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

[sgrizzle]

The aquarium is really being built in phases. They just completed one expansion and have one underway and two more in the pipe. One calls for a tank even larger than the shark tank (in case you didn't know, the shark tank, at half-a-million gallons, is one of the largest in the U.S.) and the larger tank is for sea turtles which are currently stuck hanging out in undersized tanks next door until money can be raised for the new exhibit. My main complaint is that only one day of the week can you get in after 5pm (closes at 6, last admission 1 hour prior)

The Zoo and the Aquarium do not cooperate like they should. I want to see museum-hopper passes and multi-museum memberships. I would probably go to more places if I could pay one (albeit large) price and get a card that gets me into:
Zoo
Aquarium
Philbrook
Gilcrease
Tulsa Air & Space Museum

[Conan71]

You make a good point about a museum-hopper pass.  Sure would make sense to cross-promote different attractions, each attraction should not think of others as competition.

[cannon_fodder]

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.

You realize the sea lions already live at the Tulsa Zoo and have for over a decade, right?  The Tulsa Zoo has been working to replace their 1970's vintage Sea Lion exhibit for several years.   And the possibility of taking that $5mil and giving it to the Aquarium won't be possible, since $3,000,000 of it is private donations for the Sea Lion exhibit (including my $).

So your suggestion, to make the zoo better, would be to take the Sea Lions from the Tulsa Zoo and for the City of Tulsa to fund an exhibit at the Jenks Oklahoma Aquarium?  I truly do not get that.  Addition by subtraction just doesn't work in this instance.

All the fish in the rain forest could be moved, along with the sea otters and flamingos to the aquarium.  We could add so much to the zoo by eliminating a few exhibits.  Penguins swim too, so out with them.  We could get rid of the Elephants (one of the only Male Asian Elephants in captivity) and save even more money.  Ditch the Rhinos and save even MORE money.  The big cats also cost a great deal of money to maintain.  Soon we'd be able to afford to make the zoo really nice.

The aquarium lacks large mammal experience, doesn't have any outdoor facilities, and has no personnel who trains animals. Sorry, the sea lions (Briney and Dorsey) are a popular animals and their shows are usually packed.  Their home is the huge outdoor exhibit at the zoo.  Neither institution would be better off with that change.

- - -

On a more general notion, from my superficial vantage I agree that the museums in Tulsa need to cooperate more (aquarium, zoo, museum, whatever . . .).  I am a member of both the zoo and the aquarium and hold them both as vital parts of Tulsa.  I do not believe either would benefit by transferring a major exhibit from one to the other.   

The mission of the zoo is to help people of all ages develop a better understanding of the natural world.  The means all animals.  I'm happy they don't emphasize aquatics now that we have an aquarium doing so, but I'm glad they include it to some extent.  To deny that would be leaving a gaping hole in the natural world.

- - -

In re the Zoo at large: 

To compare it to the Animal Kingdom is ridiculous. I hope you didn't compare Bell's to Disney World or to Tulsa Air and Space Museum to the Kennedy Space Center.  I would hope Animal Kingdom was better for the money behind it and the 8 times more expensive admission.

But I agree, the zoo needs to work on the details.  Slowly but surely the zoo is redoing exhibits, adding things, and keeping up what it has.  It always has other things to be done and always will.  But shortening that list by getting rid of major exhibits isn't a long term solution.

I also agree wholeheartedly that I would like to see the zoo add low-cost exhibits of local interest.  This would include both a native species exhibit as well as a farming exhibit.  It might sound lame to some people, but visitors might like to see an armadillo, Oklahoma tarantella, scorpion and other such Oklahoma creatures up close.  And it wouldn't be hard or take up much space.

The farm exhibit is another one that seems missing at the zoo.  We have a decent little petting zoo out there which could be the start of a farming exhibit.  Horses, cows, pigs, chickens . .  all the normals animals one would find on a farm in Oklahoma.  We live in Tulsa, a fairly good sized city, I'm sure too many of our children only see cows as we drive by and know pigs from cartoons.  Heck, this exhibit could probably be done real cheap with cooperation from 4-H or a similar program.  It seems to fit with the idea of education.

[the Aquarium has a native Oklahoma area that is sizable, as well as the stream exhibit)

Per the aquarium at large:

They seem to have a better long-term plan.  The Sea Turtle exhibit will be a great addition, the turtles were a nice easy addition, the Ozark stream (beavers, otters, fish) is great.  They area much smaller than the zoo, charge more for entry and don't offer some of the perks (free entry for children groups, free for families of deployed service members, etc.) - but they also have less of a "following" for fund raising.   They do a great job.

