Fired City Parks Chief Says She Had Nerve to Question Mayor Taylor

[DowntownNow]

Interesting article from someone that wants to take a public stand against another Taylor action.  

Fired park chief says she questioned Taylor

by: P.J. LASSEK World Staff Writer
Sunday, June 28, 2009
6/28/2009 4:15:59 AM

Challenging Mayor Kathy Taylor on the funding of Tulsa Zoo Friends' sea-lion exhibit was likely the final action that led to her recent dismissal, former Park Director Nancy Atwater says.

Just before completing her one-year probation period, Atwater said, she was let go last Monday with only the explanation that she and the city "were not a good fit."

Atwater told the Tulsa World that the action came a few days after she questioned Taylor on funding for the $5 million exhibit during a staff meeting on capital needs.

Susan Neal, who oversees the Park Department, would only say the dismissal involved more than one issue. She said Atwater "is talented" and wished her success.

Atwater said it wasn't her first time to question the administration or to initiate action on park issues during her nearly 10 months on the job.

"I'm outspoken," she said. "I would communicate with the administration, get no feedback, and then I would proceed, and that was my mistake."

Atwater said when she was recruited to be Tulsa's park director she was told the city was looking for "a self-directed leader who could think outside of the box."

"Apparently, that's not what they wanted," she said.

"I'm much better in the private sector than the public; it's more honest, more flexible. The private world is not ethically repugnant," she said.

Neal said no one from the city has acted unethically.

Earlier this month on Atwater and Neal's recommendation, the Park Board voted to defer construction of the sea-lion exhibit for six months to monitor the economy. The project funding includes $3 million from Zoo Friends and $2 million from the city's third-penny sales tax program.

In the city's current economic condition, Atwater said she expressed concerns about where the city would find the $200,000 a year needed to operate the exhibit.

Taylor now wants the Park Board to reconsider its vote next month.

Neal said the mayor got more input from Zoo Friends showing the benefits of the low construction prices and that operational costs would not be needed for two years.

Keegan Young, Zoo Friends executive director, said the organization has a construction company ready to start the project. He also said Zoo Friends is committed to funding the operational costs that the city can't pay.

The nonprofit Zoo Friends provides services for the zoo including fundraising, marketing, collection of gate admissions, concessions, gift shop, and guest services. It has 28 employees at the zoo and funds six city zoo posts the city can't afford. The city has 82 employees at the zoo.

Atwater said she also became at odds with Zoo Friends as the city made severe budget cuts and she tried to further reduce the revenues that Zoo Friends receives from the city for its cut of gate admissions.

Overall, Zoo Friends makes a lot of money generated at the zoo and very little goes back into the zoo operations, she said.

"I suggested we reduce the funds instead of bodies," she said.

"It's an awkward situation. Zoo Friends employees at the zoo get bonuses, and city employees get furloughs," Atwater said

Young said there are no bonuses, but his employees will get pay raises.

Atwater also questions why the city hasn't sought bids for some of the contract services provided by Zoo Friends. Neal said she did not know that answer but the city is in the process of renegotiating the Zoo Friends contract, which will clarify its roles at the zoo.

Atwater said it's been frustrating watching the administration "systematically dismantling" the Park Department, leaving it without resources to function properly.

She said privatizing of the golf courses and Gilcrease Museum were successful, but, "what will become of the zoo, Oxley Nature Center and the recreation programs?"

Neal said the Park Department's budget struggle is not the current administration's fault and has been there for at least a decade. It's a national problem that all Park Departments face due to their difficulty in competing for funds with public safety, infrastructure and utility needs, she said.

Atwater said it will take the "leadership of the next administration to define the future of the Parks Department because this one hasn't. That's the elephant in the room. Are we going to have a Park Department or not?"

A master plan for the city's Park Department, which got under way in January, will provide a road map for the future. Public input on the plan will begin next month.

