City Stymied in Effort to Find Replacement for Zoo Director : Personnel: Candidates cite high housing costs, low salary in refusing job, which has been vacant more than seven months.

High housing costs and a relatively low salary have scared off top candidates to replace former Los Angeles Zoo Director Warren Thomas, who retired last fall during a controversy over his management of the Griffith Park facility, officials said Monday.

More than seven months after announcing a nationwide search for a new director for the financially troubled zoo, officials have not yet begun formal interviews for the job.

“We’ve had people who have said they were not interested because of the salary and what that means in terms of housing,” said John J. Driscoll, the city’s personnel director. Top candidates are put off by the area’s high housing costs, he said.

A number of zoos around the country--some in less expensive markets--provide “houses and a whole bunch of perks that we don’t have in Los Angeles,” Driscoll said. “If we want to be competitive, we’re going to have to do something about the salary.”

The salary range for the zoo director is $75,940 to $94,356, but most city employees are hired at the bottom level of their job’s salary range.

Other major zoos offer salaries well above $125,000 in addition to perks such as houses and cars, Driscoll said.

City Council President John Ferraro, whose district includes the zoo, said the pay scale for director is “very low.” He said he has asked for a report on pay rates at other major zoos to see if a change in the scale is justified.

A county grand jury report released on Monday suggested that the Los Angeles City Council sweeten the pot by offering substantially more than the current salary and by providing the first housing allowance for a city employee other than the mayor, who lives in a Hancock Park mansion owned by the city.

Driscoll said a housing allowance is not under consideration, but he acknowledged that such a perk may be necessary if the city is to attract top managers from other areas of the country.

The grand jury began its look at the zoo last fall after disclosures by The Times of chronic animal care problems at the 25-year-old facility.

The Times reported that the Griffith Park facility had been cited repeatedly by the U.S. Department of Agriculture over a three-year period for inadequate food storage, sanitation and drainage problems, pest and rodent contamination, inadequate housing, run-down animal barns and other alleged violations of federal regulations.

Also, a city audit showed that Thomas had improperly set up and controlled a special bank account into which he deposited city funds.

The grand jury did not specifically address either issue, but recommended that zoo management be streamlined to give greater control to the city. At present, the zoo is jointly run by the city and the nonprofit Greater Los Angeles Zoo Assn., which have been at odds with each other for years. One recommendation was to give the city greater authority over the education and research programs, which now are operated by GLAZA.

The panel also recommended improved auditing procedures and suggested ending free parking for zoo patrons. The city should also consider asking for bids on the zoo concessions, which are operated by GLAZA, jurors urged.

Camron Cooper, chairman of the GLAZA board, said the board concurs with many of the jury’s suggestions, but disagrees with the proposal to give the city greater control over education programs.

“We believe that GLAZA is just much better equipped than the city to handle these very professional functions,” Cooper said. “We have 500 volunteers and we are not subject to the budgetary fluctuations that the city is.”