I'm with Susie B on this... Something stinks in Nooga. I hope the TFP continues to follow this story because there's more at stake here than the treatment of these dogs.
Obviousman is on point. Board of Directors & Zoo administrators are playing defense regardless of them saying they’re being proactive.
If they were proactive they would have a Vet Tech already not doing it after several animals had died.
If they were proactive they would have administrative controls including feeding schedules in place instead of having the city administrator point out numerous instances of mishandling money and two animals die for not being fed.
As for conflicts of interest, the most obvious one is having vendors serve as Board of Directors. I don’t see how this is acceptable. We wouldn’t allow a public administrator give a contract to a company they owned.
Council to take up zoo director’s lease
I'm with Susie B on this... Something stinks in Nooga. I hope the TFP continues to follow this story because there's more at stake here than the treatment of these dogs.
Consultant hired to provide Chattanooga Zoo study
Obviousman is on point. Board of Directors & Zoo administrators are playing defense regardless of them saying they’re being proactive.
If they were proactive they would have a Vet Tech already not doing it after several animals had died.
If they were proactive they would have administrative controls including feeding schedules in place instead of having the city administrator point out numerous instances of mishandling money and two animals die for not being fed.
As for conflicts of interest, the most obvious one is having vendors serve as Board of Directors. I don’t see how this is acceptable. We wouldn’t allow a public administrator give a contract to a company they owned.