What I find interesting in the article is the following:

• Atwater questioned the the timing and feasibility of constructing and maintaining a new exhibit during tough economic times and is subsequently dismissed.  Susan Neal at the time also made the same recommendation as Atwater.  Taylor now says she wants the Park Board to reconsider the vote.
• Zoo Friends says they already have a construction company ready to start the project.  As a 501(3)(c) entity, Zoo Friends is not required to seek bids for projects, something that could help tremendously in this economic climate.  They are however, allowed to utilize public tax dollars for such endeavours.

• Atwater has come out and publicly called the administration "ethically repugnant,' quite a statement from someone what was hired by them not a year before and in the article is described as a 'talented' by Susan Neal.
• Atwater publicly raises her concern over being terminated based on her quesitoning Mayor Taylor on this fiscal issue.  Susan Neal says there were other factors but offers none.

• Atwater makes the claim that Zoo Friends "makes a lot of money generated at the zoo and very little goes back into the zoo operations"...in FYE 06/2007, Zoo Friends had a budget surplus of $1.15 million.
• "Atwater also questions why the city hasn't sought bids for some of the contract services provided by Zoo Friends. Neal said she did not know that answer" - There's always a lot that Susan Neal never seems to know the answer to eventhough she is over the departments information is sought from.  Just watch any of the City Council meetings she has been involved in.

• $2 million of funding for this new exhibit is supposed to come from the City's Third Penny Sales Tax Program...a program that for the next fiscal year shows a massive budget shortfall resulting in the reduction of services, positions and furlough days.  If the City is scrounging for every necessary penny it needs to operate, why would we be investing $2 million of the needed revenue into a project like this now?  Why not postpone until times are better?  Or is Taylor trying to ensure a certain construction company can remain solvent through this economic downturn with taxpayer funded projects?  Isnt this Pork?
• Atwater makes one last final statement that may very well paint a picture of things to come and we are left wondering what will be the outcome..."Atwater said it's been frustrating watching the administration "systematically dismantling" the Park Department, leaving it without resources to function properly"

[/list]
[/list]
[/list]

[FOTD]

Kudos to our Mayor for finally working to keep project costs down or eliminated when it appears such projects may lower the future funding necessary for our safety priorities. Perhaps, the parks department should be privatized through forming a foundation or trust. Between the Warren's and Kaiser's interests in contributing time and money, this is one department best removed from the city priority list. Most parks were donated as a trade off for residential development.

Nice try Nancy. Don't let the door smack you in the butt on the way out...

[DowntownNow]

Kudos FOTD?  Really?  Perhaps you missed the part of the article that said it was Nancy Atwater (along with Susan Neal) that recommended the Tulsa Parks Board postpone the project and they agreed?  Did you also miss part where it stated your beloved Kathy Taylor is hoping that the Parks Board reconsider the vote at the next meeting to proceed with the project and spend that $2 million that you say is needed for public safety?  Wait, did you even read the article?

We are facing a significant budget shortfall, one that will force a reduction in services, materials and manpower through 8 furlough days of City employees but Mayor Kathy Taylor can justify spending $2 million on a seal lion exhibit that comes from the same Third Penny sales tax revenue that is being impacted?

How on earth can she or Susan Neal justify this? This is a slap in the face to every hard working City employee that will have to take a reduction so we can have a new exhibit a year or two earlier. We can wait until times are better for a new exhibit...we can not wait on things like mowing, trash, public safety, grafitti, etc.

[DowntownNow]

Just to make it easier for FOTD and others:

Earlier this month on Atwater and Neal's recommendation, the Park Board voted to defer construction of the sea-lion exhibit for six months to monitor the economy. The project funding includes $3 million from Zoo Friends and $2 million from the city's third-penny sales tax program.

In the city's current economic condition, Atwater said she expressed concerns about where the city would find the $200,000 a year needed to operate the exhibit.

Taylor now wants the Park Board to reconsider its vote next month.

[waterboy]

Perhaps the 200,000 will come from the surpluses that Zoo Friends is accumulating? I understand Taylor's and FOTD's concept that labor and material costs are low right now so why not capitalize on them. However, unless ongoing costs are budgeted through Zoo friends, it is a false economic gain.

BTW, those parks were not necessarily donations. They were requirements of the law at the time. A certain amount of park or public lands was required with each development approval. Over time such requirements as sidewalks, curbs, parks etc. has become more or less voluntary. Now, these things are shouldered by neighborhood associations and foundation donations.

