Government often needs a push — a big one — to do its job. The condition of the municipal zoo, as chronicled by Honolulu Star-Advertiser writers Allison Schaefers and Dana Williams, provides evidence of the city’s failure, up to this point.
Closed exhibits, 42 acres of unkempt grounds, inadequate enclosures for animals and myriad other shortcomings led the Honolulu Zoo to lose its accreditation earlier this year.
That was the push the city needed, evidently.
Bills before the City Council today offer some ideas that could help the institution dig itself out of a deep hole, the result of chronic instability in funding and management churn.
Council Chairman Ernie Martin has proposed Bill 30 to authorize a special fund for the zoo, directing all revenues from attendance, food concessions and parking to go directly into it.
Martin separately is proposing an amendment to the Honolulu City Charter that would dedicate 0.75 percent of city revenues to feed this fund, as well.
Both of these are worthy ideas, primarily because they address a central criticism by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) in its decision to deny reaccreditation to the Honolulu Zoo: lack of a dependable funding source.
The voters would have to approve the Charter amendment. But instead of the proposed 0.75 percent, it would be wise for the Council to consider lowering the revenue share for the zoo to the 0.5 percent the city administration favors, which would reduce the revenue annual take to $6.5 million.
This still roughly equals the current zoo operating budget, and would be an easier sell to the voters. Further, the income from the admission charges, food sales and parking — if Bill 30 passes, as it should — would provide a further boost, enabling zoo staff and facilities resources to improve.
However, an additonal initiative, replacing the zoo’s asphalt parking lot with a multi-level parking structure, merits further Council discussion and community input before any commitments are made.
The Waikiki representative, Councilman Trevor Ozawa, has joined Councilwoman Ann Kobayashi, the budget chairwoman, in a request for $500,000 in next year’s budget to pay for study, planning and design of the structure.
The structure would replace the existing parking lot — and could spoil the garden-like setting of the zoo, which, at the threshold of Kapiolani Park, provides an essential break from the high-rise metropolitan vistas of Waikiki.
The smarter first step would be to proceed with monetizing the parking operation for the zoo’s benefit, with the existing lot, and leave the structure project for a future time — and potentially another location, perhaps on the urban side of Kapahulu Avenue, if one is needed.
Turning around the zoo’s overall operations will be a complex proposition, involving more than dollars and cents. The city is negotiating a new contract that will spell out the roles to be played by zoo and city officials, as well as by the nonprofit Zoo Society that is meant to raise additional revenues.
The AZA has urged the Zoo Society to step up its financial contributions to the zoo’s coffers: Its collected revenues have comprised, on average, merely 5 percent of the facility’s operating budget.
The organization could do much better.
But there are important hurdles to be surmounted first.
Sidney Quintal, the retired director of the Department of Enterprise Services, cited longstanding philosophical differences between the zoo and the society, including disagreements over fundraisers and programs.
This fuels conflict between the two entities, which must get on the same page regarding the way forward for the institution.
Honolulu residents, the children in particular, deserve the chance to visit a well-funded and properly managed zoo.
Accreditation is an important credential to be reclaimed because it qualifies the zoo for loans of animals for exhibition. This is an educational resource many Hawaii residents otherwise could never access, and the city should strive to keep it.
That striving must begin now.
The Honolulu Zoo’s attraction hinges on the animals in its care, but its long-term success — or failure — falls to the human beings in charge.
