Overton Park Conservancy issued the following position statement this afternoon.
The statement makes the salient point that the contracting authority for City of Memphis rests with the mayor, not Memphis City Council. Regardless of our positions on the parking issue, the erosion of the mayor’s contracting authority is a slippery slope for a “strong mayor” form of government like the one in Memphis. In addition, the Conservancy again confirms its position to participate in the mediation process established by Mayor Jim Strickland.
Here is the Conservancy’s statement:
Overton Park Conservancy Position Statement
March 7, 2016
The Memphis City Council on March 1, 2016, passed a resolution that the vast majority of the Greensward was to be “devoted for Zoo purposes only.” The Council’s resolution appears to conflict with OPC’s authority to “manage,” “operate,” and “lease” the Greensward, when the City Mayor had clearly transferred that authority to the Conservancy. However, although concerned, the Conservancy remains optimistic that most of the issues can be resolved by agreement, and we remain willing and anxious to make every effort to do so.
To the extent there is any question whether Zoo customers may continue to park on the northern third of the Greensward on “peak” days, when the Zoo’s other parking lots are full, there is not and never has been any disagreement between the Conservancy and the City about that. The Conservancy has always acknowledged and accepted that, unless and until acceptable alternatives are found, Zoo customers may continue to park on the Greensward on “peak” days as a last resort. The Conservancy agreed to that in writing with Mayor Wharton and we have reiterated that agreement with Mayor Strickland and the Council.
The Conservancy’s Executive Director, Tina Sullivan, emphasized that in her statement at the Council meeting. It is our belief that the Mayor, as the City’s sole contracting officer under the Charter, has jurisdiction to decide whether and when satisfactory alternatives to Greensward parking are available and should be adopted. Therefore, as and when alternative parking solutions are found, accepted by Mayor Strickland, and he so directs, parking on the Greensward should be reduced accordingly, with the ultimate goal that it be eliminated.
It is not clear whether and to what extent the Council was attempting in its resolution to deal with any issues other than Greensward parking. As we have said, there is considerable concern that the resolution that has been provided to us has inconsistencies in the exhibits, presenting a number of practical and legal questions.
The Conservancy strongly believes the Council’s resolution is based on fundamental misunderstandings about the basic facts regarding the management agreements the City has entered into with OPC and the Zoo. It is quite clear the City has never agreed to give the Zoo management authority over the Greensward, and that the City very clearly gave that responsibility solely to the Conservancy in 2012. The Conservancy, since 2012, has been managing, operating and leasing the Greensward for private and special events, according to the terms of its agreement with the City Mayor.
The Conservancy sincerely hopes most, if not all, of these issues can be worked out by agreement through mediation rather than by litigation, and we will continue to make every effort to do so.
That is the position of the Overton Park Conservancy as we continue to work with all parties to find real solutions to better serve all of our stakeholders and, more importantly, all of our visitors to Overton Park.
Sincerely,
Ray Pohlman
Chairman
Overton Park Conservancy
OPC lost all credibility in its opening sentence. Memphis City Council did not declare in its resolution that the “vast majority of the Greensward was to be ‘devoted for Zoo purposes only’.” The resolution in fact reads:
“The Council does hereby ratify … the authority of the operators and patrons of the City’s Zoo to use the portion of the Greensward described … for parking as and when needed on a priority basis to the exclusion of all other uses …”
This does not mean that the vast majority of the Greensward is devoted to Zoo purposes only. It expressly does mean that the Zoo can use a portion of it for parking when needed.
OPC isn’t swaying anyone to its side by deliberately misstating the facts.
The zoo cut down trees without permission and charge for parking on taxpayer’s land. Also, since the zoo claims it as parking on peak days, I hope they have be proper ratio of marked ADA approved spaces to normal parking spaces . It’s a point worth noting. Since they made the Greensward a parking lot big enough to interfere with park activities like rugby and ultimate frisbee.
Overton Park Conservancy has also used park space for their fee-charged private events. Their letter even says so. They lost their right to complain about the zoo when they took the Greensward for their own private events.
James: It depends on the City Council map, right?
Billy: If you’re saying that the Conservancy forfeits its position by holding fundraising events – private or public – on the greensward, you would have to find every park management group in the country guilty. That’s what they do since they can’t rely on governments to fund them and that’s particularly the case for Overton Park Conservancy, which gets $150,000 or so from City of Memphis while the zoo gets more than $3 million.
For anyone to sit there and sat it is OK for the zoo to steal public space and use it as they please has never step foot in another operating city in this country. To sit there and say we don’t need this park is to ignore every large successful city in this country. You are destroying any chance of solving this on your own before the supreme Court gets involved how pathetic do you think Memphis will look then. It’d bad enough you have to do major overhauls on the zoo yo even get tourists and the idiotic planning didn’t including upgrade the parking to a garage. But who are we kidding this is the same city that allowed. Fed. Ex. Forum to be built. Using federal funding for a bus stop and couldn’t even include a. Damn bench in the area in attempt to do so.
