Petfinder.com
Featured Pet click picture for more info.
Programs and Services Committee The Programs and Services Committee is a committee of the the Newton Board of Aldermen and consists of one Alderman from each ward.
Meeting Summaries
The following are unofficial summaries provided by NewtonDogs. FEBRUARY, 2004 April 21, 2004
The following is a list of Programs and Services Committee members and the attitudes they expressed at the April 21, 2004 Programs and Services committee meeting (some of their positions may have change since them). A more complete transcript (to the best of my note taking ability) of what they said at the meeting follows. Except for Aldermen Samuelson and Baker, these are all Aldermen at Large, which means they are elected by citizens throughout the city and are elected to represent the interests of all citizens.
Ward 1 – Carleton Merrill - Very Opposed Best way to contact: none available
Thinks dog owners just need to obey the law. Sees no reason to provide any services at all for dog owners. There probably is not much that can be done to change his opinion, but he needs to hear from constituents that they do not feel that he is fairly representing them. Ward 2 - Marcia Johnson - Supportive Best way to contact: phone or email
617-965-4920 * marcia@marciajohnson.org
Marcia has come a long way in the past six months to understand that dog owners that want to spend time with their dogs off-leash are, as she called them, a disenfranchised group of constituents that are being unfairly discriminated against. She also recognizes and admits that off-leash dogs are in our parks now and that for the most part dog owners, as a group, do a good job policing themselves. She sees a need for designating times and places where people who don't want to be around dogs can know they can go and not be bothered by off-leash dogs, but recognizes that this does not need to be all the time in all places. Ward 3 - Ted Hess-Mahan , Supportive Best way to contact: phone, email, US mail
617-795-7220 * tedhess-mahan@rcn.com
This was Ted's first term as Alderman. He is trying very hard to hear both sides of this issue. He needs to hear from more constituents. He is in support of off-leash times in parks and designated off-leash areas. He seems very reasonable. Ward 4 - Amy Sangiolo , Supportive Best way to contact: Phone or email
617-969-0677 * sangiolo1@rcn.com
Amy was on vacation this week so did not attend the meeting. She is supportive but needs to hear from more constituents. Ward 5 - Paul Colletti , Opposed Best way to contact: None listed
Colletti, who has been on the board of Aldermen longer than almost anyone else, said that the Public Hearing in December was the largest hearing he has ever seen. Nonetheless, he said he will support creation of only one or two fenced dog parks located in places where they won't bother anyone, he suggested the old motorcycle trails (I don't know where those are) but expressed concern that people weren't about to get in their car and drive to them. Ward 6 - Ken Parker , Opposed Best way to contact: Phone, email, mail
617-965-3723 * ken@kenparker.org
He said he is willing to consider a couple parks but absolutely nothing more. Very opposed to dogs sharing times in parks and open spaces that are ever used for anything else. Again brought up the health hazard raised in Health Commissioner David Naparstek's Memo of Nov. 19. Ward 7 (Ward alderman) - Lisle Baker , Opposed PRESIDENT of the Board of Aldermen
Best way to contact: Phone, mail
617-566-3848
Wants to exclude conservation land (he is also on the Conservation Commission).
He stated that it is important to recognize that problems with people not pickup up after their dogs and dogs being allowed off-leash are separate issues. He said that he knows very little about the issue and currently is willing to consider one or two parks but nothing more, but only if they are not on conservation land. I think he is probably very open to hearing from constituents about this issue and there may be room to change his mind. Ward 8 - Fischman - Opposed Best way to contact: phone or email
617-964-2848 * mfischman@daylor.com
Recognizes that there is no easy solution. Suggested that the city create two off-leash parks and if, after one year, they are successful, ie, residents completely stop using all other parks in the city, then consider expanding to additional areas. He said that he doesn't think that Brookline, Wellesley, or other communities came up with their less restrictive policy in response to residents breaking the law and really doesn't have a clue as to why so many residents allow their dogs off-leash.
Also present at the meeting: Ward 5 ward Alderman - Christine Snow Samuelson - Supportive, but still needs to hear from constituents.
Best way to contact: phone
617-244-8789
Christine has been working on this issue for 10 years. She recognizes that the only workable solution is to share the spaces and create hours in parks throughout the city, in addition to a few designated areas. She believes that a few designated areas will not work, and says that besides, we don't have enough space to designate enough land for all the dogs and their owners in the city. Ward 7 - Vern Vance , Opposed Best way to contact: phone, email, US mail
617-232-5494 * vvance@rcn.com
Does not agree that residents that want to spend time with their dogs have needs that are comparable to people who want to play soccer or tennis. He said that people playing tennis or soccer do not pose a public health hazard and do not interfere with others using the space. He said he has no sympathy for residents that want to spend time with dogs off-leash.
