Does the Zoo Need a Ponzi Exhibit?

The Bernard Madoff and subprime-lending scandals have made "Ponzi" a household word. But if you didn't already know what it meant, you might just as easily think it referred to a small nocturnal marsupial — just the kind of cute critter you might find at the Woodland Park Zoo.

We're kidding about the marsupial part. But the similarities between a Ponzi and the way the Zoo Society deals with the public bear consideration. Arrogance when questioned, refusal to be forthcoming about finances and operations, inconsistency with data and explanations — all are hallmarks of a classic Ponzi scheme. And all taint the Zoo's approach to dealing with its "investors" — in this case, the taxpayers, City of Seattle, you and me.

A basic Ponzi takes money from investors (promising great returns) and diverts it to the pockets of the Ponzier. The whole setup works great as long as investors aren't paying much attention or drawing on their accounts. For that reason, the cornerstone of a successful Ponzi is opaqueness. Ponziers cannot allow independent scrutiny of their books or respond to probing questions about their operations. If they did, things would go pear-shaped real fast.

The Zoo's planned $28 million parking garage was a Ponzi of sorts. The bulk of the financing — 75 percent — was to come from city coffers. And what would we taxpayers get in return? Debt was assumed to be paid off in 20 years, but even after that it was doubtful the garage would ever pay for itself, let alone give the public a return, considering maintenance and operational costs.

In classic Ponzi fashion, the Zoo first tried to hide what it was doing, not even informing the public that the garage location and configuration were being changed. When the public raised an outcry over the Zoo spending taxpayer dollars for something we didn't even want, the Zoo said, sorry it's a done deal. Fortunately, the Zoo's fuzzy and unresponsive explanations led to a court case that got the garage overturned.

Unfortunately, a number of garage-like boondoggles are still on the books, from the Zoo's standpoint. And just as unluckily, Zoo leaders continue behave in Ponzi-like fashion.

On the front burner is the $7 million West Entry expansion slated to begin this year (the project is under appeal by Save Our Zoo and others). The Zoo wants to install a concrete ticketing plaza and a second Zoo store, removing 14 mature trees (to be replaced with 70 to 80 stick trees) and putting a lot of pavement where open ground exists now.

The Zoo's Long Range Plan, drawn up in 2002, calls for consolidation of the north and west entrances without offering too much in the way of specifics. An argument can be made that the extravagant West Entry is like putting a whole second story on a house where a bathroom remodeling was contemplated.

The Zoo justifies the big plans by saying it needs more ticket windows to handle peak crowds, where lines can extend 30 to 45-minutes long. Save Our Zoo can confirm long lines on, say, a summer Saturday morning. But they are hardly a day-long occurrence, and no documentation is offered on exactly how long they last. The Zoo claims they can occur on 100 days a year, a statistic again offered without documentation and one we consider wildly exaggerated.

As for the second store, the Zoo says parents want to be able to buy stuff on their way out rather than having to carry it around on the grounds. We'll be discussing the store in a subsequent post, but again, the Zoo offers no documentation on this rationale.

Mr. Ponzi can be found lurking in the West Entry's shadows. A much-cited rationale for the expansion is anticipated attendance growth. According to the Zoo, attendance is expected to jump next year to its highest count since 2001. In the Zoo's favor, a new penguin exhibit should spike attendance, as the birth of Hansa the baby elephant did for 2001 crowds. But attendance quickly drops the year following a new exhibit. Attendance through this decade has consistently run below projections assumed in the Long Range Plan, and the recession's growing impact may dampen turnout beyond 2009. Attendance has hovered around 1 million for years, and there is evidence that substantial increase beyond that would make the Zoo a less pleasant place to visit (due to crowdedness and other load factors).

The public is asked to take attendance figures on faith. The Zoo says it will not release daily attendance counts because compiling reports from raw data would take up too much staff time. "We do not do a report of daily attendance figures," said David Schaefer, the Zoo's public affairs director, adding the Zoo is "not willing to prepare a report that doesn't already exist." But Save Our Zoo did not request reports, merely the data.

Save Our Zoo also has sought a copy of the Zoo's 2009 budget for nearly two months, only to be given various excuses. Eventually the budget will be public record through the Parks Department. But it seems disturbingly Ponzi-like for a taxpayer supported organization operating on public property to withhold budget information from public review.

The Zoo is curiously guarded on another data point — membership. It does not track how much members use the Zoo (repeat visits). It does not break down membership by zip code or other specific categories (strangely, since its marketing department presumably could use such data).

