Hello,
I am writing an update even though this blog has yet to go public. I want time line current. It has not gone public because I have sent out 4 letters to VIPs and decided to wait and see if anything materializes. If not, then we will have no other option than to go public. That isn't the way I prefer, but if no VIP cares enough, then ...
Those VIPs were, Nick Podell, Chairman of the Board, San Francisco Zoological Society, David Stanton, Board Member, San Francisco Zoological Society, Larry Martin, San Francisco Park and Recreation Commissioner, and San Francisco Mayor Edwin Lee.
Today (Saturday March 12, 2011) Lee and I visited the Zoo. We first noticed our tail a bit after 4p. There was curiously placed Security while we were at the Hippo, but can't be definite on that one. The head of Guest Services, Durant was a definite and continued to follow us for about 45 minutes. We circled back and zig-zagged about one area the whole time and eventually showing up as we walked out the gatehouse. It appeared he really thought we didn't notice. Its ridiculous as there are Visitors about everywhere acting the fool near the Animals, yet we remain public enemy number one. Who is watching the Visitors and Animals while everyone seems to be watching us?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I came home to a check for the remainder of my Membership Fees. This was three weeks outstanding and appears to have come via Pony Express. The ridiculous thing is lora LaMarca/Head of Marketing who was so very rude to say she had nothing to do with the issuing of the checks, is the primary signature on the check. Still there is no official reason, with this check or in any other way of correspondence, by her or Director Peterson, from which I requested such from both.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Zoo has added an additional (listed last) FAQ to their Membership page, also re-titling it to "Frequently Asked Questions "and Policies."
*****************************************
***************************************************
I guess this holds the hand of the statement provided on the email correspondence by Amy Frankel/Marketing, that noted the Membership Policy as a "fluid document and we revisit and update it as needs arise." ... As needs arise. Curious. I don't believe this can be used in a retroactive way, but obviously they do.
Since this information was not there last week, it appears that the Policy has been recently been revisited. How this after the fact supplement could be relevant to us, is questionable at best. There has to be a Policy item at the time, in order to violate it. There was not as of February 14, 2011. There was not as of March 3, 2011. I also guess we have not been given an official reason because there is no item that existed for us to violate, so there was no violation to advise of? That said, can you terminate without advising of a non-violation? I know its a lot to keep track of. Its much easier to keep track of the facts when the facts are based on truths.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sunday March 20, 2011
*There has still been no written reason given to us as to why our Membership has been revoked.
*There has still been no response from any VIPs I have contacted. Prior to those VIPs, I had emailed San Francisco Supervisor Sean Elsbernd, (who I had previous correspondence with) he initially responded (but has not followed-up) when contacted with:
Kim,
Well, that's a lot of information. Honestly, I'm not quite sure where to start. I'll make a few inquiries. However, I do not want to create any expectations.
Sean
*We are still being followed on every visit.
*Lee is still a victim of Director Peterson's slanderous statement.
*Me ? I guess they just don't like the things I say or write. But, as was pointed out by an Attorney, I have been within my 1st Amendment rights, on this blog, via email and in person. He also said based on this information "The Zoo was retaliating against us for pointing out its flaws."
I am writing an update even though this blog has yet to go public. I want time line current. It has not gone public because I have sent out 4 letters to VIPs and decided to wait and see if anything materializes. If not, then we will have no other option than to go public. That isn't the way I prefer, but if no VIP cares enough, then ...
Those VIPs were, Nick Podell, Chairman of the Board, San Francisco Zoological Society, David Stanton, Board Member, San Francisco Zoological Society, Larry Martin, San Francisco Park and Recreation Commissioner, and San Francisco Mayor Edwin Lee.
Today (Saturday March 12, 2011) Lee and I visited the Zoo. We first noticed our tail a bit after 4p. There was curiously placed Security while we were at the Hippo, but can't be definite on that one. The head of Guest Services, Durant was a definite and continued to follow us for about 45 minutes. We circled back and zig-zagged about one area the whole time and eventually showing up as we walked out the gatehouse. It appeared he really thought we didn't notice. Its ridiculous as there are Visitors about everywhere acting the fool near the Animals, yet we remain public enemy number one. Who is watching the Visitors and Animals while everyone seems to be watching us?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I came home to a check for the remainder of my Membership Fees. This was three weeks outstanding and appears to have come via Pony Express. The ridiculous thing is lora LaMarca/Head of Marketing who was so very rude to say she had nothing to do with the issuing of the checks, is the primary signature on the check. Still there is no official reason, with this check or in any other way of correspondence, by her or Director Peterson, from which I requested such from both.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Zoo has added an additional (listed last) FAQ to their Membership page, also re-titling it to "Frequently Asked Questions "and Policies."
*****************************************
Can my Membership be taken away?
The San Francisco Zoological Society reserves the right to terminate or deny Membership at any time by advising the Member or prospective Member and returning a prorated share of any dues payment. Cause for termination can include showing disrespectful behavior towards the animals, staff or guests of the Zoo; inappropriate conduct, including, but not limited to, conduct that is disruptive, abusive or violent; or for failing to comply with Membership terms and conditions or abusing privileges.***************************************************
I guess this holds the hand of the statement provided on the email correspondence by Amy Frankel/Marketing, that noted the Membership Policy as a "fluid document and we revisit and update it as needs arise." ... As needs arise. Curious. I don't believe this can be used in a retroactive way, but obviously they do.
Since this information was not there last week, it appears that the Policy has been recently been revisited. How this after the fact supplement could be relevant to us, is questionable at best. There has to be a Policy item at the time, in order to violate it. There was not as of February 14, 2011. There was not as of March 3, 2011. I also guess we have not been given an official reason because there is no item that existed for us to violate, so there was no violation to advise of? That said, can you terminate without advising of a non-violation? I know its a lot to keep track of. Its much easier to keep track of the facts when the facts are based on truths.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sunday March 20, 2011
*There has still been no written reason given to us as to why our Membership has been revoked.
*There has still been no response from any VIPs I have contacted. Prior to those VIPs, I had emailed San Francisco Supervisor Sean Elsbernd, (who I had previous correspondence with) he initially responded (but has not followed-up) when contacted with:
Kim,
Well, that's a lot of information. Honestly, I'm not quite sure where to start. I'll make a few inquiries. However, I do not want to create any expectations.
Sean
*We are still being followed on every visit.
*Lee is still a victim of Director Peterson's slanderous statement.
*Me ? I guess they just don't like the things I say or write. But, as was pointed out by an Attorney, I have been within my 1st Amendment rights, on this blog, via email and in person. He also said based on this information "The Zoo was retaliating against us for pointing out its flaws."
it is my sincerest hope that someone in the media picks this story up and helps you get your memberships back! i know the animals would be most happy to see you, as would the keepers and your other zoo friends. GOOD LUCK!! and thanks for keeping us updated.
ReplyDelete@anonymous- Thank you again for your comment. Thank you for your support and check back for the continuing saga. I too hope we receive some kind of restitution for this injustice that has caused both of us great pain and anguish, and had caused us to feel uncomfortable in a place we both found peace in at one time. I think this action against us really sends a bad message. It says you can love the place and its residents, but don't get too caring, cause we will ruin it for you! Cheers and keep posting your thoughts!
ReplyDeleteAgain, it's about slander, it's about violation of freedom of speech, and it's just horrifying that the zoo (a place I loved) and a place many love, would treat people this way. I'm the Lee in the blog that was slandered by the Director. I've been waiting six weeks for a reason for having my membership revoked. All I ever did was care.
ReplyDelete