Fair warning: Personal opinion follows….
I had an “Alice in Wonderland” moment yesterday when it was announced that 39 members of the House of Representatives had signed a letter to the Governor requesting that she quickly approve the final environmental impact statement for the Honolulu rail project.
According to the Star-Bulletin:
“There’s no reason, in our minds, the governor should hold this up anymore,” said Rep. K. Mark Takai (D, Newtown-Pearl City), who led the effort. “This is too important an issue — too important an opportunity — to miss.”
The problem, of course, is that the final EIS has not been made public, so neither the governor, nor the representatives, have been able to review it or determine what issues might remain.
So we’re there, along with Alice, down the rabbit hole.
First issue the judgement (“it’s a great EIS, no reason to delay”). Then, after the fact, review of the evidence (i.e., actually examine and evaluate what’s in the final EIS, not yet available).
Actually, yesterday’s “Rush the Rail” pep rally starring Mayor Hannemann and the House 39 did clear things up for me.
I’m a supporter of rail, having enjoyed using rail transit in many mainland cities. But I’ve been puzzled over the city’s single-minded pursuit of this particular rail system, including many things that have not seemed reasonable. Why would we choose to ignore the flexible, modern light rail technology developed over the past 20 years and used in the vast majority of mainland and international cities for urban transportation, and instead select what was “state of the art” back in the mid-1980s but has now been surpassed by systems that are cheaper, quicker to build, more able to be integrated into urban environments, and so on?
Why did this administration work to maintain the appearance of weighing public opinion while keeping its hidden thumb on the scale? Community meetings to invite input on the rail plan were little more than opportunities to comment on what color scheme should be chosen for the pre-designed stations. Professionals wanting to offer suggestions were first told they should wait until the EIS was completed, then told their comments were too late because the draft EIS was already done. Technology decisions were buried in unilaterally adopted complex specifications that quietly ruled out alternatives at the same time officials were denying the decisions had already been made.
My mistake, and the mistake made by the AIA and others, has been to wrongly assume that this process is about planning the best, most efficient, and most appropriate transit system for Honolulu’s needs.
Now I realize we should take the mayor at his word. This is not about transportation, community planning, or envisioning how we want to live in the future.
This is simply about money. Pork. Profits. Jobs. And, of course, politics. They’re all connected, and time is of the essence because a key player, Dan Inouye, our senior senator, is of an age when, well, health issues can get serious on short notice. So just get it done, take advantage of his position and get the most federal money possible while we can, then make the best of it. Not perfect, but….Live with it.
Even though a more flexible system could probably be built at substantial savings, and be ready for use sooner, this is really about maximizing those federal dollars.
If you just give up those notions of best practices, community design and transportation planning, and just think dollars and jobs, it all makes sense.
From that perspective, I can start to see why the powers-that-be would want to just resurrect Frank Fasi’s original rail design, do some minor updating, then rush ahead while deflecting any other considerations or opinions.
I think the message is simple. We’re not really concerned about the best planned transportation system. Aesthetics? Not even worth worrying about. We’re talking money and real politics. Get real. Get over it.
The mayor was direct and forceful yesterday in delivering that message. He does, it seems, mean exactly what he says.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I concur.
yeah, that sounds right.
“Why would we choose to ignore the flexible, modern light rail ”
two words:
Pay Ola
Lingle shouldn’t trust Mufi to wait for the full funding agreement before starting construction It will be difficult for the FTA to contribute if Mufi jumps the gun and starts with just an ROD.
Although we have different interests/focus, I am just as passionately wed to my beliefs as you. And with my inability to keep them to myself, I have had my head handed to me on a platter, repeatedly. I was once thrown out of the office of a powerful legislative committee chair in a hail of epithets; the one that stuck with me was the derisively used tag “doctrinaire.” If that means I stick to my factually justified and clearly articulated positions, then I embrace the name. You should do the same.
Well said, Ian, and I too concur. Mufi’s rhetoric as of late, particularly negative statements directed towards Lingle, while proclaiming that this is all about creating jobs, have further strengthened my belief that this is all about politics. I’m in support of rail, but wish it was all going down much differently.
