Sections

About Us

 
Make a Donation
Local • Independent • Essential News
 
Photo by John Flynn

Did rejection of Parks Board appointee have a deeper meaning?

Tuesday, April 30, 2024 by Jo Clifton

On April 3, the name Ted Eubanks was on the list of members of the public who were expected to be appointed to various boards and commissions at the following day’s City Council meeting. But on April 4, Eubanks’ name was not on the final version of the list. Council Member Mackenzie Kelly had nominated him for the Parks and Recreation Board, but for some reason she withdrew his name before the final list was released.

At the April 22 meeting of the board, the group Rewild Zilker had sent a letter, which became part of that meeting’s minutes, complaining about the fact that Eubanks was not appointed and detailing his qualifications. According to the letter, “Mr. Eubanks is a highly accomplished park professional and an award-winning park planner who has worked in the field for 30 years across the US and in several foreign countries. He is a recognized expert in birds, ecotourism and park interpretive planning that would be of a great benefit to the city of Austin advocating for his vision of parks as natural spaces for physical/mental health, recreation, reflection, and climate mitigation. It is beyond question that he is very qualified for the board and would, in fact, likely be the most qualified member on the Parks Board.”

In addition, several members of the public, including Eubanks, addressed the board and questioned why Kelly had removed his name from consideration. Several suggested that Council Member Leslie Pool’s office was involved. Pool could not be reached for comment on the matter Monday. Likewise, Kelly did not respond to a request for comment.

Although the Rewild Zilker letter and several speakers suggested that Parks and Recreation Department Director Kimberly McNeeley had something to do with the decision to remove Eubanks’ name from consideration, McNeeley denied any involvement. She told the Austin Monitor on Monday via email, “I did not have conversations with any Council Offices regarding any appointment to the Parks Board. I did not have conversations about Ted Eubanks’ nomination- in fact, I was unaware he applied. I have no knowledge of who applies for board positions, and I do not and have not participated in any nomination/selection processes. The authority to appoint a board member is solely the Council’s discretion/decision.”

Rewild Zilker stands at odds with supporters of groups like the Trail Conservancy. As Rewild Zilker said in its letter to the board, “The Trail Conservancy is one of the largest recipients of PARD privatization funds and a major contractor to PARD. As you may be aware, Mr. Eubanks has expressed views critical of the Zilker Park Vision Plan and its non-profit model. Director McNeeley and The Trail Conservancy were both strong advocates of the more commercial non-profit model advocated in the Zilker Park Vision Plan and could be motivated to silence critical voices.”

The group also suggested, without offering any proof, that McNeeley might go to work for the conservancy.

So it appears that Eubanks’ nonappointment may be more related to the struggle between two different groups of Austinites who want to influence how Austin’s parks develop. There is an argument going on now over how the Waterloo Greenway has become a glitzy place, a place where a group of friends may not simply have a picnic, as Joe Riddell told the board during the same meeting. Although the Zilker Park Vision Plan, which Council ultimately rejected, seems dead for now, there continues to be a fear that it will resurface and take over the favorite spot for many Austinites.

Parks Board Chair Pedro Villalobos told a fellow board member it was not their job to investigate decisions about appointments. The answer is with Council, he concluded.

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.

You're a community leader

And we’re honored you look to us for serious, in-depth news. You know a strong community needs local and dedicated watchdog reporting. We’re here for you and that won’t change. Now will you take the powerful next step and support our nonprofit news organization?

Back to Top