SAN FRANCISCO — The jury is still out on
whether San Francisco — named after the patron saint of animals — will
make it a little easier for pets and their owners to find homes.
After two hours of sometimes-heated discussion, the Commission for
Animal Control and Welfare tabled a resolution Thursday that would have
suggested The City prohibit housing discrimination against responsible
pet owners.
The matter will be taken up again at a commission meeting in
January. Any resolution would be nonbinding, but it could pave the way
for a San Francisco supervisor to push forward with proposed
legislation. The commission’s recent resolution to ban cat declawing in
The City was picked up by the Board of Supervisors and enacted into law
last week.
After hearing testimony from tenant groups encouraging the
resolution and landlord groups worried about its implication on their
properties, Commissioner Philip Gerrie withdrew the resolution until
the next meeting. He said he would come back with a resolution that
laid out more specifics about what the rights of landlords and tenants
would be.
The commission has raised a number of proposals, including
establishing a mandatory percentage of apartment units for pet owners,
as a way to increase the number of city residents available to adopt
animals from shelters. Some reports indicate that as many as 80 percent
of San Francisco residents are renters, and only half of rental
properties allow pets. Meanwhile, about 7,100 dogs and cats were taken
in by public shelters in 2008 and 87 percent were adopted, one of the
highest rates in the country.
“At this point, we’re still trying to figure out exactly what policy
to move forward with,” commission Chairwoman Sally Stephens said. “But
the motivation is to get more people available to foster and adopt
rescued animals.”
As expected, reaction to the proposal has been divided between apartment and tenant groups.
Ted Gullickson, director of the San Francisco Tenants Union, said
the proposal would give renters the same basic rights already enjoyed
by those living in federal housing properties, where pets are allowed.
Janan New, president of the San Francisco Apartment Association,
countered that a mandatory pet policy would be an onerous and expensive
liability for landlords, and that it would adversely affect other
tenants with allergies or fears of animals.
wreisman@sfexaminer.com
kworth@sfexaminer.com
FAIR USE NOTICE. This
document may contain copyrighted material the use of which may not have been
specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Tenants Together is making this
article available on our website in an effort to advance the understanding of
tenant rights issues in California. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair
use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the
U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes
of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.