Planning officials confirmed that an application under the streamlining act has been filed for the Walgreens proposal. Land-use attorney Sue Hestor told us that the folks seeking approval under the state act are by no means going to get it automatically. But it may provide the developers with a chance to see whether their applications have been properly dealt with so far by the Planning Department. (Savannah Blackwell)

Dog eat dog: Sup. Leland Yee is urging the Board of Supervisors to pressure the Golden Gate National Recreation Area to shine light on a secretive process dog advocates say may end off-leash recreation in San Francisco's national parks.

Yee's resolution is the latest salvo in a yearlong battle between dog owners and the GGNRA, the agency that oversees Bay Area parklands owned by the National Park Service. In response to public outcry last year when its Citizen's Advisory Commission debated canceling a 1979 city policy that recommended off-leash recreation at a few city parks, the GGNRA initiated a rule-making process to collect public opinion.

A federal panel will review more than 8,000 comments this fall before deciding whether San Francisco parks will be exempt from federal regulations requiring dogs to be leashed. Dog advocates argue that the GGNRA has already cast a suspicious shadow over the process by refusing to reveal the design, methodology, or protocols it will use to analyze public comments, despite numerous requests under the Freedom of Information Act.

Steve Cockrell, president of CityDogs advocacy group, said, "The GGNRA has created mistrust in San Francisco by deceiving the public with dirty tricks." Exemption 5 in FOIA allows the agency to refuse to release information used in a decision-making process before a decision has been made, GGNRA FOIA officer Rich Weideman said. But Terry Francke, general council to the California First Amendment Coalition and an expert on public access law, said the agency is hiding behind the exemption.

"The cynicism of purporting to solicit public input on the one hand and concealing how it will be massaged on the other has apparently not occurred to the agency," Francke said. Federal agencies have been told by Attorney General John Ashcroft to make any argument against disclosure they can with a straight face and his lawyers will defend the secrecy, Francke said. "The question is whether the agency's decision-making process in this instance, with no slightest tinge of security sensitivity, can ask to be considered legitimate while refusing to be transparent," he said.