As Waylon And Willie Leave Old City Park, Uncertainty For Dallas’ Only Heritage Village Remains
Share News:
Two weeks ago, a social media post about Old City Park’s resident donkeys Waylon and Willie and their exodus from the historical village just south of downtown Dallas started a lively online discussion. There were more than 30 comments that included some pretty inflammatory remarks about demolishing historic buildings and developers taking over the park.
Social media is our modern-day town hall, so I figured it was time to get some answers.
History of Old City Park
Old City Park became the first city park in Dallas in 1876. It was also the site of the first public swimming pool and the first zoo. In 1966, the park was in an unfortunate state and a group of prominent Dallas women were determined to revive it. They were successful in relocating 21 historic buildings from all over Dallas to the site, creating a heritage village within the park.
If your child attends a Dallas-area public school, they’ve probably taken a field trip here to see the period-costumed blacksmith at work, delighted in the railroad depot, and marveled at the general store. You may have married at the church, attended Candlelight in Old City Park, or before 2003, you might have had brunch at Brent Place.
So why are Waylon and Willie leaving on Friday? Why are the chickens gone and the sheep being herded off? And what might be lost next?
Right now, the Dallas Parks and Recreation Department is in charge of the grounds. The City of Dallas Office of Arts and Culture is responsible for maintaining the buildings. The nonprofit Dallas County Heritage Society (DCHS), takes care of programming and the day-to-day running of the park.
Multiple entities have been charged with different aspects of one park. You can probably see that is not the most efficient or effective way to conduct business. In reality, when you have a bunch of good folks trying to make smart decisions, wires can easily get crossed. There can be a general lack of focus, direction, and communication, even when each one clearly defines its mission.
Now, DCHS has had a long-term management agreement with the City of Dallas for more than five decades. Yes, five decades. Let that sink in because it’s important.
Everything Changes May 26
May 26 is when everything concerning Old City Park gets consolidated under the Dallas Parks and Recreation Department. Why is this happening when DCHS has had a management contract for 51 years? This is where clear communications seem to be lacking.
It’s like the old childhood game of telephone. The message from the top is not the same message getting shared down the line. And the full message is not being delivered to anyone. Perhaps because no one has a full message to deliver … yet. This fuels the disgruntled social media posts — as it should.
So, my own telephone game began.
Dallas Parks and Recreation Department Director John Jenkins assured me developers were not going to encroach on the park and there were no plans to demolish buildings in Old City Park.
“We want to preserve it and we will do everything we can to do so,” Jenkins said. “We are working on the transition plan right now. We want DCHS to stay involved. Nobody is tossing artifacts. We can do an interim agreement with them to get us through this to complete the master plan.”
Several issues need talking through here because that message is not reaching DCHS.
Old City Park is Changing Hands
Although a lot of conversations are happening, there is a lack of clear communication between the Dallas Parks and Recreation Department and DCHS. Remember, conversation does not denote communication.
DCHS Chief Operating Officer, Sarah Crain told me there has been over a year of conversation between the Parks department and DCHS.
“We have been told repeatedly that yes the city wants to continue the cultural program here but no funding has been found to do so,” Crain said. ”The city has known our contract is expiring for some time. DCHS would love to work to continue to maintain historic programming.”
But where is the money?
There’s not enough money and apparently, there has never been enough. It’s not for lack of trying because there are many advocates for this gem of a park.
Michael Meadows of the Meadows Family Consulting Group was hired on March 31, 2021, by DCHS Board Chair Jim Kipp and Board Chair-elect Michael Duty to conduct a deep organizational assessment after the DCHS executive director had resigned.
“They told me they had been losing hundreds of thousands of dollars on their operations for several years and wanted to know if their business model of being a living history museum had any future,” Meadows said.
The answer was not as things stood. Meadows recommended the park stop charging for admission, after all, it’s a public park. He also told them they had to increase attendance to have more opportunities to generate revenues and that the annual subsidies from the city had to increase substantially if they were going to survive.
Meadows, and two former heads of the Dallas Parks and Recreation Department, Paul Dyer and Willis Winters, created a report with recommendations as to the future of the park.