Not to say they couldn't do better (I could do a similar, more extensive, list for the zoo):

1) Open the restaurant or add one.  Something you don't need admission to go to for lunch and/or dinner.  Clearly a seafood place and preferably with a huge wall aquarium as part of it.  Could be a money maker for them if they leased some space and shared a wall (which would be the aquarium).

2) More of a theme.  Currently most of the aquarium is a display case for marine animals.  Which is fine, but it isn't set up as a "theme park" atmosphere.  The cure can be seen at the Denver Downtown Aquarium (a private aquarium run by Laundry's Seafood), where there are far fewer exhibits but it is setup with a theme feel to it.  Trees over head, docks, things like that.  The Oklahoma Aquarium does it a little bit, but it is mostly polished concert floors and glass cases.

Denver also uses the space better and wrap exhibits around a big tank in the center such that it feels like you are passing numerous large tanks.

3) More info!  Feel free to try and drown me with info on the animal that is on display.  They do a satisfactory job of it, but I have to imagine there are curators that want to add more details.  Do it!  What's more, bring back the sea food information.  It was informative and kinda funny. 

- - -

SIDE NOTE: how is it that Tulsa doesn't have an oil museum?   Or a City Park displaying (non-working) oil equipment?  SOMETHING cool reflecting our oil heritage and educational.  Many/most people have no idea how a drill rig or pump jack works.



/entire post not really on topic.  Sorry.

[sgrizzle]

Or a City Park displaying (non-working) oil equipment?  SOMETHING cool reflecting our oil heritage and educational.  Many/most people have no idea how a drill rig or pump jack works.

Haven't you heard the PSA's? Playing on oil field equipment isn't cool, man.

[cannon_fodder]

I was waiting for that . . .

[carltonplace]

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. 

I don't know anything about her or her working relationship with the administration, but just from reading the article I hooked onto what wasn't said (blatently anyway) and how loudly the unsaid seemed to jump out.

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.

Translation: "I disagreed with most of the direction that my boss gave me, and I complained when I wasn't given an immediate response to my input"

"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.

Translation: "i'm bitter

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.

Translation: "When I decide something, it should stay 'decided'. There is no benefit in finding alternate solutions or colaborating"

[FOTD]

Just a matter of time before all these quasi public deffered maintenance facilities bring our city down.....Tulsa was much better ficscally and artistically when the ballet, opera, symphony and philharmonic and two premium museums were our crown jewels. Tulsa, never a tourist town....never will be. A Chamber of Commerce led debacle.

What's going on in NYC will come to our town in 5 years. That's about how long our town is behind the curve...


Too few dollars chasing too many tax payer subsidized facilities....


As Arenas Sprout in New York Area, a Scramble to Fill Them - NYTimes.com.htm


By CHARLES V. BAGLI
Published: June 28, 2009
In the inaugural season for the new ballparks for the New York Yankees and Mets, the teams have been embarrassed by television shots showing vast areas of premium seats going unsold.
 