Become mayor or governor in this town and you become a multimillionaire. It’s traditional.
What was the question?
I would be interested in evidence showing an unusual accumulation of wealth by former governors.
I don’t know that there’s any pattern to be found. Suggestions?
thanks for the today’s analysis
if Hanneman becomes governor —- annonymous participation in discussions about civic affairs will become even more valuable
who wants to subject themselves to nasty personal attacks?
for those that have the luxury of making public stands on issues — thanks for participating — and I don’t care if the stand is one I agree with or not
BTW, in all the falling-over-ourselves to lavish praise on Frank Fasi and bask in the reflected glory, how come no one has mentioned the pay-to-play culture that he made so robust, the high city officials who were bag mean for donations extorted from political appointees, and all the rest?
Or can truth be tacky — or at least inconvenient — at such a time?
Ian,
Like you, I am a reflexive proponent of mass transit. But also like you, I have had to recognize that Mufi’s decisionmaking has little to do with providing the best transportation solution, nor the best “planning” solution. He aims to spend as much money as possible, pour as much concrete as possible and lay as much steel as possible in order to award the largest contracts as possible and wring from this the largest campaign contributions as possible.
His logic and that for a good mass transit system only coincide occasionally.
As a loyal Keynesian, I appreciate a “jobs” program as much as the next person, maybe more. But even the excuse of “economic stimulus” does not free us from the need to spend tax dollars prudently. Every “stimulus dollar” not spent foolishly can easily be spent on other pressing needs, which will ALSO stimulate the economy.
The AIA claim that the elevated stations wil resemble “aircraft carriers in the sky” struck me as particularly apt. Overbuilt, with lotsa concrete, lotsa steel, expensive to maintain, to keep clean, graffiti covered, hard to police, scary on a dark night, eyesores on a bright day, etc., etc., etc.
One more point. Had the opposition been more reasonable, I might have gotten involved. But the Stop Rail Movement has been so full of wacka-doodle, ideological dingbats, like Eric Ryan and Cliff Story, with Sam Slom and Malia Zimmerman cheering them on. That chorus of naysayers helped drown out any reasonable discussion. Except for the poor AIA professionals, who remained reasonable to the end. And see where that got them!
Kolea you make good points but I have to disagree with your statement about AIA “Look where that got them” If it wasn’t for the groundwork of Stop Rail Now and later the AIA we would not be in the strong position that we are in today.
Thanks to the AIA we have a very strong statement from Governor Lingle stating that when she does receive the EIS she will conduct a thorough review,as required by law, to ensure that the final EIS satisfactorily describes all impacts on the environment,economic and social welfare and cultural practices: incorporating an objective review of opposing alternatives and responding to each substantive comment received during the draft EIS revue process. Her review will also include a complete analysis of the project’s financial plan.
It is the City with its clout in Washington that is playing the political card whereas Governor Lingle is striving for a practical solution and saving our island from sinking into financial and aesthetic bankruptcy if we proceed any further with this overpriced obsolete railway
Hawaiian Eagle,
I say “look where it got them,” because the AIA’s position has helped slow down the project, but their intention was, literally, to get the City to consider changing track, not to kill the project completely.
I agree with Ian (and others) that Mufi APPEARS to be being unreasonable in his criticisms of Lingle. He apparently thinks she has her mind made up in advance of the EIS review and is out to kill the project. Kinda like how HE had his mind made up before the City heard consideration of alternatives.
In her public comments, she appears to be playing it safe. But that does not mean Mufi is not privy to leaks about discussions going on in the Lingle camp.
I had naively assumed the mass transit project would be designed PRIMARILY to serve transportation needs and to help direct growth. The process would inevitably be distorted somewhat by who gets the contracts and the location of stations would probably enrich well-connected investors. But those effects would be secondary to planning considerations.
Apparently, I was wrong. Watching how Mufi has railroaded through HIS conception, without bothering to give consideration to reasonable input, and seeing how overbuilt the d@mn thing is, has led me to accept the view Mufi sees this project first and foremost as a means to raise campaign funds and “reward friends and punish enemies.” I had resisted that view of him before, but his mishandling of this issue has led me to this conclusion.