“The DCHS board loved what we recommended and adopted the plan,” Meadows said. “The plan was shared with John Jenkins, Council members Moreno and Mendelsohn, Benjamin Espino at the Office of Arts and Culture as well as many other city leaders, so it is public record. Part of that plan was to add viable businesses into the buildings and have some exciting attractions like a Victorian-style carousel.”
The bottom line was the current business model was broken and would not improve. The focus was on how to drive attendance, increase earned revenues, and reduce unnecessary costs — and there had to be a financial investment from the city.
You would think with decades of experience, bringing in a savvy consultant like Meadows and with a clear business model to follow, that the city would say “Yippee! These are great ideas so here’s another contract and some money to make it all happen.”
The interest should be there with the $2.8 billion new convention center starting in late 2024 and the deck park over Interstate 30 scheduled for completion in 2030. The deck park will connect the new convention center with The Cedars neighborhood and lead right into Old City Park. It seems like a no-brainer, right? Bond money will cover construction costs. We voted for an increase in hotel occupancy tax in November which will provide $1.5 billion for the convention center and Fair Park and, you guessed it, absolutely nothing for Old City Park.
I listened to the three-hour council meeting last Friday where a straw vote was taken to provide millions for our parks. The Dallas Parks and Recreation Department is tasked with preparing park allocations in the following amounts: $325 million, $300 million, and $275 million. Doesn’t that sound promising?
“At this point, Old City Park is not included in that funding right now,” Jenkins told me.
This leads back to the conundrum of having three entities involved. Do you get funding from the Office of Arts and Culture, which is supposed to provide for maintenance but whose contract ends in May?
Do you get funding from the Dallas Park and Recreation Department? It seems logical, but remember they have responsibility for grounds now and in the future, so can they request funds now? On May 26, then they take over completely.
Do you get funding from private institutions? How, when the city has not provided funding?
So poor Old City Park is squeezed between a rock and a hard place with the bond vote in May and the changeover of operations in May. It would take a great deal of planning — starting now — to try and get any of that bond money.
Funding Old City Park Has Always Been a Problem
About two years before the DCHS contract was to end, they went to the city and said to continue operating they had to have more funding. Understand that without city investments it’s almost impossible to attract private philanthropists, and frankly, Old City Park needs both. They need a hero, much like what Kelcy Warren did for Klyde Warren Park.
So what’s happening? Why is what I’m hearing on the telephone from Jenkins not getting down the line to DCHS? They love the park, want to stay, and have decades of institutional knowledge to run it. While the Dallas Parks and Recreation Department has plenty to offer, they do not have what it takes to pull this off unassisted.
“We had the programming team from Samuell Farm come out and look at Old City Park,” Crain said. “When they came out I asked if they had anyone with cultural education experience. They did not. We have multiple concerns — in addition to programming there is maintenance and security. There has been no conversation about DCHS staying.”
The FY 2022-2023 expense budget for DCHS/Old City Park, which was approved by our Executive Board in September, is approximately $1.6M and projects an operating deficit of ($576K). This deficit will be funded out of our operating reserves and an unrestricted estate gift we received this past December. Our Board’s bottom line is that DCHS can and will absorb this year’s projected deficit but is unwilling to continue to this practice in the future.
Michael Meadows in and email to city leaders
So what’s to come of the buildings and artifacts in Old City Park? Find out more in Part 2
19 Comments
Leave a Comment
Thank you. This is clarifying in that there is no clarity, though the history is very helpful. A simple rule of publicity is that if you don’t supply the public answers, they will conjecture and speculate—and rarely does that turn out well. It seems no one knows what’s going on, or if they do they’re not speaking. My confidence in the DPRD on this matter is zero.
Exactly. I spoke to ten people over the course of two weeks. The contradictions were alarming. I gave city officials every opportunity to comment. Some did, and some refused to speak to me but did issue a statement after we had published. Stay tuned for part 2 to find out about the artifacts, master plan, and more. Meanwhile, if you and your family enjoy the historic buildings and artifacts, please contact the city council, parks board reps, and leadership. After all, it is YOUR park.
