McKinley's cafeteria was filled for the rail outreach meeting.
The first in a series of
Community Information Meetings enjoyed a big turnout last evening at McKinley
High School’s cafeteria. The series continues this evening at Radford per the rail meeting schedule.
The Rev. Bob Nakata (left)
of Faith Action for Community Equity (FACE) reminded attendees before the
session actually kicked off that his organization believes rail may be the last
chance for Oahu to create affordable housing for this and future generations.
With high rankings in electricity rates, gas prices, groceries, real estate and
other indices that make up the cost of living, living on Oahu is bound to be
even more expensive in years ahead. Reverend Nakata said transit-oriented
development will be a key feature of the rail project, and he urged attendees
to make that point whenever and wherever they can.
Once the meeting actually
began, new HART CEO Dan Grabauskas (enjoying a quick bite at right)
provided an overview of the project and answered questions from the floor
before break-out groups delved into transit-oriented development, rail
operations and other topics. The former head of the Boston transit system told
the audience the elevated rail plan that’s being implemented – construction on
the support columns began last week – was selected after numerous alternatives
were studied years ago. Elevated rail is the only way for commuters in the
east-west corridor to completely avoid traffic congestion.
No Soup for You?
One question from the floor
had a familiar ring to it, since it riffed off rail opponent Cliff Slater’s
stump speech. “I’ve read that traffic congestion in the future with rail will
be worse than it is today,” the Makakilo resident said. “What’s the truth in
that?”
The answer, of course, is
that congestion would be worse without rail than with it, something Mr. Slater even had to admit before the City Council a couple summers ago. Later, in
discussion, the questioner revealed the mindset that drives many who find a
reason to oppose rail.
What he and they want is an
absolute “solution” to traffic. He said if he’s hungry and goes to the store
for a can of soup, he knows the soup can will “solve” his hunger problem. Rail
shouldn’t be any different, he reasons; he believes an investment of several
billion dollars should be able to wipe away traffic, just as a can of soup wipes away
his hunger.
It’s an inventive way to
find fault with rail, but our conversation reminded us that leading a horse to
water won’t necessarily result in drinking. When someone is dead set against
the project, there’s little likelihood “truth-telling” will get through – even
the obvious truth that Oahu’s population will continue to grow and so will the
number of vehicles, all resulting in more traffic congestion than we have
today. Rail and nothing else will "solve" congestion.
With little enthusiasm on
Oahu – let alone the space – for building more highways here, rail will allow
users avoid the inevitable growth in congestion. But equating congestion with
hunger and thirst may not be so off the mark after all. Sooner or later, we
simply must eat and drink to overcome both – either that or die. Traffic congestion already has reached
unacceptable levels for commuters, and a daily diet of riding Honolulu’s future
train will help them cope with it by avoiding it.
Questions for Ben
Anti-rail mayoral candidate
Ben Cayetano will hold another of his chilli-and-rice dinners this week. It’s
billed as an “ask the candidate” event, so here are the top three questions
that need asking:
1. “You say rail won’t solve
the traffic problem, but isn’t it true congestion would be worse without rail
than with it?”
Answer: If he’s truthful,
Mr. Cayetano will have to answer in the affirmative. He’s taking his cues from
Mr. Slater (see above), and in so doing, there’s no other way to answer it
truthfully.
2. “Isn’t it true that the
bus rapid transit plan that you’re borrowing from the Harris Administration
wouldn’t end the congestion problem?”
Answer: If he’s truthful,
Mr. Cayetano will have to admit that. Adding more buses to already congested
roads and highways can’t possibly reduce the inevitable growth in congestion.
3. “When will you do the
right thing and publicize the details of the BRT plan you want to implement if
you’re elected after you’ve killed mobility-enhancing, travel-time-reducing,
development-guiding, transportation-equity-enhancing and job-creating Honolulu
rail?”
We don’t know the answer to
that one. Only Mr. Cayetano knows. He formally announced his candidacy 104 days
ago on January 19. There are only 101 days to go before the
primary election, which means Mr. Cayetano has managed to stall for more than half the
time between announcement and election.
Of course, his supporters don’t care
about his BRT plan, since most are really concerned only about killing rail. He represents their best chance to achieve that goal, but what about the
media? Do reporters care?
We heard from one reporter
who’s closely following rail that he’s been asking Mr. Cayetano for the BRT
plan's details, and the candidate is refusing to respond to his inquiries. Is that the
brand of transparency Mr. Cayetano is proposing in his
administration?
That qualifies as
another question, so we’re obligated to provide the Answer: Only if the media and
public let him get away with it.
No comments:
Post a Comment