Just when you thought I would drop the monkey crapper – monkey business, I get drawn back in. If you watch the November 21, informational meeting you will hear the zoo director talk about the zoo wanting to own the zoo animals. It helps with trading animals for breeding, etc. I’m all for it, but,
1) They should have to purchase the animals from the city &
2) They should have to cover the insurance on them
And, see, #2 is the kicker. The zoo not only wants us to ‘gift’ the animals but they also want us to cover the insurance. The council votes on it this Monday (Item #25). Document.
Here’s the dealio. I’m cool with them owning the animals, but they have to take on the responsibility of them, that means paying for them and providing their insurance. We’ll see if the council caves, once again.
11 comments ↓
Actually, this new agreement does exactly what you’re requesting in point #2. Take another look at Section 11 and compare the new 11.1 & 11.2 with the former (red-lined sections). The zoo will now be responsible for the liability insurance, as it should be.
Can you link that or paste it in? I am having trouble finding it. I need TP for my bunghole.
Page 9 of the Agreement:
http://docs.siouxfalls.org/sirepub/cache/2/ht3hwz2hon0d4yyz1kry4p45/1909231201201112170038.PDF
Bow down to the almighty bunghole!
Corn – could you just paste the verbage into the comments, the link does not work, and I went back and tried to find it and could not. Thanks.
We should not be supporting two zoos. Great Plains and City Hall is too much to handle.
You forgot to mention Carnegie.
What about the Pavillion?
Can we keep Great Plains and ditch City Hall?
Anthony – You win the ‘best suggestion of the day’ award.
and Joan, I don’t mean this at you, and I am NO grammar expert myself, but if one more person spells Pavilion with two L’s on an internet forum I am going to scream. PAVILION. ONE ‘L’!
Who would have thought Lewis would turn into a spelling Nazi?
It is like one of those things that grinds me.