The Advertiser’s Sean Hao reports today that there are only three bidders for the initial rail contract here in Honolulu.

Hao correctly notes that the specifications for these contracts lock in a particular technology, despite prior official statements that the specific technology would not be chosen until the environmental impact statement was completed and officials had an opportunity to study the tradeoffs inherent in each alternative.

But he misses the chance to explain what that technology choice involves.

Hao writes:

Siemens, which calls itself the nation’s No. 1 maker of light rail vehicles, did not explain why it’s not interested in the project.

Well, it’s no mystery. Honolulu’s rail project, as currently planned, does not utilize what is commonly referred to as “light rail”, which is used in most cities across the U.S. Instead, Honolulu is moving ahead with “automated light metro”, a more expensive, less flexible kind of train that won’t be capable of running quietly through the urban core at street level where desirable, as is done in so many other cities.

The Advertiser’s readers would have benefited from clearer understanding of that key fact–the Hannemann administration has so far refused to consider light rail–rather than leaving the impression that the pullout of the largest light rail manufacturer is somehow unexplained.

Here’s a little update on the unlicensed security companies selling door to door.

One of my neighbors had the paperwork the salesman from one company left, including a Honolulu Police Dept. permit form that falsely listed the company as a licensed contractor. The form used a bogus number instead of a contractors license number. That document, along with several others, have been submitted with a complaint to DCCA by one of our legitimate local alarm companies.

Another local company discovered another of the door-to-door companies trying to steal a client, Max Alarm or Homeland Security. The salesman Lied to the homeowner and pretended that they were from the company that had installed the home’s security system, and were supposed to install an “upgrade”. But when the homeowner saw them remove the original company’s sign and replace it with their own, she figured out it was a scam and had them remove the “upgrade”ew4. I’m told she’s filing a consumer complaint.

In Waipahu, police had calls last month when pushy door-to-door salesmen scared homeowners by insisting that they had to come into their homes.

A couple of weeks ago, the heads of several local security companies requested a meeting with DCCA Director Larry Reifurth to discuss the ongoing problems, but I haven’t gotten a follow-up report yet.

Prowling the web recently, I noticed the state’s Office of Administrative Hearings, part of the Dept. of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, makes some of its past decisions available online, including items of public interest such as disciplinary actions taken against licensed professionals. But the office appears to have stopped posting decisions back in 2005-2006. At least my browsing didn’t turn up more recent decision in “hot” categories, such as disciplinary cases before the Real Estate Commission.

Perhaps this little nudge will get them back on track and the decisions back online.

I’ve got a backlog of dog photos and short videos that hopefully I’ll have time to share this week. This one features four of our daily favorites. Most days they’re in their front yard when we walk past, but on this morning they were out for a run on the beach. Click on the photo to see the video, or use this link if you’ve got a fast Internet connection. [Note: One reader reported a problem with the video, but solved it by first booting Quicktime and then clicking the link to the video.]

Oh–apologies in advance for my slip of the tongue while trying to keep the umbrella and bag of dog biscuits out of the way of the camera. And I don’t know why the shadows have that purple cast to them. Mysteries of video.