APRIL 21, 2004 Programs and Services Committee meeting summary -
** These are notes taken at the meeting and are, to the extent possible, the exact words of the Alderman speaking. The term "I" refers to the speaker. ALDERMAN JOHNSON - The next item on the agenda is about the creation of a dog commission made up of key players of park and recreation, conservation commission, etc. to look at locations with liaisons to each committee. I also suggest a pilot to see how it going. Kathy (legal) has drafted a memorandum to create an ordinance and to establish a dog commission. One question is shall Programs and Services as a whole present this, or Aldermen Samulson, Sangiolo, and myself.
ALDERMAN SAMUELSON - I think a dog commission should play a role once parks are set up. It should be a fair body that can talk to all interested parties. I don’t see it taking a roll in setting up or deciding locations. It should be a place where people could go to once a month to raise concerns, such as parks not being clean.
ALDERMAN PARKER - Commission seems like a good idea. A lot of constituents feel strongly on both sides of this. I support fenced in areas, places, NOT HOURS. I’d like to see an ordinance to create off-leash designated parks, not times. There should be more than one, so it is conveniently located. I am concerned about the public health issues raised by the health commissioner.
ALDERMAN BAKER - I apologize for not being as informed as some. I see two elements, a pilot program that expires and Conservation areas should be off limits altogether. I have had constituents concerned about modifications of the law at all. Have the commission do homework. There is value to having similar program as Brookline. I am open to persuasion. Conservation areas should be excluded and there is a sunset provision as with Brookline. The memo from Kathy said Brookline told her that there has been some involvement on the part of dog owners to police themselves, I don’t know if Newton has such a group. I would find it difficult to vote for something that does not exclude conservation areas. Hard to sell to public when there are many concerned about this.
ALDERMAN FISCHMAN - Alderman Park referred to a lot of my thinking. At public hearing many said they wouldn’t want to go there. Difficult to get a short list of sights. Interested to see how Brookline is working. Hardly a week doesn’t go by when the newspaper doesn’t have an article about owners not picking up. The wild west theory that is going on and people that came out proud to report that they are breaking the law. Part of me thinks they should be put in jail. But jails are not big enough because there are so many. They probably have something legitimate at there point. Locked into both sides and I don’t see any resolution.
ALDERMAN COLLETTI - Pooper scooper hearing (Dec 3 public hearing on off-leash) was the largest meeting I have ever attended. It shut down city hall. I didn’t think I would ever think this, but I recommend two places, one is the old motorcycle trail. We must require the commission to restrict to only two areas. But I don’t think that will work. I am concerned that a dog commission will become too powerful. Bigger than the people that are elected to represent them. But don’t see the old motorcycle track ever becoming a popular location.
ALDERMAN HESS-MAHAN - I am a distinct minority in this group. I don’t think they are going to stop going to parks at 7:00 a.m. I support the creation of a dog commission.
ALDERMAN JOHNSON - Right now dogs are in your parks. In the research Kathy (legal) did, when created areas dogs owners police themselves. Dog bites are from dogs protecting their own property, not in parks. I differ from Alderman Samuelson. I see a dog commission making recommendations to this board. Recommendations brought forward for discussion in the proper channels. I agree on a pilot with a sunset provision.
ALDERMAN SAMUELSON - Everyone at this table has a piece of what it will take. I understand desire to create few fenced in areas, but people aren’t going to only use them. I thought we want a combination. There is not enough space to create enough dog parks for all the dogs in Newton. People are not going to leave their neighborhoods and come to these areas. Dogs ARE loose today. Daily. Only way to IMPROVE the situation is to give them time. Selecting sites that will provide people with a lot of different options. Fashion enough options so that dogs owners feel they have some rights. Everyone is going to have to give up something.
ALDERMAN BAKER - It is important to distinguish off-leash from compliance with the pooper-scooper law. 1) is it necessary to have dogs off leash? – I kept my dog on leash. 2. Cleaning up – a separate question. Part of the difficulty is the two get mixed up together. We take in a fair amount of money on dog licenses and it goes to the library as I understand it. I have some of Colletti’s concerns. I need to be better educated. Enforcement about cleaning up is a separate issue.