Madison Square Garden
A rendering of a renovated Madison Square Garden, a project costing more than $500 million.
But those who study sporting facilities say empty seats may become even more commonplace here, as New York faces a glut of sports arenas.
Five major complexes — four existing and one planned — will soon be slugging it out within an area 30 miles wide.
At least two of the existing arenas already lose money, and experts say further casualties are almost guaranteed.
“Five arenas is not going to work,” said Mark S. Rosentraub, a professor of sports management at the University of Michigan. “I don’t think four works, even in a market as large as New York. There’s competition in every direction and there aren’t enough events.”
In Brooklyn, the developer Bruce C. Ratner is racing to start construction of a $772 million arena for the Nets basketball team, even as Newark woos the Nets for its money-losing Prudential Center arena.
In New Jersey, the owner of the Devils hockey team, which abandoned the Izod Center in the Meadowlands to play at Prudential Center, wants Gov. Jon S. Corzine to tear down the Izod Center, in the hopes of eliminating a competing venue.
On Long Island, Charles Wang is pressuring local officials to approve his plans to rebuild the much-maligned Nassau Coliseum for his Islanders hockey team by hinting that the team might flee to Queens, or leave New York altogether.
Then there is Madison Square Garden, whose owners are starting a $500 million overhaul of the 41-year-old arena. The Garden’s cachet helps draw performers, but the arena has another considerable advantage: three major professional sports teams play there, leaving the Garden with fewer dates to fill than the region’s other arenas, which all play host to only one major sports team apiece.
By the time the arena in Brooklyn, which will be called Barclays Center, is built, there will be a total of nearly 100,000 seats to fill, 365 days a year.
“The market is saturated,” said Professor Rosentraub. “In the long run, you’ve got serious challenges.”
For most of the last 30 years, there were only three arenas in the New York area: the Garden, Nassau Coliseum and the Izod Center, which opened in 1981 as the Brendan Byrne Arena. Each facility, at one time or another, was home to at least two major sports franchises. But in New York, as in the rest of the country, teams have sought and obtained new buildings — a trend that has contributed to a glut of arenas.
And stadiums and other nontraditional sites have become new rivals. For example, KeySpan Park in Coney Island, which opened in 2001, also hosts musical acts.
Similar battles are already taking a toll in smaller markets than New York.
In Glendale, Ariz., the city-owned Jobing.com Arena — which is losing money and events to US Airways Center in nearby Phoenix and a third arena at Arizona State — may lose its National Hockey League franchise, the Phoenix Coyotes, which filed for bankruptcy last month.
In the Minneapolis-St. Paul region, the Target Center, which is owned by the city of Minneapolis, vies with the publicly subsidized Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul. The Minnesota Timberwolves basketball team plays at the Target Center; the Minnesota Wild hockey team plays at Xcel Energy Center. Both sites are losing money, and they must also compete with the University of Minnesota, which has two arenas.
In Columbus, Ohio, the Blue Jackets hockey team recently opened negotiations to sell its money-losing Nationwide Arena to the county, but the recession has made the sale somewhat unlikely. Nationwide Arena competes for concerts and other nonsporting events with Ohio State University’s Jerome Schottenstein Center, which barely breaks even, according to a report by The Columbus Dispatch.
All of this competition can eat deeply into revenues.
At Nationwide Arena, concert promoters have been known to use the competition as leverage to get a better deal. In some cases, according to Mike Priest, president of the Blue Jackets and JMAC, which manages the arena, promoters have forced the management to guarantee as much as $1.1 million for a major band, even though the same act commands $350,000 less in Indianapolis, which has one main arena.
The competition in the New York area is not just for fans and performers, but also for public subsidies, corporate sponsors and well-heeled tenants for luxury suites.
And within the overall competition, there are subsets of more intense rivalries. In New Jersey, the owner of the $375 million Prudential Center has taken aim at the state-owned Izod Center; in New York, the proposed Barclays Center in Brooklyn is positioned to be a rival of the Garden and the Nassau Coliseum.
No one questions the Garden’s stature as the most venerable and busiest of arenas. It routinely books 275 hockey and basketball games (the Garden is home to the Rangers, Knicks and Liberty), circuses and concerts a year; most operators say arenas need to fill 200 dates to generate an operating surplus.
Still, the Garden’s owners zealously guard their franchise. They successfully opposed the city’s plan in 2005 to build a $2 billion football stadium nearby. The Garden is now embarking on a complete renovation of the arena at a cost of more than $500 million. The 89 existing luxury boxes at the top of the arena will be replaced by 97 plush suites much closer to the action.
The Garden, however, may be looking over its shoulder at Brooklyn, where Mr. Ratner has fought to build a new arena ever since he bought the Nets in 2003. His company has said it intends to host college basketball and boxing cards — both mainstays at the Garden.
Mr. Ratner must start construction by the end of the year in order to qualify for tax-exempt financing, but he faces a number of hurdles, including public approvals and a possible lawsuit.
If successful, Mr. Ratner’s arena would be built next to a major transit hub that involves 10 subway lines and the Long Island Rail Road, providing access for those who might normally visit Nassau Coliseum, 16 miles to the east. Mr. Wang, whose Islanders hockey team plays there, has publicly bemoaned his inability to redevelop the arena, while he spends more than $20 million a year to keep the team alive.
Still, Mr. Ratner’s arena would be the most expensive in the country, and his company has already sustained $111.9 million in pretax losses on the Nets. And critics contend that the tax revenues generated at Barclays Center will fall short of the $300 million in cash and tens of millions of dollars in tax breaks the state and the city have pledged to the arena and a related housing development.
In New Jersey, the owner of the Devils, Jeff Vanderbeek, and the City of Newark would rather have the Nets move from the Izod Center to the Prudential Center. The Devils played at Izod Center until the team’s move to Newark in 2007.
The Nets have rebuffed the invitation. “It’s flattering,” said Brett Yormark, chief executive of Nets Sports and Entertainment. “But we’re going to Brooklyn.”
So far, Prudential Center has not been a success. The Devils invested $155 million in the arena, while Newark put up $220 million and spent another $85 million on related projects. The team is supposed to pay a minimum of $2 million a year in rent, far less than the city’s $12.6 million annual debt service for the arena. But the Devils are disputing their rent bill and have yet to pay a dime.
Mr. Vanderbeek, who declined comment, touched off a political firestorm this month when he told The Record of Hackensack that the state needed to tear down the Izod Center. That, he told the paper’s editorial board, would boost the bottom line of the Prudential Center and the Devils by at least $10 million annually.
His comments brought a quick rebuke from Governor Corzine and the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority, which runs the Izod Center. Whether the Nets stay or go, the authority still needs to generate revenue to pay the bonds on the state-owned building.