In response to repeated queries by Save Our Zoo, the Zoo supplied these year-by-year membership totals:

2004 - 35,000
2005 - 34,000
2006 - 35,500
2007 - 36,000
2008 - 37,000

The figures suggest incremental growth. But they conflict with previously cited totals. The 2006 annual plan, for example, lists 40,000 members. The 2008 plan (dated November 2007) lists 38,000 members.

Asked about discrepancies, Schaefer said the membership totals supplied are rounded off and represent the highest total for each cited year. He also said totals can vary by "a couple of thousand." But 5,000 to 6,000 for the 2005-6 era is more than a couple. And the previously cited figures, compared with the Zoo's supplied totals, suggest falling membership. Sources have told Save Our Zoo on a not-for-attribution basis that membership is "flat" and "static." Schaefer said the Zoo projects a 3 percent annual growth next year.

Save Our Zoo asked for exact year-over-year membership counts as of a specific, statistically consistent date. The Zoo said it does not compile precise information, and Ponzi would nod approvingly.

Save Our Zoo is hardly the only victim of Zoo opaqueness and evasiveness. The city's board of parks commissioners last fall submitted a series of questions to the Zoo on a wide range of topics. Several answers were dismissive, and in some cases did not even address the question, as in the case of questions about whether an off-site location for a second Zoo store was considered and whether means were considered to reduce wait times at the current entry points (north, west, south). The full text of the commission-Zoo Q&A is linked below.

The Zoo has reason to foot-drag on the West Entry. Once it receives a master use permit (currently in the appeals process), data that should or could have figured into the West Entry decision will no longer matter (and cannot be used for an appeal). "It's a done deal" will again become the refrain of the hour. That and "we didn't know." We didn't know attendance would flatten or drop. We didn't know costs would increase so dramatically. We didn't know people wouldn't use the second store. We didn't know removing mature trees and paving over open ground would create such problems (runoff abatement is included in the project but remains a concern).

If there has been one overriding lesson from the economic meltdown of 2008, it's that bad decisions are always preceded by lack of transparency. By withholding and obfuscating financial and operational information, the Zoo sends decidedly the wrong signal to the public about the health and viability of its plans.

Perhaps the Zoo should simply dedicate a small glass cage in one of its exhibits, the kind used for reptiles and critters, to a black box. The box could be labeled simply, "Ponzi."

For full text of the Zoo's responses to the parks commissioners, please scroll down.

Full text of the Zoo's 2009 plan.

Was the whole economy a Ponzi?

Good article on the Madoff scandal and unheeded warnings that preceded it.






Questions for Zoo Society

Q. What are the interim and long-term plans for Camp David? Where is the new trailer going?

A. Camp David is to remain where it is for now. The new trailer is directly south of the reception trailer. The trailers were to have been located closer to the ARC as part of the west garage development, but that is not planned currently.

The zoo’s long-range development plan, approved unanimously by the City Council in 2004 after years of public process, envisions offices for zoo staff near the current north entrance. However, there is no current planning for an office building and it is not identified in the zoo’s current capital development planning.

Q. What planning has begun for a Conservation Exhibit Gallery? How will this building be used?

A. A Conservation Gallery also was part of the long-range development plan with the idea of using it for traveling exhibits that need to be enclosed from the weather, as well as to showcase the zoo’s message of environmental stewardship. While some preliminary concepts have been considered for this Gallery, it is not in the zoo’s five- year capital program.

Q. What new winter time activities are being planned for the zoo grounds?

A. The zoo has considered some winter events to bring people to the facility in the months of November through February, which is normally the slowest time of the year at the zoo. No such events are planned in 2009, but there is the potential to get fuller use of this city-owned facility other times of the year.

Q. How is the off-site property near Enumclaw being used? What is the cost to operate and maintain that facility? What are the future plans for its use?

A. The off-site property near Enumclaw is being used to grow hay to feed zoo animals in a shared arrangement with a local farmer. The zoo has a caretaker living on the property who manages the property in return for housing. Due to these contractual arrangements, no money is directly budgeted to support the operation of this facility.
Future plans are to house endangered zoo animals for the purposes of reproduction and support of conservation work.

Q. How much money does the zoo earn at Mom and Me Day? Since admission that day is based on buying a Tee shirt from Macy's, how much revenue does the zoo earn compared to charging normal admission fees?

A. Mom and Me is not a major generator of cash for the zoo – it was about $17,600 in 2007 and $16,200 in 2008. The real value is in very significant in-kind advertising by Macy’s, which helps kick off the new summer season at the zoo. Also, it is very popular with the public because they can get in – and get a t-shirt – for about $8. So even though the zoo doesn’t make a lot of money, it is a very nice, affordable event for people who might not otherwise get to the zoo.

