E-mail testimony accepted but board still allows transfer

By Treena Shapiro
Advertiser Staff Writer

The state Board of Agriculture yesterday reaffirmed its decision to allow Rusti the orangutan to move to Kualoa Ranch from Honolulu Zoo after considering e-mail testimony that was disregarded at an earlier meeting in February.

Rusty, a 23-year-old orangutan, will be allowed to move from the zoo to Kualoa Ranch, under a decision reaffirmed by the state Board of Agriculture. But he cannot be moved until the city grants a permit for his new cage. Advertiser library photo

In any case, the permit will not be issued until the city grants a building permit for the primate's cage, which was constructed without proper approval. The matter could be as simple as getting a building permit after the fact and paying a penalty, or it could necessitate public hearings if it turns out that housing an orangutan at the ranch requires a zoning change.

A city spokeswoman said the Department of Planning and Permitting is still working to resolve the issue.

In the meantime, zookeeper Linda Vannatta has decided to move forward with a lawsuit to have the Agriculture Board void its decision because it made the original decision without considering all the testimony.

Vannatta's e-mailed testimony opposed the plans to move Rusti into a temporary holding facility at Kualoa, but her attorney, Jack Schweigert, said that the lawsuit was about whether the board violated the state's open-meeting law. "Basically this lawsuit is more than just the issue of Rusti ... although he certainly is the focus," Schweigert said. "The process is flawed."

Schweigert said he wants a new hearing that will allow the board to consider all the testimony together before making a decision.

For Rusti, this means that a move meant to be completed by last month will be pushed off even further. The 23-year-old primate has been kept at the zoo for almost six years as the Orangutan Foundation International's various plans to move him into a permanent facility have fallen through.

Vannatta filed suit after Board Chairwoman Sandra Kunimoto failed to distribute her e-mailed testimony to other board members, which the Office of Information Practices considers a violation of the sunshine law.

Another 11 e-mails were also not distributed before the Feb. 20 meeting.

Kunimoto said yesterday that she did not realize the e-mails were meant to be testimony. Board member Andrew Hashimoto said that because the e-mails were addressed only to Kunimoto, it was not clear that they were meant to be distributed.

Cindy Newburg of Citizens for Humane Animal Policies, whose testimony was also not distributed, told the board: "I think the hearing was flawed. I want the decision voided and I want to be heard."

She said she did not understand why there was confusion over the e-mail. "Clearly, it's our group asking the board not to grant the permit amendment. I don't know how that can be construed as anything other than testimony."

After considering all the e-mail and new oral testimony, the board consulted with an attorney in executive session, then reopened the meeting and voted again to approve the permit.