James, James, James. I’m sure if I looked as close as you have at the resolution, I could piece together the same statement by re-arranging words to fit the message I want to present. Without re-arranging, The resolution, as amended reads:
3. The City’s Zoo. The area described on collective Exhibit “B” attached hereto and incorporated herien by reference, but specifically excluding Rainbow Lake, shall be devoted for zoo purposes only and may house and be used for zoo operations, parking and appurtenant buildings and facilities, except that no capital additions, removal of trees or shrubs, permanent improvements, paving, plantings or permanent structures to that portion of the Greensward identified on Exhibit “B” shall be made by the City or any other person or entity without the prior consent and approval of the Memphis City Council.
I repeat “devoted for zoo purposes only”. That means total management. And if you look at Exhibit “B” as presented on last Tuesday, It included the entire section including the playground. Regarding credibility, OPC has been the only ‘adult’ in this entire fiasco. They have never asserted any restrictions on the zoo, but have offered to play nice and fund the parking study. The zoo says they are open to options – as long as it doe not restrict unfettered accses to the greensward (sorry ‘grassy area’). Your beef is with the people who want to use the Park at their will – isn’t that what parks are about?
How much are you paid to troll the media and twist language in favor of the zoo abusing the will of the frisbee-flyers? Maybe we will find out when the open records request in Court is decided.
Oh, and I look forward to attending my first zoo Board meeting – which will have adequate public notice and space to attend from the interested public. Hey, exactly what is my estimated $3.5 million a year in tax dollars being spent on?
To say that this issue erodes the mayor’s contracting authority for the City of Memphis is a silly stretch. Memphis has a strong mayor/council form of government, but that doesn’t mean the mayor can at will override everything the council does. He can’t, especially when it comes to city-owned property. From the beginning, the Conservancy has tried to resolve this dispute and Mayor Strickland has supported that position, but the zoo has behaved like a school yard bully claiming it has the right to park cars on the grass — and to heck what anyone else thinks. Mayor Strickland diplomatically called for mediation, especially after the zoo filed a lawsuit in January against the conservancy, the City Council, and the city to try and stake its claim on the greensward. And though the Conservancy filed a countersuit, which legally was the proper procedure, the Conservancy still is willing to sit down with the mayor (at his behest) and the zoo and mediate. Mediation is part of the give-and-take of government. We’ve seen what happens on the federal level when ‘Tea Partiers’ refuse to negotiate — government shuts down. City government won’t shut down over this issue, regardless what happens, but the Zoo ought to man up like the mayor and the conservancy and negotiate in good faith for the betterment of all of us. There’s a compromise somewhere in here and I suspect Mayor Strickland will find it if the zoo’s leadership sheds its position as obstructionists.
OH NO! ultimate Frsibee players have to ‘move over’??
The horror! the shame!!! the crisis has reached maximum distress levels!!!
I wont be able to stay in Memphis now-I’ll have to leave for Berkley or Olive
Branch or somewhere-if I can find two roommates to move too!!!
A city that can’t protect or value parks can’t hope to address the most serious issues like poverty, blight, and neighborhood decline. Simple as that.
SAT: The City Council does not have the power to amend or change contracts. Only the mayor can do that. The Council can only vote them up or down. This is a fundamental power of the city mayor and why Memphis has a strong mayor form of government. Once city-owned property has been approved in a contract, only he can suggest changes. Sadly, the Council can get a legal opinion that tells them that they can do pretty much anything they want, but this is not what the city charter says.
Thank you SCM and all for helping to dispel so much of the misinformation being espoused by those who wish to use the Greensward for whatever use the city (or Zoo) happens to find convenient for the moment.
As the exchange between “James” and Bob Rogers clearly illustrated there are those who either are unaware of what the council’s resolution stipulated or seek to prevent others from realizing the full potential impact of the council’s actions. Per council approval (apparently exceptionally easy to obtain where the zoo is concerned requiring minimal-if any- notice to the public), the approved agreement would allow the zoo to fence the area off and utilize it for parking, new exhibits or even a relocation of its maintenance yard. If the council believes that the simple “trust us” nature of the approval process stipulated in the resolution is somehow reassuring to the general public, then they are delusional considering their recent actions and the behind the scenes agreements required to create and ratify this resolution in such a short timeframe. Perhaps this is why the existing structure of city government entrusted contractual agreements with the mayor’s office- the council and their hired attorney are not intelligent enough to understand the full scope and impact of the most simple contractual language.
This is one big kerfuffle; and while parking on the Greensward is not a high priority issue in the whole scheme of things in Memphis, the duties, responsibilities of the City Council and the Mayor in policy-making and management is of the utmost priority for the future.
I hope that either the current Chancery Court claims or a separate court proceeding can clarify the proper procedures and powers of our two branches of City government.