[cannon_fodder]

Just a matter of time before all these quasi public deffered [sic] maintenance facilities bring our city down.....Tulsa was much better ficscally and artistically when the ballet, opera, symphony and philharmonic and two premium museums were our crown jewels. Tulsa, never a tourist town....never will be. A Chamber of Commerce led debacle.

Oklahoma City wasn't a tourist town.  Now they have a conference every other weekend and are on ESPN once a month for something or other.  Their minor attractions added up and they are doing just fine.   Will people come to Tulsa from NYC for a vacation as Oklahomans might go to NYC?  Probably not.  But people from KC, Dallas, and the surrounding areas might come for a long weekend.   Conferences might choose Tulsa for their events and people come for the events and bring their families to do and see what we have to offer.  And on top of all that, who says residents of Tulsa can not enjoy what we have to offer? 

Not to mention the Tulsa Zoo has been open since 1927, initiated by Tulsa Parks (not the Chamber).  Philbrook opened in 1937.  Tulsa Opera started in 1948, the same year as the Tulsa Philharmonic.  Gilcrease was 1949. So I', not sure how the Zoo fits into your theory.  Unless you are saying the premium museums and other crown jewels are bringing down the Zoo.  Which I would disagree with.

And frankly, a city the size of Tulsa is expected to have certain things.  It's considered part of the quality of life of an area.  Tulsa offers many of the things you'd expect in a larger city.  Some nicer, some needing work.  I'm glad we continue to improve.

[tshane250]

Just a matter of time before all these quasi public deffered maintenance facilities bring our city down.....Tulsa was much better ficscally and artistically when the ballet, opera, symphony and philharmonic and two premium museums were our crown jewels. Tulsa, never a tourist town....never will be. A Chamber of Commerce led debacle.

Well, that's just not true.  I know lots of people from northwest Arkansas (and some from OKC too) who come to Tulsa to visit the zoo, the aquarium, TASM, Philbrook, BOk Center, etc.  They come here to enjoy what Tulsa has to offer and most importantly they spend their money here, which means the burden of supporting these quality of life attractions is not foot by Tulsans alone.  That's kind of the whole point. 

[FOTD]

Sporadic economics will not be enough.

Sparty, OKC has two major interstates...let's not get into how weak our "synergy development" around the BOK seems.  Seems it has yet to take place. Will it happen? Will our disposable income be enough to enjoy and subsidize? Seems to me there's way too much going on to justify the expenses of up keep in the future. (heck, the polishing of the arena is gonna cost more than the line item first contemplated).



FOTD is sorry for helping divert this thread from its topic. Initially, the point was that our city government did little to help their future Sukcessors and administrators fix our long term liabilities. Underfunding in turn repels the talent needed to run various departments. Our parks being terrific assets exist out of a required necessity in developments around town. It's a shame previous mayors have laid no groundwork to insure that public safety and public education do not deteriorate at the expense of arenas and baseball parks and museums musems museums.

[tshane250]

Well, what's the alternative?  These regional attractions serve as a component of the basic economy for Tulsa, which means they bring in money from outside the region.  Without them local money is just recirculated locally, which creates stagnation - no faster way to destroy an economy. 

Tulsa's best bet for a sucessful and sustainable future is greater density.  Not only would that better utilize already existing infrastructure, it would also make existing commercial development more viable.  As it is now, any new commercial development simply detracts from already exisitng commercial development. 

P.S. I'm sorry I am keeping this thread off topic.  I'll shut up now. 

[FOTD]

Well, what's the alternative?  These regional attractions serve as a component of the basic economy for Tulsa, which means they bring in money from outside the region.  Without them local money is just recirculated locally, which creates stagnation - no faster way to destroy an economy. 

