Pueblo Zoo warns 30% city funding cut would threaten accreditation, asks council for $944,000

Abby Cross, executive director of the Pueblo Zoo, told the Pueblo City Council on Aug. 18 that the zoo faces a projected annual deficit of about $90,000 if the city applies a requested 15% cut to nondepartmental funding — on top of a roughly 15% cut last year that left the zoo about $300,000 short over two years.

Cross said the zoo submitted a city operating request that complies with the 15% cut — $767,655 — but proposed an alternate, larger request of $944,000 to avoid steps that could leave the nonprofit unable to meet accreditation standards. “A 30% cut in city funding, almost $300,000 in 2 years, is no easy thing to overcome,” Cross said. She said a cut of the size contemplated would set the zoo back “almost five years” and could exhaust reserves in fewer than four years.

The zoo’s operator, the Pueblo Zoological Society, runs the facility on city-owned land and buildings under a contractual caretaker model that Cross said dates to a 1991 operating transfer. Cross told council the zoo is one of 238 accredited zoos in the United States and that accreditation — and membership in the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) — underpins animal partnerships and eligibility for many grants. She said losing accreditation would jeopardize about 50 animals that are at the zoo under cooperative programs.

Cross described the zoo’s funding as a “three-legged stool”: earned revenue (admissions, programs, retail), fundraising (donors and grants), and government (city and county). She said roughly one-third of the zoo’s revenue comes from government support and two-thirds from earned and fundraising sources. Cross also noted a 2024 CSU Pueblo economic-impact study she said valued the zoo’s contribution to the community at about $20 million annually on a budget of roughly $3 million, which she characterized as a “665% return on investment.”

Cross detailed cost pressures: personnel (63% of expenses), compliance with state minimum wage increases and compression concerns, a 50% staff turnover rate in 2024, reduced training budgets, and rising costs for supplies and animal care. She said deferred maintenance and ongoing capital needs have been shared between the nonprofit and the city, and she described a history of recent capital investment by the zoo and the city to sustain accreditation.

Council members responded with support and questions about contract updates and county contributions. Councilman Flores emphasized that the city owns the buildings and animals and said the society acts as caretaker; he urged fair treatment in the budget process. Councilor Martinez asked about accreditation cycles (every five years) and the status of a revised operating contract; Cross said a draft contract was in process and expected soon. Several council members praised the zoo’s community and tourism role and offered assistance identifying revenue options, including evening events and expanded behind-the-scenes programming.

Cross said the zoo’s formal operating proposal that follows the 15% cut requirement would be $767,655 and that the alternate request to sustain operations and accreditation is $944,000.

The council did not take a formal vote on the zoo request during the Aug. 18 meeting; councilors asked staff to continue contract and budget discussions ahead of the formal budget process.