ALDERMAN MERRILL - We all love dogs. Responsibility is on the owner of the dogs. As elected official I don’t intend to give up responsibility to a commission that will be focused on creating dog parks. I am not satisfied to send residents to a commission instead of having them contact their elected officials. I don’t see any area on the north side that could be used as a dog park. Not in my back yard. I see this all the time. Basic problem is to educate dog owners to comply with regulations. We know enforcement won’t be done. I don’t know anything that will make everyone happy. I am against a dog commission. Strong position. Education the public, using any word possible to educate them about the law. I know my position is not popular.
ALDERMAN FISCHMAN - I would be more impressed if people felt dogs need off-leash would comply with the law. I found it difficult to accept was their feeling that they are proud to do it. Maybe it is a popular movement There ought to be an effort to abide by the law for a period of time. Maybe there needs to be an effort to educate them to abide by the law. I didn’t hear from Brookline that they changed their law because everyone was already violating the law.
ALDERMAN JOHNSON - The reason I had Kathy create a draft ordinance is to open the dialogue. The purpose of the dog commission is not to usurp any responsibility from the Board of Aldermen. I don’t see this as DOGS off-leash. I think of this as DISENFRANCHISED section of our population. Many places in the world have off-leash time – Kensington Park in London is full of dogs. Everyone KNOWS there is a leash law. We need to be open minded. By being opposed you are disenfranchising a group of constituents you have been elected to represent.
ALDERMAN MERRILL - There are lots of signs that people ignore.
ALDERMAN JOHNSON - Dog owners can not enjoy the park the way soccer, baseball, lacrosse players can. This group is being discriminated against by the city. I am disappointed that you feel this is OK.
ALDERMAN VANCE - To equal tennis and soccer players doesn’t make sense. These don’t interfere with other using the parks. Dogs pose a public health hazard for other people. They adversely affect others who use the parks. I am not opposed to limited place that can be fenced in. Rockport as a single location where people can take dogs off-leash. I am sympathetic to need to find something. Not sympathetic to need to find locations all over town. There should be a limited few. Because dog owners are being disenfranchised is not a good reason.
ALDERMAN BAKER - Vance said some important issues. Board policy. Concerned that people’s ability to use public space is compromised because of the presence of dogs off-leash. If there is an argument that makes sense it is how do we make the city work for people who want to use parks without dogs. This population is more numerous. Folks who want to use the parks who don’t own dogs have a more legitimate complaint.
ALDERMAN HESS-MAHAN - I am hearing from competing groups of people that the system is broken. We do have a problem in which both feel that can’t use the park. 6 to 1 my calls are people concerned about dog poop and the other people not able to take dogs off leash.
ALDERMAN SAMUELSON - There are today real significant problems. I believe there are compromises that can be made. One thing you have to keep in mind is that this is not just a problem in Newton. It is a good thing, a beautiful thing, that owners are socializing. We can’t buck the trend. Newton is loaded with dogs and dog owners. It is ONLY FAIR to find a place they can enjoy their dogs. This is going on across the country, from here to California. Newton is behind the times.
ALDERMAN FISCHMAN - I am behind the idea for a one year pilot for one park. All other parks must not allow dogs off-leash All other owners in support of this should make sure other dogs are not off-leash in other parks at all.
ALDERMAN PARKER - I think this is an interesting discussion but it is time to move onto the next item on the agenda.
JANUARY 5, 2005
Programs and Services Committee meeting ALDERMEN PRESENT
Marcia Johnson, Lisle Baker, Ted Hess-Mahan, Ken Parker (arrived late), Amy May Sangiolo, Mitchell Fischman (split between mtgs)
NOT PRESENT
Carlton Merrill, Paul Colletti
CITY DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVES
Parks and Recreation: Fran Towle and Carol Stapleton
Planner for Conservation Commission: Martha Horn
CONSTITUENTS
Roughly 15 citizens in favor of revising the leash ordinance and a reporter from the TAB
SUMMARY
The primary docket item under discussion was a proposal by Alderman Johnson to create a Taskforce to assess the feasibility of revising the leash ordinance to include “off-leash” activity in designated areas. Alderman Johnson proposed modeling this after the Taskforce that looked at locating a Skateboard Park in the city. The taskforce membership would include Aldermen, representatives from concerned city groups (Parks & Rec, Conservation, Police, Health), and citizens. The Taskforce would then make a recommendation to the Programs and Services Committee for eventual vote by the full Board.
After about 2 hours of discussion, both in committee and including input from the other attendees, the motion was held for the next meeting (WED. JAN 19). Aldermen Johnson, Sangiolo and Baker will meet in the interim to refine the language of the proposal.
