Seattle Press on Line - City Transfers Management to Zoo Society

City Transfers Management to Zoo Society

By Roberta Cruger

Will she have proper care after Zoo operations are turned over to the Woodland Park Zoological Society? (Woodland Park Zoo archive photo)

Dec 20, 2001 -- As the City of Seattle transfers the zoo into the hands of the Woodland Park Zoological Society (WPZS), the Operations and Management Agreement has come under intense scrutiny. In the seven weeks since a draft was first submitted to City Council, it has undergone at least that many revisions in an all-out effort to get it passed in 2001. After a flurry of last-minute revisions, the agreement was passed 8 - 1 by the City Council on December 17. Councilmember Judy Nicastro was the sole dissenting vote.

"It gives new meaning to the Christmas rush," says Chris Leman, a zoo activist who has effectively worked toward changes to not "give away the zoo." Criticism from advocacy groups is not about the privatization but the hasty process, and there is concern over adequate protection of the city and safeguarding the public interest.

According to Jorgen Bader, a former assistant city attorney, the original document was lopsided in favor of the WPZS, without adequate controls for Seattle. "The agreement is, in reality, a 20-year lease with a large subsidy," he claims, citing a lack of oversight, limited accountability and transparency. The issue of insurance liability was addressed and included in an amendment.

Another amendment states that the Zoo Society will provide the public with an opportunity to read and comment on its draft Annual Plan each year, with the provision that such comments will be addressed in the final Annual Plan.

Though the city maintains ownership and provides funding, this power shift is intended to streamline and increase efficiency, eliminating duplicate records and stabilizing funding, without competition from services such as police, fire and transportation, which could appease donors unwilling to fund government departments.

Stephanie Bell, program coordinator with the Humane Society of the United States, also expressed concern. She maintains it's imperative that records regarding the welfare of the animals be open. Though animal care records were adopted, she wants all documents the Parks and Recreations Department keeps, such as vet reports and animal sale information, to stay accessible.

"No one's trying to kill the transition," Leman insists, but he has pushed for more public hearings to review revisions. One key issue among Leman's list of objections is the shift of civil service jobs. Zoo employees, currently employed through the Parks Department, will be phased over to Zoo Society employees over the next year and potentially lose whistleblower's rights. This issue was addressed in the final agreement with a proviso that no City positions in the Zoo Program will be eliminated. Nor will any employee involuntarily transferred to the Zoo Society see their job cut.

"The devil's in the details," says Newell Aldrich, a staffer in Councilmember Nick Licata's office. "It's been hard to follow it all, so much has happened so quickly." As chair of Culture Arts and Parks Committee, Licata urged a number of changes to the agreement, including ethical standards similar to the city's code, guarding against conflict of interests. Councilman Peter Steinbrueck also believes in holding off legislation for further review, despite the early approval by the Finance Committee. Another amendment was introduced addressing this issue; the Zoo Society will be required to adhere to a code of ethics "consistent with State and federal law and wit American Zoo and Aquarium Association standards."

It doesn't feel like a rush to David Towne, CEO of the Zoological Society and former zoo director. The Zoological Society has been working on this transition since 1995 when a Zoo Commission first tackled the idea. He compares the contract to similar arrangements the city has with the Symphony and Seattle Art Museum, and cites economic considerations for the push, as well as a change in mayors and his retirement.

Apparently Greg Nickels is for the zoo's privatization, but some speculate it's a legacy Mayor Paul Schell wants to leave. The next and last opportunity for the Council to vote on its approval of the zoo's long-range plan will be in April.

The process of transition has been a matter of birth pangs, says Irene Wall, president of the Phinney Ridge Community Council and Zoo Society board member. "The growth curve has been high." She acknowledges that objections led to modifications, improving clarity and public access. The long-term partnership the Zoo Society has enjoyed with the Parks Department and its dedication to the city's award-winning zoo should continue to prove beneficial. "It's an evolution, not a revolution."

Reader Comments

Discuss this article in the forums!

No comments yet!