuss this situation at the February Commission meeting.

 

3.       Approval of Draft Minutes from the November 10, 2005 Meeting

 

Commissioner Yeager  wanted to add a statement made by Commissioner Guldbech regarding ACC’s policy on cat surrender.  According to Guldbech, if the person surrendering the cat has fed that cat for more than 30 days, he/she designated as the owner and must sign an owner surrender form. Guldbech will report back to the Commission about whether this is a policy or just rule of thumb.

 

Commissioner Hamilton moved to approved the minutes as amended

Motion seconded by Commissioner Schulke

Motion passed unanimously

 

4.       Chairperson’s report and opening remarks

 

Commissioner Kennedy  - This meeting gives the Commission an opportunity to begin the new year on the right foot and to   look back at last year and see what helped us be effective.  According to our Commissioner Handbook, the Commission is required to review our process periodically to determine whether we are adhering to established  process and standards of conduct.

 

The Commission agreed not to cancel a meeting if there were no agenda items, as it would provide an opportunity for public comment. 

 

  

5.     New Business

 

a.     Discussion of the Commission’s work with regard to collaborative problem solving and achievement of goals. A review of the year’s accomplishments and challenges to determine how the Commission can continue to be of service to the city and county of San Francisco.

 

Commissioner Kipnis moved to discuss the item

Motion seconded by Commissioner Schulke

Motion passed unanimously

 

Commissioner Kennedy asked Commissioners Herndon, Guldbech, and Schulke, who have had a long   history with the Commission, to discuss   the elements of successes, approaches, and strategies that   have   helped the Commission in achieving its goals.

 

Commissioner Schulke – one element of success is keeping open lines of communication with appropriate parties, including the Board of Supervisors and other city agencies, and maintaining these relationships; cited the success of the Horse Carriage issue. 

 

Commissioner Guldbech – one element of success is to have a few Commissioners work together on an   issue, confer the city attorney, and then meet with the appropriate Supervisor(s).

 

Commissioner Herndon – it is important to look at both control and welfare issues, which help us determine which supervisors would be most supportive of our efforts. Important not to step on legislative toes; cited the example of the live animal market, which became the city against the Asian community, who questioned why humane rules would be enforced against them but not against the crab and lobster dealer at Fisherman’s Wharf.  Commission needs to be reasonable about our approach to the Board; make only recommendations that we believe will get results. Important to keep pour reputation and credibility intact.

 

Commissioners suggested the following issues for discussion:

 

·         Restore the voting rights of the city department representatives

·         Absence of both Park and Rec. and Health Department representatives from Commission meetings

·         Quarterly reports to the Board of Supervisors

·         How we are doing in terms of whether we are meeting Standards of Conduct

·         Scope of jurisdiction and what avenues are available for issues that do not fall under our jurisdiction

·         Meeting preparation

·         Expansion of our Web site

 

Commission agreed to discuss the restoring the vote of nonvoting members, the absence of reps from Park and Rec and the Health Department, and jurisdiction.

 

Jurisdiction

The Commission acknowledged that at times, items brought before the Commission by Commissioners and/or the public do not necessarily fall under the Commission’s jurisdiction.  It is also sometimes difficult to determine whether an item is under Commission  jurisdiction. After much discussion, the Commission agreed to the following:

 

With regard to issues brought up by the public – Commission will develop clear guidelines on what issues fall under Commission   jurisdiction.  Develop a list of possible referrals for those issues that do not fall under Commission jurisdiction. In the event that a member of the public wants the Commission to act on an issue outside the Commission’s jurisdiction, the Commission will listen to the issue and inform that individual of that fact, and offer possible referrals to which the individual may seek assistance. 

 

With regard to issues sponsored by Commissioners – items brought forth for discussion and/or action must be under the Commission’s jurisdiction. It is each Commissioner’s responsibility to determine whether an issue is under the Commission’s jurisdiction and to have a goal for that issue prior to submitting the item to the Chair.  Prior to finalizing the agenda, the Chair may question any agenda item that appears to be out of the Commission’s jurisdiction and confer with the sponsoring Commissioner. 

 

In the event that the Commission is uncertain about whether an agenda item is under its jurisdiction, it may enter into a time-limited discussion of the item and make any of the following actions:

 

1.       determine that the item is not under its jurisdiction and vote to end discussion on the item

2.       determine that the item is under its jurisdiction and proceed with a full discussion

3.       determine that there is not enough information about the issue,  table the item, send it back to the sponsoring Commissioner  to do more research on the issue

 

Commissioner Hamilton will work on developing a new page for the Commission’s web site, which will clarify the Commission’s jurisdiction and provide guidance to the public as to where they can seek assistance on animal issues.

 

Restoring the vote of city department representatives

Commissioner Schulke believes that expertise from city departments is a great benefit to the Commission and it would behoove us to have their votes.   Restoring the vote might also entice representatives from the Health Department and Park and Rec., to start attending meetings again.  

 

Commissioner Herndon stated that following the Commission’s actions taken on the live animal market issue, the Board of Supervisors acted to remove the voting rights of the Commission’s city department representatives. Herndon suggested that the Board may have believed that city representatives were voting in the best interest of the city, instead of in the best interest of the public.  Furthermore, there are no other city Commissions who give voting rights to city department representatives.    Herndon also stated that he is comfortable not having voting rights.  Should he ever vote in a manner that the public does not agree with, he would be put in an awkward position relative to his role as a public official.

 

Commissioner Guldbech stated that she is comfortable not having the right to vote.  She would be much more reserved as Commissioner if she was required to vote, given that should would have to vote on behalf of the department head, regardless of what she personally believed to be the right way to vote.    Furthermore, not having the right to vote allows Carl Friedman to have a designee on the Commission instead of him having to attend the meetings.

