There was a great community turnout at the Parks & Rec meeting, nearly filling the Council Chamber. About 20 to 25 people spoke in favor of off-leash access. The public comments were thoughtful and heartfelt. Recurring themes throughout the testimony included the expectation that the City would stand up for the community, especially since this matter had been decided through a long process; the importance off-leash access as it relates to the quality of life for many people; and the request that the City defend the current situation, defend our community, and negotiate with the state – not simply give in. One person spoke against off-leash dogs.

Parks & Rec Director Dannettee Shoemaker noted that the she and her staff had only become aware of the State's letter last Thursday, November 3, and need some time to formulate a response. Her comments seemed generally favorable to the current off-leash status. She talked about exploring all options, the current legal status is and how this might be addressed in negotiations to renew the City's 30 year lease on the park.

She also spoke about the difficulties of defending against the lawsuit and fighting the State's decision. The Department is under financial stress and they'll take that into account in their decision about how to proceed. She also mentioned that the 30 year operating agreement expires in 2007, and the City might choose to wash its hands of Lighthouse Field. This is an area where extensive public comment and support to the Commission and to the City Council would help strengthen the resolve to defend our community.

Commissioner Rigler said that he felt people spoke very persuasively. The question will be how the City can persuade the State. He pointed out that ultimately the City can't enforce its will on the State. The City might also want to investigate opening other areas.

Commissioner Poen complimented the group and said our group was the best organized he has seen in his many years of serving on public commissions. He gave an impression that he is sympathetic to our position. At the same time, he recommended also working on other alternatives, including parks and beaches that could be opened to off-leash dogs. If we win with the State, maybe we'd also have some new areas opened. If we lose, at least there might be some alternatives.

Commissioner Samuelson expressed surprise that this issue was back. He just started a new term on the Commission, but had served on the Commission during the original debate and he thought it had been settled. He felt there were a lot of things we didn't know, and he'd like the Parks & Rec staff to research the issue and come up with an analysis of the options.

Commissioner Di Donato stated that he has always been opposed to dogs in the park and remains so. He talked about how nice it is in Europe that dogs on the street are muzzled. He did indicate that he understands there is a large community demand for off leash areas. He repeated a suggestion he made a long time ago that part of the Field be fenced in for our use. While the size would be much reduced, maybe it could be 24 hours per day. [Note: If off-leash dogs are banned by the State, this seems to be a non-starter. If the State reverses course, then things can stay as they are.]

Commissioner Reyes (Chair) wrapped up the session by directing staff to research all of the alternatives and report back at the February 2006 meeting of the Commission. [The actual date of this meeting will be announced.]

Many community members spoke to us afterward, to ask how they could help. "I Like Dogs and I Vote" bumper stickers were given out and there were some small donations.