Lighten Up the Leash Laws

So this dog park discussion is interesting.

Let me say upfront. I think an actual enclosed park would be the best approach, but I'm not sure where we'd put one. I never thought I'd write this, but some anonymous posters on the Daily News article actually had some constructive thoughts on this subject. Worth checking out.

(One thought, can we get the state to fence off a small piece of Maudslay for the park?)

But without a dog park in place, I think the next step is loosening the regs a bit on leashes. The plan laid out here seems ambitious. I'm not sure we need four different sites, but it's a good starting point. Gives the Council some wiggle room to look tough and talk them down to two.

I don't believe such a move will really have a great impact on the parks. Most people who need to have their dogs off leash are already doing so. This isn't going to spark a flood of canines to our parks.

But here's a separate thought on this subject. The article says Mayor Holaday charged the ad hoc committee with finding a solution, and I commend her for doing  so. (Not surprisingly, a poster on the article disputes this.) But assuming this is the case, could this be the Mayor's crowning accomplishment for her first year in office if parkign goes down in flames?

I suppose the parking garage site would be another, but that's not going to work without a parking plan.