 

With regard to the ongoing absence of representatives from both the Health Department and Park and Rec., it was agreed that Commissioner Guldbech will follow up with her contacts at the Health Department and Commissioner Kennedy will contact the head of Park and Rec. to discuss this issue. The Commission agreed that the most effective way to resolve this issue may simply be to inform both representatives when an agenda item directly affects their department and strongly encourage them to attend the meeting.

 

After Commission discussion of the pros and cons of this issues, the Commission agreed not to peruse restoring voting right of city department representatives.

 

Meeting Preparation

 

Information Dissemination.  Commissioner Kipnis suggested that given the amount of information presented at meetings, the Commission develop rules for dissemination of materials prior to meetings, in accordance with the Sunshine Law.  It would be helpful if the Commission had ample opportunity to read through relevant materials prior to discussion of an item.    Commission agreed to keep written materials down to a minimum, and only include the key points that are relevant to the agenda item. 

 

Commissioner Kennedy affirmed that the Commission can share information with each other prior to the meeting   as long as the information   does not contain any personal opinion or recommendation relevant to an agenda item.  Commissioners Schulke reminded the Commission that all materials provided to Commissioners must be available to the public at meetings.    

 

Time Limitations for Commissioners.  The Commission agreed that in order to use meeting time efficiently, Commissioners who must be fully prepared when sponsoring an agenda item.  The Commissioner must state the goal of the item at the beginning of the presentation, present the key points, and be concise.  Knowing the goal of the item will help the Commission determine how much time is needed to discuss the issue, taking into consideration how much public comment there will be on the issue.     It was agreed that although the Commission would not mandate time limits, Commissioners should be able to present their item within 10 minutes, in most cases.

 

Commissioners agreed to submit the approximate amount of time needed for presentation when submitting an agenda item to the Chair.   The Chair may recommend specific time limits on certain items based on: (1) requested amount of time; (2) the content of the item and other items on the agenda; (3)   the number of items on the agenda; and (4) the number of people who want to provide  public comment, which will be assessed at the meeting.  

 

Time limitations for special speakers.    The Commission agreed that the purpose of inviting special speakers to a meeting is to educate the Commission and the public on the agenda item, not to support the Commissioner’s position on the item.  The Commissioner who invited the speaker must adequately prepare the speaker by informing him/her of the type of  information that needs to be conveyed  and encourage the speaker to keep the presentation to 10 minutes, as there will be an opportunity for the speaker to answer questions following the presentation.  

 

6.     Public Comment

 

Mary Ann Buxton, SPCA Feral Cat Program Coordinator – Refuted comments made by Commissioner JR Yeager at the November Commission meeting, referring to Item 6a of the November meeting minutes.  

 

·         Bullet point #1: Cats are brought to the SPCA for s/n by volunteers and guardians who are providing aftercare.

 

·         Bullet point #2: Every new person who presents a trapped cat to Feral Fix signs an SF/SPCA document called “Feral Fix Program Guidelines.”  The SPCA also assists volunteers in the long term care of feral cat colonies.

 

·         Bullet point #3: Cats are voluntarily returned by volunteers.

 

·         Bullet point #5: After TNR the health of the animal is 100% improved because its received s/n medical care and because volunteers provide aftercare.

 

·         Bullet point #8:  The SF/SPCA Feral Cat Program and its volunteers have:   (1) taken over a third of JR’s colonies and SPCA volunteers and business owners now provide aftercare;  (2)  have found new locations for 12 colony cats that he cared for. In only 2 of the cats’ situations did we agree that relocation was imperative to the cat’s safety.  The other 10 feral cats were rescued by the SPCA out of ACC after he took them there in a few days time; (3) have done post-surgery recovery care and the return of cats for him he’s brought to feral fix because he made no plans to pick them up at the end of the day;   (4) have found feeders for JR when he’s abruptly decided to quit feeding.

 

Michele Blunt, SPCA Feral Cat Volunteer – Refuted comments made by Commissioner Yeager and public speakers at the November Commission meeting.

 

·         Commissioner Yeager presented a slide show of cats being returned to what he considers to be inhumane, dangerous and unhealthy areas including the central waterfront, China Basin and India Basin.  These cats had their left ear tipped, looked plump and healthy, and were returned to their homes.  Where they live is their home and where aftercare is being provided.

 

·         Page 3 –Studies show that feral cats carry no more disease than domestic cats that live in homes.

 

·         Page 3   - The Protection Agency Office of Water states that the top 3 sources for fecal contamination are livestock, birds, and dogs.

 

·         Page 4   - The main cause for reduction of wildlife is 1) habitat loss 2) global warming 3) pesticide use

 

·         Page 4   - The SPCA feral fix program is successful because there is no big brother type of monitoring.

 

·         Page 4   - Studies how that feral cats are not the main reason for decline in bird populations. 

 

·         Page 4 - SPCA is spending ½ million per year on feral cat program.  Every animal that is adopted out is s/n and SPCA provides low-cost s/n to the public.

 

·         Page 4 -   The SPCA has a 24 hour hot line that goes directly into the feral cat program office and these calls get responded to daily.  Feral Cat Program works closely with the community and its CAT volunteers.

 

·         Page 4 -    “No laws are being broken.  TNR has been proven to be the only method to improve the lives of feral cats.  If public were unaware 15,000 + feral cats would not have gone through the SF Feral Fix program over the last 12 years.

 

Ron Cole - There is a web site being built on Breed Specific Legislation;   will provide the name of a woman who he suggested the Commission invite to present data on dog bites.    

 

7.  Adjournment

 

Commissioner Schulke moved to adjourn meeting.

Motion seconded by Commissioner Hamilton

Unanimous

 

Meeting adjourned at 7:30 pm.