HART and transparency? | City taps millions in rail reserve funding | and More Rail News

article top
City's rail rendering

BY BOBBIE SLATER – Please read Kevin Dayton’s excellent article on change orders for the rail and what it is really costing you. From the Star Advertiser on Sunday, June 17th (click here if you have a Star Advertiser subscription>)

And just in case you still have reservations on how “transparent” HART is with the public, here’s more information that may or may not surprise you.
The HART Board (‘The Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transgressions’) and “transparency.”  



A few examples:


The firm hired by the FTA, the Project Management Oversight Contractor (PMOC) issued the PMOC Report of October 2011 with a 50-page Project Risk Register at the end of its 330-page report. A significant portion of the Report concerns the risks inherent in the rail project.


In response to persistent requests from the League of Women Voters, HART recently posted the October 2011 PMOC Monthly Report, which is only 42 pages long. While it has a short risk section, nowhere does it have the kind of comments such as this one on p. 13 of the longer report:


“… this is an extremely large project, and historically such projects are found to exhibit high-risk profiles … the remaining work on this project extends into increasingly dense urban areas, increasing the risk of third-party interferences and unexpected underground utility and archaeological conditions.”


The two reports in their entirety can be found on the www.honolulutraffic.com website.


At the last HART meeting, Cliff took the report with him to the testifier’s desk, and in three minutes, said why he was opposed to this project.


Don Horner testily accused Cliff of selecting projects that had not had a good success rate and ignoring the successes. He then said that he wanted to hear from Cliff what he (Cliff) thought the risks were and they could meet over lunch. Please note, they could have had an open discussion then and there, not over a private lunch.


Secondly; HART has been asked repeatedly by the League of Women Voters among others, to post the report on the HART website. They have recently posted 42 pages.


Thirdly, an organization called. “The Pacific Century Fellows” asked Grabauskas, CEO of HART, and Law Professor Randy Roth, a plaintiff in the lawsuit, to make presentations to them. The format would be 15 minutes for one side, and 15 minutes for the other side, then both sides would answer questions.


Grabauskas has asked that the presentations be made in private without the other side present. Sounds like the Fasi gag order all over again. Let’s never be on the same platform as the plaintiffs – I guess it could get awkward.


For more information, log onto HonoluluTraffic.com