I for one do not look forward to the privatization of parks. Kaiser and Zarrow may be great guys but their tastes are not always the public's taste and the potential for abuse is great. Look no farther than the RPA and its foundation buddies who had blunted development for decades till Kaiser and Warren ponied up. They jettisoned their "friends" foundation when the two interests diverged. She may have needed the boot, but one should take note of her frustration.

[RecycleMichael]

She was a bad fit for the job. She argued in public meetings, attacked the partners in the zoo, and was uncooperative during budget meetings. They combined mowing operations of parks with the department responsible for mowing right-of-ways and she acted as if they had destroyed her department.

I say kudos for getting rid of her before she became entrenched in civil service and a liability for future administrations.

[Wilbur]

Third penny items are voted on and approved by the people.  Thus, once approved, they are required to be completed.  No one has the authority to 'just say no' when it comes to third penny projects.  If so, I would think it would take a re-vote of the people.

Projects might get postponed if third penny comes in under projections, but I don't believe they can be canceled.

[FOTD]

Third penny items are voted on and approved by the people.  Thus, once approved, they are required to be completed.  No one has the authority to 'just say no' when it comes to third penny projects.  If so, I would think it would take a re-vote of the people.

Projects might get postponed if third penny comes in under projections, but I don't believe they can be canceled.

Yes. But it can be replaced in the list of priorities. Use the funds to form a foundation. Combine all entities like Zoo Friends etc under one private/public Trust. Add a line item to city bills.....shift the tax burden. Like trash, let there be a direct charge for mowing and maintenance of the parks by outsourced companies. City provides water for free.

[DowntownNow]

So Michael, she was a bad fit and they waited until now to can her?  Just before her one-year probation?  They could have done that the first time she 'attacked' Zoo Friends or their directors, especially given the influence members of that Board hold. 

Neither the Tulsa World, nor any other news organization, has ever reported on Atwater's attitude being out of line.  Just because she chose to challenge the status quo and ask pertinent questions in light of a tough economy, troubled budget, etc. as a good Director should, that makes her a bad fit?

I suppose it does when Taylor obviously wants the new sea lion exhibit started at the taxpayer's expense of $2 million out of the already strangled Third Penny revenues.  I suppose all City services should defer to this added extravagance eh? 

I would have raised all kinds of grief if I were the Parks Director and I was told they were moving mowing of the Parks to the PWD when funds arent available for them to perform the job they already have.  I would question with great skepticism the amount of control that 'charitable' organizations have on City policies and procedures relating to Parks.  Its one thing to be a charitable organization that wants to work hand with a department and raise funds for various park purposes, its quite another to hold those efforts hostage ,so to speak, so as to influence policy and decisions.

Where is the justification in spending $2 million of desperately needed funds for other departments and services?  Where is the justification in spending this while City employees are being forced to take furlough days?  What is the harm in waiting (as was recommended by both Atwater and Susan Neal , who by the way is Taylor's voice on the Park's Board) 6 months to determine the state of the economy and its effect on the budget?

Scares the bejesus out of me when people think Board, Trust and Authority Directors should just keep their mouths shut and go with what someone wants despite the ramifications it could have for the larger interest of the citizens, or worse yet, do what they want with impunity. 

If you dont have the cajones to occassionally ruffle feathers and stand up for your beliefs and the interests of the public at large over individual or influential interests, then dont bother seeking appointment for the position.

I think we need City employees working to repair streets, man the 9-1-1 call centers, provide public safety through Fire and Police, mow the grass on rights of ways, abate grafitti and be near a phone when a citizen has a concern of need more than we need a sea lion exhibit right now.  That can wait.

[RecycleMichael]

You can Monday morning quarterback all you want. I am not going to get in a debate with you about mowing or sea lions, because you have a history of anonymous attacks and relish in attacking good people.

I knew she was in trouble when the last couple of months of her employment I kepy hearing about her. It was no secret that she became very difficult to work with. She made a bunch of enemies and proved herself the wrong fit for that job.