In general, the discussion was much more constructive than in previous meetings (perhaps due in part to the absent Aldermen and/or the presence of concerned citizens). A recurring issue was the need to get “buy in” from both the Committee and the Board as a whole so as not to “waste everyone’s time” if a Taskforce were to be appointed. The perspectives of the individual members are outlined below; had a vote been taken, Aldermen Johnson, Sangiolo, Hess-Mahan and Parker appeared to support the Taskforce proposal while Aldermen Baker and Fischman were more ambivalent.
SPECIFIC COMMENTS:
ALDERMAN BAKER (ward 7): Emphasized that the difference from the Skateboard Taskforce model is that both “whether” and “how/where” are open issues for off-leash areas, whereas having a skateboard park was accepted and only “where” was the question. He would like to exclude Conservation Land from any discussion and wants clear language that there will be ongoing enforcement of the existing leash law while this is being studied. He expects “significant Board opposition” and doesn’t want to waste time on something that “will blow up in the end”. He asked for input from Fran Towle and Martha Horn (see comments below). He will help craft language that could “provide a vehicle to move forward” but cautioned that he is certain that the off-leash opponents are underrepresented at these meetings.
ALDERMAN FISCHMAN (ward 8) Also believes that any leash ordinance change is still far from accepted and wants to separate the “whether” from the implementation issues, but agreed that is difficult. Concerned about the Task Force membership – how to be both representative and effective. Referred several times to health issues and Commissioner Naparstek’s “testimony” at the public hearing.
ALDERMAN HESS-MAHAN (ward 3) Initially skeptical but has been impressed by his “field trips” to Brookline as well as neighborhood parks especially regarding cleanliness and “self-policing” by dog owners. Would want to emphasize self-policing as a key part of enforcement. He supports creation of Taskforce without preconceived constraints like exclusion of Conservation land.
ALDERMAN JOHNSON (ward 2) In introducing the proposal, she argued that a blanket no to all off-leash activity was “vastly unfair” and reiterated the motivation of she and Alderman Sangiolo to address an ordinance that is not working and is virtually unenforceable. She suggested that “ Newton is not so special” that it can’t accommodate the needs of responsible dog owners like its neighboring communities and so many cities worldwide. She emphasized the need to move forward, noting that the public hearing on this matter was held 12/03. She is flexible as to the composition of the Taskforce and recognizes that it needs to not be unwieldy. Focus will be on “open-minded” individuals looking at all options.
ALDERMAN PARKER (ward 6) Favors dedicated “24/7” fenced-in areas to minimize health concerns. Supports Taskforce formation and “thinking outside the box” but also reiterated that the anti-dog constituency that is not so vocal should not be ignored.
ALDERMAN SANGIOLO (ward 4) Co-sponsor of proposal; believes that the support for “dog parks” is greater than for skateboarding. Doesn’t support exclusion of conservation land and referred to its use in her ward. Need to move forward; current law can’t be enforced. Suggested that the options being considered be clearly identified so the purpose of the Taskforce is not misunderstood.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
Three people were asked by the Alderman for input.
COMMISSIONER FRAN TOWLE, Parks Recreation: “Position has not been taken, issues are health, safety and enforcement”
MARTHA HORN, Conservation Commission: “Here as an observer, the commission will respond to a specific proposal”; “Much of their land is very sensitive” but acknowledges upon questioning by Alderman Baker that enforcement is not currently possible.
TED KUKLINSKI, Newton Conservators: Stated that dog owners were a significant, if not the largest, users of open space on year-round basis. Noted that distinction between conservation land and parks often blurred, but agreed that sensitive areas should be accommodated.
CITIZENS
Alderman Johnson opened the meeting to comments from the audience. All speakers supported the creation of legal off-leash opportunities citing the positive impact on the community and the belief that dog owners should be entitled to use recreational space for this kind of activity. All were sensitive to the need for clear designations and responsible behavior.
January 19, 2005
The Aldermen's Programs and Services committee PASSED the resolution to create a task-force to explore possible times and locations for off-leash activity, referring the resolution to the full Board of Aldermen for approval. There were only four aldermen present at the meeting (but that was all that was needed for a quorum).
* Marcia Johnson (ward 2)
* Ted Hess-Mahan (ward 3)
* Amy Sangiolo (ward 4)
* Lisle Baker (ward 7)
The Aldermen debated the issue for about 1 hour. Johnson, Hess-Mahan, and Sangiolo voted in favor of the task-force, Baker abstained.
February 2005 Board of Aldermen Meetings
To read summaries of the the full Board of Aldermen meetings click here >>