Q. What is the total number of staff and how has that changed in the past few years? What is the distribution by job category?

A. Currently, there are 271 regularly-benefited employees. That number is down somewhat from earlier in the year but higher than in 2007, in which there were 253 full- and part-time permanent employees.
There also currently are 138 temporary or seasonal staff, and that number is also higher than last year.
A breakdown by job category: animal care, 114; facilities, 56; education, 31; guest services, 28; other categories such as administration, planning and development, marketing, public relations, etc., 42.

Q. Last year, work was begun on an asset management plan. Is this plan complete, and has a draft of final copy been submitted to DPR?

A. Work began on a facilities-condition assessment in 2006, which the zoo staff uses to plan expenditures on long-term maintenance and repair. It is a dynamic assessment which is updated periodically as repairs are made and new projects come on-line. It has not been submitted to the Parks Department.

Wildlife Conservation Activities


Q. How much cash does the zoo contribute toward field projects?

A. The zoo’s Field Conservation Department budget is $850,000 in 2008.

Q. How much is the Annual Conservation Dues?

A. Grants to the field are approximately $350,000. Of this, Conservation Dues are $18,000.

Q. What is the amount of "base support" provided to the Partners in Wildlife programs?

A. $195,000, plus the zoo supports the Conservation Director who leads the Tree Kangaroo conservation effort.

Q. What is the value assigned to in-kind or other zoo staff support for conservation programs outside the Woodland Park Zoo?

A. We have not assigned a value to the staff support. For example, animal care staff raise the Oregon Silverspot butterflies and Western Pond Turtles for release into native habitat in Oregon and Washington. We have not included the staff costs of raising these animals in the figures noted above.

Admissions

Q. What effect has the increase in admission fees had on visitation? Are there as many return guests?

A. Paid attendance this year increased 4 percent over 2007. We do not have data on how much of the paid attendance is repeat visitors. This summer’s attendance is the second-highest in the 10 years the records have been kept here at the zoo.

Q. What information on guest statistics does the new Point of Sale software allow the zoo to capture and how is this information used?

A. We can sort by ticket price, discount, group size.

Q. The total admissions numbers for the zoo for 2006 and 2007 were 1,088,922 in 2006 and 1,034,216 in 2007. 2008 Admission projection was 1,090,000 which included 50,000 toddlers (under 2) and 9,000 students under the free admission program. Do you think that the 2008 Admission projection will be met, or if not, what is your best estimate? Have you updated the projections for 2009 and 2010, and if so, what are they?

A. We do expect to meet the 2008 projections. The 2009 projection is 1,120,000. We have not made a projection for 2010.

Q. How many other students in organized tours visited the zoo in 2008? How many low income guest passes were redeemed at the zoo of the 40,000 available tickets (per the 2008 Annual Plan).

A. There were 36,287 paid school attendees in 2008, (a figure which includes children and adults on organized field trips.) Of the 40,000 low-income guest passes issued, 37,621 tickets were issued. They are not all used for admission, however. In 2007, the return rate was 42 percent. It is about 39 percent so far this year.

Q. Do your Admissions figures include people who come for an event, like a wedding, concert, or other after hours activity, and pay a fee, in addition to the people who come just to see the Zoo? If so, generally how many of these event-oriented admissions are in the total Admissions numbers?

A. The admissions numbers include all events organized by the zoo, such as concerts and the pumpkin prowl. There are a few private events, after hours, that are not reported to admissions, but the number is very small compared to our overall attendance – less than 2 percent.


West Entry

Q. The Long Range Plan tied a consolidated west entry to a new parking lot or garage. Since the plan no longer includes a new larger parking supply, why is such an elaborate entry needed?

A. The new west entry was part of all seven transportation solutions studied in the 2002 environmental-impact statement. It is a stand-alone project that does not rely on a parking garage. Currently, about half the zoo patrons come though the north and west entries. That is expected to continue when those two entries are consolidated into the new west entry.

Q. Did you consider any improvements to the current entries to reduce wait times?

A. The west entry project includes a number of changes to reduce wait times. In this plan, ticketing and membership services will be handled separately, so those with membership cards will not have to wait in line with those waiting to buy tickets. Other ticketing changes are part of the program.


Q. You have said wait times exceed 30 minutes and this is a problem. How often does that occur?

A. 30-minute to 45-minute waits can occur on as many as 100 days a year.

Q. What is the estimate for cost of West Entry?

A. Approximately $7 million, although the project has not gone out to bid.

Q. What is the budget for trees and other landscaping -- what size of trees will be planted as replacement for the 14 removed?