[DowntownNow]

This is pointless because rather than discuss and debate, which means answering questions poised, you Michael choose to ignore and complain.

Its not Monday morning quarterbacking on my part.  I agree the Mayor has the right to hire and fire such positions.  I do however, question the reason behind this termination and its timing given the issues illustrated in the article.  Especially in light of Taylor's comments that she now wants the Parks Board to reconsider its earlier vote to postpone the sea lion project.  There was no other basis for her termination of than 'it wasnt a good fit.'  Sorry, thats not good enough...why wasnt it a good fit?  How can they make that statement and then go on to say she's 'talented.' 

But all that aside, and your failure to comment even once on the questions I posited, lets talk about who personally attacks whom.  In your previous post you essentially attacked Ms. Atwater...stating she was a bad fit, argued at budget meetings, attacked Zoo Friends.  What qualifies you to define a 'bad fit'?  Did you attend all the meetings she was involved in?  How was it she could make a recommendation and have it approved by a majority of the Parks Board if she was such a bad fit?

[RecycleMichael]

Yes.

You want to take the view of the fired employee who tries to save face by saying it was political, fine.

I worked with her (and the three people in her job before that) and I think Tulsa Parks are going to be better off under different leadership. I also think that her attitude was poor and the Mayor waited till after the budget to make the change. 

[TheArtist]

Frankly I think its a shame and a waste to be building a sea lion exhibit at the zoo. We have a nice little "starter aquarium" which would be greatly improved by having a few more nice exhibits. I was just at Disneys Animal Kingdom in Florida. Absolutely incredible, a wonderful attraction.... not a sea lion or fish tank in sight.

Its yet another example of how we tend to half donkey things, with a little of this and that scattered around. But if we were to plan ahead and focus our limited resources and funds we could create some great stuff, aka, "critical mass" for some truly wonderful area attractions.

I dont think anyone here could truly argue against the notion that it would be better for the region, the city, and yes even ultimately the zoo, to take that 5 mill and add the sea lion exhibit to the aquarium there in Jenks.  You know danged well that would be true.

Also for a couple million you could do a LOT of wonderful improvements to our zoo. Last time I was at the zoo,,, well again, at the Animal Kingdom a couple weeks ago,,, it was sunny and HOT! lol. I have been to the zoo here on such days as well. But the difference was that the Animal Kingdom had lots of comfortable shady areas aaaall over the place. They used covered walkways, bridges, etc not just as shady areas or to keep you dry if it rained etc. but also as aesthetic features with educational and entertainment potential. I remembered walking one stretch at the zoo thinking,,, wouldnt it be great to have a covered walkway of wood and thatch between these two areas. Structures, especially themed ones,  not only serve a practical purpose, but can act as educational material showing how the flora, fauna, and environment impacted human culture and building materials. Artifacts, interesting info signs, etc, can be hung and attached to them. I thought of how neat it would be to have a large, artificial rock outcropping with arches and tunnels leading to yet another area. Again, acting a another welcome spot of shade and shelter from heat, rain and wind. Soooo many wonderful things could be done for a couple mill that would greatly improve the zoo, its level of comfort, entertainment potential, its appearance, and educational components. A LOT more than a single sea lion exhibit. Which again, would better serve us all going in at the aquarium.

I think the zoo is lacking in a vision that will sell. And dont give me some bull about "thats not what the zoo should be about",,, hogwash. Every animal there would be better served if the zoo were a greater attraction pulling in big bucks. 

[pmcalk]

Artist,

You need to revisit the Tulsa zoo.  It has plenty of shady areas, great themed exhibits, and termendous educational areas.  No, it doesn't have a enormous fake tree, a dinosaur section (talk about hot/no shade), or multi-million dollar theme rides.  But it also doesn't cost $75 a day to attend. 

I agree the zoo doesn't need a new sea lion exhibit.  What I would really like the zoo to create with the money is an indigenous Oklahoma area--perhaps a tall grass prarie area, complete with buffalo and other animals.

[Rico]

Isn't "Tulsa Zoo Friends" the group that does Waltz on the Wild Side......?

Always did like Lou Reed.