Having said that about Mufi does NOT mean I think Lingle is motivated by other, more noble considerations. A lot of the Stop Rail people were also Go SuperFerry folks. Lingle consciously and deliberately ignored the best advice of state agencies and exhibited contempt for the EIS process in order to ram through her favored project, to benefit her cronies.
So don’t expect me to now believe she is reviewing the EIS with a fair and nuanced eye, concerned more with my priorities: good planning and solving our transportation needs.
Our funky political system, with its above ground, formal operations and its subterranean networks of support, has given rise to three (almost four) major political figures whose destinies are to dance with each other or clash. They are Lingle, Mufi, Ed Case and Neil Abercrombie. They are all eyeing Senator Inouye’s position as King of the Hill. Age and, ironically, his seniority in the House, have caused Neil to take himself out of contention for a Senate seat. But Mufi, Case and Lingle are all angling for the Senate seat. Whatever else they are doing, it is subordinate to that goal.
Ed sees the House seat as the best place to park his butt while waiting. Mufi decided, with apparent urging from Inouye and others, to go for the Governor’s seat The Governor’s seat is a damn good place for rewarding friends and building a financial base for future campaigns. Besides, it can help ensure the rail project remains on track. (Actually, remaining Mayor would have been the best for Rail, though not for Mufi’s personal quest for power. Team Inouye may lose the Mayor’s seat due to Mufi’s ambition).
If Lingle can use the EIS as a means to either cut Mufi off at the knees, or to wring concessions from Inouye or others, I have little doubt that will be what she tries to do. If she is smart, she will conceal her motivations behind a newfound respect for the necessity of a thorough environmental review. Heck, just delaying the project for long enough or putting it into doubt undercuts Mufi’s ability to wring contributions needed for his gubernatorial campaign.
But don’t expect me to believe Lingle is simply “striving for a practical solution” for either our transportation needs or for sound urban planning principles. The intersts behind the Rail Project failed to give her a piece of the action. She is not going to allow the project to advance the careers of her opponents with getting something in return. She would rather strengthen her ties with the Tea Party/Grassroot Institute activists who populate the anti-rail movement than to give the project the green light.
Unless somebody gives her a reason to change her mind. Though that might be too late.
This is much where I was on this as well. We were asked “Rail Yes or No”, not what rail. But then, presumably the proponents liked it that way, since anyone the slightest bit green and wanting rail wouldn’t go over to the no side.
Any rail project will deliver campaign contributions to the politicians. Up in the sky or ground level, same thing, except that the elevated line is more expensive, so more money, more contributions.
As to economic benefit for Hawaii, the rolling stock, rails, and much (most? almost all?) of the raw materials will be brought in.
So will the labor. Why would a contractor pay high local rates? If 43 undocumented Mexicans can come through TSA to work here, why not documented and even undocumented labor to work on the rail?
Hi Larry,
Either I am over-estimating Mufi’s payback to the construction unions and contractors, or you are underestimating how much he owes them.
I appreciate your sense that the “free market” will determine who gets the jobs, but I think it would be suicide for Mufi, and contrary to Inouye’s wishes, if the jobs went to out of state interests. (Like how Lingle directed major UH contracts to Texas-based companies run by Bush cronies).
I don’t know which contractors are tied to Mufi, but Mufi has long drawn important support from almost all the building trades unions. If there is iron to be laid, it will be the local Ironworkers Union who does the work. Cement to be poured, it will be local Masons. Forms to be built, it will be the Carpenter’s Union who gets the work.
If HIS Rail Project does not deliver union jobs to Hawaii’s building trades, after all the support they have given him, he has no political future in Hawaii. And rightly so.
So angry and cynical, yet so utterly, utterly naive.
Isnt it all just this simple:
NO CHOO-CHOO? NO GOVERNOR MUFI.
Its about jobs, its about money, its about this or that and this and that. Yeah, riiiiiight. Boys and Girls, the man knows hes gotta deliver the choo-choo, or his okole’s gotta stay put in the Mayors seat.
NO CHOO-CHOO? NO GOVERNOR MUFI.
18 comments? Woo hoo! Almost as much fun to read as the original posting!