A. The landscaping budget is approximately $780,000. Of the 70-80 trees planned to replace the 14 that will be removed, about 40 will be about 12-feet high and will be placed either between the west parking area and the west entry plaza, or strategically placed around the perimeter of the plaza to control views. Another 30 to 40 trees, of specific ornamental species, will be used to accent specific areas. These will be 8- to 9-feet tall. The trees will gain about 2- to 3-feet in height within a few years.

Q. Will the Zoo prepare a Vegetation Management Plan?

A. The zoo’s practices already far exceed the requirements of the city’s Vegetation Management plans. For example, we have a very specific plan for the Northern Trail biome and are methodically developing similar plans for the other biomes. Each project has a vegetation asset assessment and reclamation/restoration plan. For large mature trees, each is addressed as a distinct individual. Shrubs and groundcovers are evaluated for potential salvage and replanting. We follow the protocols laid out in the City of Seattle Parks Tree Management, Maintenance, Pruning and/or Removal for assessment and mitigation and meet or exceed those procedures or protocols. Overall, we are guided by the principles laid out in the original Long Range Plan of 1976 and reinforced in subsequent updates of that plan including the LRPDP.

Q. What staff resources are available to inventory and care for the trees at the Zoo?

A. We have a staff horticulturist that manages our plant collection and inventory. The zoo horticulture staff that maintains and improves our plant resource consists of the maintenance operations manager, a horticulturist, three senior gardeners, six gardeners, and two assistant gardeners. In addition, the zoo contracts with Seattle Tree Preservation on for assistance on the stewardship and management of mature trees.

Q. Have you prepared an inventory of the all the mature trees that could be impacted by the full development of your Long Range Plan?

A. We have an inventory of all the mature trees on the grounds managed and maintained by the zoo. This inventory has not been compared/analyzed in the context of full buildout of the long range plan. Impacts to the plant resource are assessed and mitigated within the scope of each project development.
We do a tree assessment whenever we build a new project. Construction documents contain the detail of which trees would be removed, for what reason, and how and when they will be replaced. In general, we replace three trees for any tree taken down – which exceeds city requirements. The zoo has planted about 4,700 trees since 1985.

Long Range Plan

Q. There is community criticism about the Zoo's Long Range Plan in particular the addition of several buildings not related to animal exhibits or care. What is the conservation purpose in building these structures in the park? If the purpose is mostly economic, what alternatives have you considered such as opening a 2nd zoo store in a commercial area? How is scheduling the development of these facilities prioritized relative to non-animal facilities like the West Entry, that is, why are animal facilities not scheduled for development before the West Entry is?

A. The premise of this question is not accurate. The long-range development plan was adopted by the City Council in 2004 after five years of extensive public process.

The long-range development plan included the following principles:

• Improve the animal health, conservation and maintenance facilities and provide new exhibits;
• Provide the community with facilities for social gathering, recreation and interactive learning for visitors of all ages, with a focus on programs that inspire conservation;
• Enhance the zoo’s financial stability and stewardship by creating facilities and programs that yield new, year-round revenue streams;
• Improve visitors’ experience, particularly for families with young children and during off-peak times in late fall, winter and spring;
• Reduce the neighborhood traffic impact by providing sufficient on-site parking to accommodate current and projected zoo attendance on all but a few days each year, and;
• Provide on-site staff work space that enhances efficiency, productivity and collaboration.


Since the management agreement between the City and Zoo Society took effect, the zoo has opened many animal exhibits – Wild Dog, Jaguar, Master of the Web (spiders) and the Willawong Station (Australian Birds). The zoo re-opened the African Savannah with many new animals such as ostrich and giraffe. The Zoomazium, which opened in 2006, includes animals and animal experiences as part of its programming.

This year, the zoo opened its very successful flamingo exhibit, and next year the new Humbolt Penguin exhibit will open. Projects such as the west entry, which will improve access and services for zoo guests, are an inherent part of the zoo’s mission of connecting people with animals to inspire them to take action to save species and habitat.


Interviews of zoo guests indicate that they would like the opportunity to visit a store on their way out, rather than carry items with them during the day. A store at the exit is customary in zoos.

Q. The Seattle P-I editorial board, Council member Tom Rasmussen and the Phinney Ridge Community Council have asked that the Zoo secure a DPD land use interpretation for the Zoo Store and Conservation Gallery. Will you do that especially in light of the error made on the garage which turned out not to be allowed by the code?

A. The zoo asked for a code interpretation on the zoo store at the request of Councilmember Rasmussen and Parks Supt. Gallagher. There is no conservation gallery proposed in this project.