April 10, 2007
Last night, almost 50 people spoke in favor of continued access to Fresh Pond for off-leash dogs and their owners. Cambridge residents and residents of neighboring towns were allowed 3 minutes in which to speak- the sign-up sheet ran to seven pages and citizen opponents of the Fresh Pond Medallion Program spoke for a total of over 2 hours. According to Councillor Tim Toomey, this was the largest turnout for any issue at a City Council meeting in several years.

The results were gratifying: the City Council voted unanimously to SUSPEND the Medallion Program pending the delivery of evidence for its rationale from the Water Department. Signs at Fresh Pond indicating that the program is going forward must be removed or covered, and medallions may no longer be handed out until the City Council’s questions are answered and they vote on the proposal.

Our deep gratitude goes to each citizen who wrote a letter or an email, spoke with a City Councillor, or told a friend about the meeting. Working together, we have succeeded in placing a temporary hold on the program and raising concerns in the minds of the City Councillors. Thanks also to each of the Councillors who took the time to speak with us, read our emails and letters, and listen to our almost two hours of impassioned testimony.

The following points, among others, were raised by opponents of the proposed program:

- There is no evidence that the water supply is at risk of contamination from off-leash dogs at Fresh Pond, particularly in comparison with road run-off, salt, construction debris and upstream wildlife.
- There is neither a plan nor a list of criteria in place for evaluation of the pilot program to determine its success or failure.
- The program seems to be based on opinion and conjecture rather than empirical data or studies.
- The plan sets a poor precedent in our relationships with neighboring communities, particularly Belmont, which borders on Fresh Pond.
- Because the Master Plan implementation has been funded in part with state and federal monies, it is inappropriate to prevent residents of other towns from using the Reservation in the same way Cambridge residents can.
- Families with dogs have nowhere else where they can recreate as a family in public space with their dogs. They feel that access to mowed grassy areas is necessary at Fresh Pond because they can be outdoors anywhere else with their dogs, but nowhere with their dogs.
- Almost everyone who spoke mentioned that the ban of dogs from mowed grassy areas is cumbersome, difficult to enforce, and does nothing to protect the water quality. Dogs are allowed on the paths, which are closer to the water than the grass, but on which they are more likely to encounter other users.
- The vision statement of the Master Plan emphasizes as its first goal water quality, then the preservation of recreational open spaces. The proposed regulation is unnecessarily preventing recreational use for an entire group of users. There are no proposed restrictions on other user groups of which we are aware.
- There is a need for greater transparency on the Fresh Pond Advisory Board. The board members are appointed to serve apparently in perpetuity and have refused to release their credentials to the public. There is no list of the members on the City website.
- Frustration was expressed due to the fact that signs at Fresh Pond indicate that the program is already in effect and medallions are already being given out, despite the fact that the ordinance has not yet been passed.

Ann Roosevelt, President of the Water Board, read from the Fresh Pond Master Plan regarding the rationale for the Medallion Program:

“A Cambridge City ordinance permits dogs owned by Cambridge residents, as defined by statute, to be walked or run off the leash at Fresh Pond, provided the dogs are under voice control and that the dogs not be allowed to romp on grassy areas.

Unfortunately, the City currently lacks the means to enforce the existing ordinance adequately, to protect the environment, to provide for public safety, and to ensure no dogs other than those owned by qualified Cambridge residents are being walked or run at the Reservation unleashed, as intended by the City Council.

The ordinance must be enforced so that the Reservation will not be overrun by dogs owned by non-Cambridge residents. Some Fresh Pond users have estimated that approximately 30 to 40 percent of the dogs now being let off leash at the Reservation are brought in by residents of neighboring towns such as Arlington, Belmont and Somerville. Further, there is speculation that increased enforcement of leash laws in these neighboring towns will cause the number of non-Cambridge dogs off-leash at Fresh Pond to grow. This could result in serious problems, including degradation of the landscape and conflicts among recreational users of the Reservation.” (Fresh Pond Master Plan, XII. Fresh Pond Recreation Policy, pages 112-113)

City Councillors then discussed the proposed ordinance, voicing a number of questions which must be answered by the Water Department at a later meeting:

Councillor Michael Sullivan:
- Why are dogs being prevented from being on the grass at all when the current ordinance only bans them from “romping” on the grass, not from being on the grass? Fresh Pond seems to be enforcing a non-existent regulation.
- Why are prong collars banned at Fresh Pond? It makes sense to ban them in enclosed areas but his understanding from the Ordinance Committee meeting was that the intent was to allow them at Fresh Pond.
- The ordinance has not yet passed but the program seems to be in effect- whose prerogative is this?

Councillor Henrietta Davis:
- Where does progress stand on creating more open off-leash areas throughout the city? Councillor Davis would like a report from the City Manager on Danehy Park status and a timeline for finding additional off-leash spaces in all parts of the City.
- Councillor Davis would like to hear from the Water Board regarding their rationale for the program.

Councillor Marjorie Decker:
- Do other communities allow non-residents to run dogs off-leash?
- If this is one of the few spaces in the area that allows off-leash dogs, there seems to be potential for overuse. Councillor Decker would like a report on off-leash policies of surrounding areas.
- Why aren’t Cambridge licenses sufficient for identification of Cambridge residents’ dogs?
- Who will enforce this program?
- Councillor Decker would like to hear from the Water Board regarding scientific findings on water contamination and their relationship to this program.
- What are considered “best practices” elsewhere (for example, NYC) regarding off-leash dogs?

Councillor Denise Simmons:
- Why are medallions being issued before the Council has issued an opinion?
- What is the evaluation plan? Will there be a body to which users can go with problems and comments during the evaluation period?

Councillor Tim Toomey:
- There should be a standalone hearing on this issue with residents and staff present.

Councillor Anthony Galluccio:
- Fresh Pond is a recreational space as well as one for water protection.
- Why did this end up in City Council after what should have been a public process? This indicates that something has gone wrong in the process.
- The Water Board should convene all of the various types of users to discuss Fresh Pond recreational policies.
- How will potential users of Fresh Pond be included in this process? It should be broadened to include people who don’t currently use Fresh Pond.

Mayor Kenneth Reeves:
- There is a variety of viewpoints on this issue- he personally doesn’t use Fresh Pond because he doesn’t like dogs.
- City Council s is a difficult context for working out this issue.

The City Manager (Robert Healey) and the Assistant City Manager (Richard Rossi) were then asked by the Council to answer some questions. Below are the questions and their answers:

Q: Are these proposed policies at Fresh Pond backed up by any data?
A: Fresh Pond is heavily used, not sure if data has been collected on the topic.

Q: Have there been any studies, by the Rangers or anyone else?
A: Not to our knowledge. There’s lots of use.

Q: Have there been traffic studies conducted identifying various users and their frequency and density?
A: We don’t know.

Based on all of the testimony and discussion, the decision was made to stop the program until answers could be provided to all of the questions mentioned. The City Councillors were gratified to see so many attendees and encouraged us to speak directly with them regarding our opinions on this issue and others. It was decided to hold another public meeting solely on this topic at a later date (no sooner than two weeks from now) so that the Water Department could present their answers and the scientific basis for the program.