Natalie Iwasa asks a very good question as the City Council is poised to approve Honolulu’s rail “recovery” plan at a special meeting tomorrow.
She asks: “Shouldn’t this plan that is related to the multi-billion dollar rail project be approved by the HART board before submission to the council for their approval?”
Very good question.
I’ve copied Iwasa’s Facebook post below.
At 9 a.m. tomorrow, the full council will have a special meeting to approve HART’s recovery plan. This comes just three days after the plan was approved at a joint meeting of the budget and transportation committees. But guess who hasn’t approved the plan yet . . . the HART board!
Shouldn’t this plan that is related to the multi-billion dollar rail project be approved by the HART board before submission to the council for their approval?
In fact, shouldn’t the HART board have approved the plan prior to submission to the FTA? Isn’t rushing the reason we’re in this mess to begin with?
Shouldn’t errors be corrected before approvals are given?
The answer to all of these questions is of course “yes.”
The agenda for the full council meeting is at – http://www4.honolulu.gov/docushare/dsweb/Get/Document-197867/100617%20Council%20Agenda.pdf
Instructions for submitting testimony are on the agenda.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Friends: With the public split almost in half on the issue, it is seems unproductive to continue to debate the issue, BUT mark my words and those of others opposed–IF the rail is ever completed it will never pay for itself, and the taxpayers will be subsidizing it to the tune of about $100 million per year until voters realize that it is not helping traffic, that there is no public parking, feeder transit has not been planned, and ridership will be poor. I’m with Panos and others who say turn it into a bike or walkway and put the money to better use
Yes, I see lots of people biking and walking to work from Kapolei. Right.
One thing for sure, we don’t know what the basis of the ridership projections are. One reason traffic is so bad from the west side to town is poor planning of the highways leading to bottlenecks in Ewa and Kapolei. I don’t foresee any relief in the traffic situation until there are limits on car ownership, higher fuel taxes, and/or tolls to reduce vehicle usage.
The poor planning and execution of the rail attests to poor maintenance in the future as ridership does not meet projections. The bikeway and walkway idea was proposed by Panos, who is an urban engineer, I believe, instead of just leaving the ugly concrete guideways unused, and it may well be if the city one day is forced to abandon the project.
I saw such elevated guideways adjacent to freeways in Auckland, I think. Ian might confirm such as he is there now
I actually prefer the idea of leaving the structures as is, as permanent monuments to government inefficiency and stupidity so that future generations will pause before committing to financial black holes.
“I don’t foresee any relief in the traffic situation until there are limits on car ownership, higher fuel taxes, and/or tolls to reduce vehicle usage.”
Exactly. The rail and The Bus are only part of a public transit program. An equally important component is creating disincentives for driving one person to a motor vehicle. Unfortunately, our elected officials are far more interested in catering to the developers involved in TOD than they are in making public transit actually work.
It may be faster to bike and walk since traffic congestion will not improve with the rail.
I totally disagree. I do not see any way they will be able to operate the rail for as little as $100 million per year. We will be lucky if the amount collected by the rail tax, more like $270 million, will be sufficient.
Good suggestion, Stanford, bike and walkway. How wide is it?
Aloha Stanford, The most recent estimate I have seen on the O&M costs is about $140 million. If ridership is only half of what was projected, as has been suggested by some people, then that amount will increase significantly.
The history of cost estimates for this project started back at about $3B, then went to $5B, and now $10B seems to be what everyone is hoping won’t be exceeded, and many think it will be above that. IOW, early estimates were somewhere between a quarter and a half of what looks to be the actual cost.
O&M cost estimates started, to my recollection, at around $110M/year and are now at around $140. Using the history of construction cost estimates to guide us suggests O&M costs will be in the range of about $280M to $440M per year.
The $100M estimate Stanford mentions is about as relevant now as the $5B construction cost estimate.
Thank you for posting this, Ian. In addition to the lack of approval by the HART board, there are certain things in the recovery plan that deserve more discussion before any council approval.
For example, the recovery plan defers the Pearl Highlands parking garage until a funding source has been found. This is one item that former HART board member and CEO Mike Formby asked to have put back into the plan. He said it was important to the overall success of rail. Despite removal of the garage, the recovery plan includes an increase in the estimated ridership for combined rail and bus services.
Then there’s the whole issue with the cancelled RFP for the city center guideway and stations, which is estimated to cause an 18-month delay, at a minimum, and require any P3 savings to be at least $260 million to offset additional costs due to this delay. All of this needs to be brought into the open.
I hope our councilmembers will do the right thing and defer this resolution.
I find it unbelievable that everyone is bent out of shape that rail “won’t pay for itself”. A major point in favor of rail is that ongoing operations will be subsidized by the federal government.JUST LIKE THE BUS. As to the plan not being approved by HART, no one seems to have considered why thet should, or even the implications of that. HART is a management entity, part of the bureaucracy. They have absolutely no say in approval of budget matters because constitutionally and the City Charter that power resides solely in elected officials. Neat idea? Let’s have the police commission first approve the police budget? Ppublic employee unions approve the state budget.
The point of maintenance and operational costs are that all projections, as in the capital expenditures have been inaccurate, and most of those favoring the rail don’t know or don’t care that taxpayers will be paying for it forever. A quick look at OTS financial statements (mind you not studied in great detail) indicates net operating loss in the $170 million neighborhood. Whether the feds pay or the city pays, WE pay with our taxes. One discussion I had with a supporter touting the BART as an example of a great mass transit system, but quick review of their financial statements show operating losses in the $200 million plus, and $4-5 BILLION in un- allocated (no funds) maintenance needed (it is an old system-started around 1972). Most transit systems do not break even, but that is a foolish reason to justify $10 billion + for a poorly planned and inadequate rail line to begin with.
Bill, according to the charter, the board does have authority over HART’s budget. RCH Sec. 17-104. Power, Duties and Functions of the Board of Directors.
(d) Review, modify as necessary, and adopt an annual operating budget for the
authority and an annual capital budget for the fixed guideway system
submitted by the executive director of the authority.
Natalie: I saw your name mentioned in a news article as a “community activist”–great work you are doing! I haven’t looked at the laws, but by your description, I take it that HART is an autonomous agency, like the Board of Water Supply.. seems there was some discussion about merging HART with a city department some time back–BAD IDEA and more politics with whoever is mayor and/or council in-fighting.
Thank you, Stanford. HART is not quite semi-autonomous. It differs from the BWS mainly in that it cannot generate its own revenue.
As far as merging with the city goes, you might be thinking about last year’s charter amendment that moved rail O&M from HART to the city effective 7/1/17.
Natalie: Considering that we are dead last in infrastructure maintenance that move will prove to be another financial disaster.