This past week, Q-line asked: Should the (Airport Park) dog park be open to all or just to local residents? Here are your responses: “SINCE THERE ARE SO MANY PEOPLE and so many dogs in Santa Monica, the dog parks should be restricted to residents only. Let any nearby communities construct their own dog parks and do the same restricting.”
“I DON’T THINK THAT PEOPLE THAT don’t have Santa Monica licenses should have their dog there. We are taxpayers who have to pay for that. Perhaps they could have a few permits, and I don’t know how they would provide that, so I think it’s best to just keep it for Santa Monica.”
“I THINK THE DOG PARK SHOULD BE open to all, including L.A. residents... on a trial basis. Charge them a very nominal fee and if it gets to be more than 45 dogs in at once and no Santa Monica dogs can go in, they should just stop it. It’s pretty simple.”
“WE ARE PAYING HIGH TAXES AND high dog license fees in Santa Monica to build these dog parks. All of our other dog parks never allowed non-Santa Monica dogs and they can already be overcrowded and dangerous with dog bites. If nearby cities are jealous of our dog park they should just build one of their own.”
“THE CITIES OF SANTA MONICA AND Los Angeles should both sell monthly or annual dog park passes. All dog park users would have to purchase a dog pass from Santa Monica and Los Angeles if they meant to use both parks. No one escapes purchasing a pass. The passes should be moderately priced and all proceeds should go to the upkeep and maintenance of the dog park to keep these parks in fashionable condition.”
“IF NEARBY L.A. RESIDENTS CAN’T USE the dog park then all the people using the dog park shouldn’t be allowed to park in their neighborhood. Those people should all have restricted parking spaces, so then all the people who want to go to the dog park would have to walk 20 or 30 blocks to get to it. They are so selfish, that would teach them a lesson.”
“WE WORKED HARD TO GET IT, IT’S our tax money, it was our project. Mar Vista, get your own stinking dog park! There is only so much room. If you want a dog park, Mar Vista, then get your act together and do it yourself. Quit griping. Dog owners are some of the most rabid, emotional, stubborn people in the world. I know, I don’t own a dog.”
“I THINK IT SHOULD BE OPEN. WE should do a trade with L.A. We take some of their dogs and they take some of our homeless people.”
“AIRPORT PARK SHOULD BE OPEN TO all dogs provided that they don’t have to be driven to the park for a walk. That makes no sense at all and causes extra traffic and pollution.”
“THE DOG PARK SHOULD BE OPEN TO all dogs. My two granddogs live in West L.A. but come for daycare at my house in Santa Monica. As a Santa Monica resident, should I be allowed to bring my granddogs to play there?”
“WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED, CHILDREN? First, no good deed goes unpunished. Second, real leadership foresees a small problem before it becomes a mess. Why didn’t the City Council negotiate a companion fee with Los Angeles when buying the Airport Park property? I’ve seen the dog park, it’s very small. Why not take the adult soccer field, which nobody from Santa Monica will use — it is for L.A. residents — and use it for a dog park? (Lots of room for Fido to run around in.) Also, why is the soccer field planted with Astroturf? I thought Santa Monica was green?”
“THE NEW AIRPORT PARK IS A GREAT idea and it is now open. There is no reason that Santa Monica should discriminate against the neighbors’ dogs. Maybe Santa Monica could create a pooping fee. Santa Monica has gotten good at charging its residents’ fees. Why not gouge the neighbors?”
“IF WE ARE GOING TO REQUIRE THAT dogs have Santa Monica licenses to use our parks, could we require the bums and transients to also have licenses to use our parks.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on May 12, 2007. Read the original PDF.