Questions, I have questions:
1. DPRD is claiming that programs will go on. If that’s true, why are they forcing the removal of all animals? They have been a crucial part of programs.
2. Who will be sharing the stories and providing the tours? Those that do now have no idea if they are to continue.
3. If the buildings are to remain, what about the collection of historical items inside them?
4. Whose decision was it not to renew the contract with DCHS?
Hi Amy, Some of these questions will be answered in part 2. The contract was extended twice, and from what Mr. Jenkins told me, it’s a matter of the actual legalities of that contract. It cannot be extended again. However, if you read the story, he clearly stated he would love to create a new “agreement” with them. Of course, if there is no funding for them to operate, how can they do this? Remember, we have a huge bond vote for parks in May and Old City Park is NOT included at present. If you want to see animals come back in and see the programming continue and indeed see the organization that has run the park for 51 years (on a shoestring budget,) make your views known to your council person and park rep. Call the leadership of the park dept. Remember, ALL of these people work for US. The bond money is clearly a way to fund OCP, but it’s not on anyone’s agenda to ask for that money to fund it. Councilperson Moreno clearly stated on social media and in an email to me that is included in Part 2, that the future of the park is as green space. I gave him an opportunity to clarify if they would negotiate to keep the artifacts. He did not respond.
Thank you for working hard to explain the issues, unfortunately, no one wants to explain them to you or us. I suspect there is more to their plan than they are revealing
Yes, John, when people don’t return calls to citizens or the press, there is certainly a lot of room for speculation. I agree with you, having been involved in a few political issues over the years and seeing how the sausage is made. However, I encourage everyone to make their voices heard. The neighbors surrounding Glenco Park successfully lobbied for their park to remain the same and not have a skate park at one end. Your voice does matter.
Dallas has “always” had a reputation of a city that values image above substance. Somehow it has become a sanctuary city for abortion despite state law and has consistently drifted to glitz, glamour and current celebrity drowning out substance and hard work. I suggest the Old City Park be shuttered and the buildings fall down as a symbol of the soul of Dallas. A dead soul.
Kevin, I’m an eternal optimist, and I believe the voices of our citizens are heard when they pull together and shout. That is what is needed here.
HOT money from VisitDallas could be used to restore those historic buildings. Check out Texas Local Government Code Sec. 361.101(a)(5)
Tim you are correct in that the Office of Arts and Culture could have done more if they had more. It all boils down to how much a department has, and where they choose to spend it. OAC was supposed to maintain the buildings. Please see the Part 2 post tomorrow.
Wow Karen. Thank you for jumping on this. Both my kiddos took field trips here and this kind of “living, experiential” history is so VITAL! This lack of coordination/communicationis a huge problem with our city directly attributable to the City Manager and it effectively handicaps our future.
Janelle, you are absolutely correct. When I was a photo stylist, I used it for two annual reports for Dr. Pepper and Frito Lay when I had to show how both companies began. It’s been used by filmmakers and photographers for years. Mr Meadows has tried to engage the city with great ideas. They have fallen on deaf ears. DCHS has to have major funding to do anything. Without the city buying in, it’s very difficult to continue to attract sponsors. And right now, with DCHS being shown the door after 51 years of operation, the organization that knows how to do everything, what hope is there that the parks dept will be able to manage programming and maintenance and attract sponsors? Zero. Did you know that 40% of visitors are international? This park has the potential to be a destination for our entire state. For instance, it could host a Crystal Charity Ball and other huge events, but there are not enough updated bathrooms a catering kitchen, and no tables or chairs. Put those items into the budget and let DCHS continue doing what they know how to do, and you will see sponsors. With a 1.2 billion bond package that DOES NOT INCLUDE OCP, that shows you what city leaders think. They do not care and won’t care unless all of us MAKE them care. Remember, these are people who work for the US. This is OUR park. We must ALL make an effort to retain DCHS and to fund this gem.