Tulsa's best bet for a sucessful and sustainable future is greater density.  Not only would that better utilize already existing infrastructure, it would also make existing commercial development more viable.  As it is now, any new commercial development simply detracts from already exisitng commercial development.  

P.S. I'm sorry I am keeping this thread off topic.  I'll shut up now. 

Stagnation is not equal to low growth. This city flourished for years, slowly. The regional attractions bring in money from elsewhere but is the benefit greater than the liabilities they create?

Your other point is excellent. We should have walled the city off in 1965 and stopped the BA Expressway. FOTD just wishes we had the outstanding public school system that existed before white flight.


Shoulda, woulda, coulda.....why you won't hear much optimism coming from this Demon when it comes down to our town evolution....

[tshane250]

Stagnation is not equal to low growth. This city flourished for years, slowly. The regional attractions bring in money from elsewhere but is the benefit greater than the liabilities they create?

You know, I was just thinking.  The current state of the city can be likened to the current national economic crisis.  When the city went on an annexation binge in the past, it was sort like someone buying a house that they really couldn't afford.  In the back of their mind they justify the purchase thinking they will get a raise every year and will be able to afford it at some point.  Well, it turns out they couldn't afford it, but they get to keep it and everybody else gets to pay for it.  Simply put, we're paying for the sins of the past. 

I would counter that the city flourished quite rapidly.  Tulsa saw significant population growth both pre and post WWII, sans aggressive annexation even.  Everything sort of went to pot with the advent of the Interstate highway system and our love affair with the automobile (mixed liberally with cheap energy).   

[carltonplace]

I'd want Adelson to hire her back.  She seems like a crazy-maker, which is what EVERY city government NEEDS.  If we had more crazy makers, no ballpark fiasco, NO GPA, NO River Tax.

Yes, Tulsa certainly will progress if we fill up our leadership positions with people that say "no" and say it loudly as if their opinion is the only thing that matters. It's de rigueur.

Peace makers that lobby for concensus, question and look for amenable solutions are so passe.

[edited to -db snark levels]

[DowntownNow]

Carltonplace...what we need is someone thats not afraid to say "no," but also ask "why?"  What we dont need are more sycophants that shake their heads any way the adminstration tells them to, despite the consequences.

Atwater didnt just say "no," she 'recommended' to wait 6 months to re-evaluate the economy and the impact of spending $2million on a sea lion exhibit out of an already diminished and strained budget. 

Where is the harm in an appointed director questioning the need for expenses at financially weak times?  I would call that fiscal responsibility and looking outside-the-box.

Let's not forget that Atwater, as well as Susan Neal (the Mayor's own Director of Community Development and
Education Initiatives) both recommended, and the Parks Board approved, the delay in this sea lion program. 

This wasn't a decision pushed just by Atwater or adopted by just her.  Obviously a majority of those on the Parks Board found reason to defer the sea lion exhibit for 6 months based on the recommendation made.

Now explain to me why Taylor wants so desperately to have that same Parks Board reconsider their already voted on position to delay?

To put it in persective...$2million from the Third Penny sales tax revenue could have been re-allocated or prioritized to the City's operating budget to cover any shortfall that we are now feeling the effects of. 

According to reports in the Tulsa World, that $2million could cover a 2/3rds portion of the $2.9 million shortfall that could be realized on an anticipated loss of sales tax revenues.  That $2.9million figure includes the loss of 18 city positions (most of which are filled), postponement/scrapping of the Police and Fire Academies, shuttering of expressway lighting, materials and supplies, training, utilities, software licensing, pagers and phones, journal subscriptions and membership fees (some of which Im sure can be done away with anyways).  http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090612_11_A1_Elimin473151&archive=yes

The 4 additional furlough days for all city employees under the Mayor's current plan will save approximately $2.6million...so that $2million spent on a sea lion exhibit would right now provide 3 of those 8 days back to city employees, including public safety.  Just imagine how many more days could be given back now that the Unions have renegotiated to cover those furlough days.

Another example of what could be done with the $2million...Police and Fire Acadamies as scheduled ($770,000) and school crossing guards ($525,000) would be covered...leaving $705,000 for other personnel and services if you wanted to ensure public safety.

If you want someone to blindly just spend, spend, spend then by all means...elect a similar leader that will demand nothing but blind obedience.  If you want someone in any office that deals with your money and is willing to look out for the best interests of a City in need...well, sounds like we just lost one.  Thanks Taylor.