Thank you for this article. Visiting Old City Park was a magical experience as a child. As an adult, I’ve visited several times and it’s always clear that the park is in a fragile state. As residents, we need to push for the park to survive. It is a true gem, not just to Dallas, but could be valued on a national level as well.
Here’s my idea: The park could secure major sponsors to fund the operations, management and marketing of the park. Specifically, businesses in the housing industry would make fantastic partners! The park exemplifies the origins of all things related to housing and real estate and would be a strategic marketing opportunity for the right businesses.
For example, a major real estate firm and an architecture firm could be significant sponsors of the houses. In return, those firms would benefit from branding exposure at the park and the opportunity to use the park for corporate events. A mortgage lender could sponsor the bank. And a reputable retailer could sponsor the general store. A private school could sponsor the school house. A construction company could sponsor repairs and maintenance while a landscape architecture firm could subsidize the maintenance.
Each sponsoring company would be able to use the park for their own marketing and events which would increase exposure for the park!
The park makes a great setting for TV and film makers too. Great video reel of what the location offers should be sent to production companies so that the property could be secured as a set location.
Most importantly everyone should strive to keep the City Council and their poor judgement out of all decisions regarding this local treasure. They consistently disperse funding to projects with ulterior motives and their greed will be the demise of the gem that is Old City Park.
“to complete the master plan’
what is the master plan? is it the city’s or the DCHS?
Sorry Peter, I thought I laid that out clearly in the second part of the story. SWA consultants were hired by the city to create a master plan for the park.
It would not surprise me if the plan is to let the buildings deteriorate because OCP represents the evil racist Dallas past especially with Millermore the home of slave owners
they pulled down the Lee Statue, and removed the monument from Pioneer cemetery, next up Old City Park
The city was hellbent on removing the old railroad museum in Fair Park and when it went to Frisco, the site became a parking lot. The city has never been a caretaker of its history: a big example is Dealey Plaza, that is only preserved through a private/ public partnership.
I’m going to call the parks and city council members, but the real solution, especially in a city like Dallas, is to create a foundation championed by old Dallas money. Let Old City Park become their philanthropic child.
Robin, I loved those trains. They were not even in a great area at Fair Park, but at least we had them. My son adored them when he was little. There are multiple issues in that first, this is a city park, so the city is legally responsible. The issue is they are doing the absolute bare minimum to maintain it, and when you don’t offer up public funds, it’s really tough to interest old Dallas money aka philanthropists. If anyone knows how to do this, it is the consultant they hired, Michael Meadows, and after professing to think the report he and two former department heads of the parks department created, it was ignored. The only recourse any of us have is to make our voices heard. Again it is OUR park. And people tend to forget is your council people are in public SERVICE. They work for YOU. It is part of their jobs to return your calls and emails or you can express yourself by voting them out of office.
Sec. 26.001 of Chapter 26, Title 3 of the Texas Parks And Wildlife Code, Protection Of Public Parks And Recreational Lands provides states a municipality of this State, (e.g. Dallas) may not approve any program or project that requires the use or taking of any public land designated and used prior to the arrangement of the program or project as a park unless (1) it determines there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use and taking of such land, (2) the program or project includes all reasonable planning to minimize harm to the land as a park and (3) there is a finding made only after public notice and public hearing. Bottom line – the City of Dallas cannot use, take or sell the land that is Old City Park without meeting several restrictive requirements that, in my opinion, cannot be met.
Dallas Park & Recreation will knowingly ignore the Park And Wildlife Code as they have in the past. The construction of a private facility at Samuell Farm that is off-limits to the public is one example. Park & Recreation has tried for decades to sell Samuell Farm, despite the aforementioned prohibition and Dr. Samuell’s specific instructions that the land he gave to be used as parks was “not to be sold”. My spidey sense is tingling from this report on Old City Park.
If your readers are concerned about preserving Old City Park, its resources and its history, I suggest they begin emailing their councilperson now and calling out the City of Dallas Park & Recreation Department to let them know you know the law. The professed miscommunication among city representatives about the future and fate of Old City Park is not a flaw but a feature of the process.