If we know anything about
the “young adult” generation, it’s that it doesn’t want to be told what to do
or think.
Yet that’s what the writer
of a letter to the editor published in today’s Star-Advertiser (subscription) does by
suggesting the author of a pro-rail commentary published on Sunday doesn’t know
what he’s talking about.
Not a good idea, and it’s
certain to simply alienate today’s letter writer from the generation that’s
stepping up to assume leadership throughout the community.
We’re using the newspapers
editorial section again (as we did yesterday) as a source of good thinking about the rail project. To be
sure, rail opponents use the letters column as a tool fight the project, and
their letters are pretty much what you’d expect.
But even anti-rail
letters can be instructive, too, and that’s why we’re here – illuminating the
rail project’s components and digging into the arguments from both sides of the
issue.
Young Adults
Brandon Elefante’s Sunday commentary contained many of the same descriptions of elevated rail that the project’s
spokespeople and public involvement team members have been making in our
educational communications.
“Rail transit will provide
us with an alternative mode of transportation that will be reliable, efficient
and cost effective,” Mr. Elefante wrote. “With the escalating costs of gas, car
registration, insurance and vehicle maintenance, owning a car could become a
thing of the past and may no longer be an affordable option for many. As young
adults, we continue to struggle to make a living here in Hawaii, considering
the rising cost of our educational loans and other bills.”
His commentary envisions an
expanded rail project beyond its initial 20 miles, extending from Ala Moana to
Waikiki and to the University of Hawaii in Manoa. And that’s where today’s
letter takes issue with Mr. Elevante:
Young writer seems
ignorant of rail cost (Star-Advertiser,
7/17)
I wonder if (Mr. Elefante)
has any comprehension of the cost of such a system. The 20 miles in the current
plan are estimated to cost more than $5 billion. From Ala Moana to Waikiki and
Ala Moana to the University of Hawaii? I shudder to think! I wonder if he
realizes that the cost of construction, maintenance and subsidy will be borne
by his generation? (sic)
We’re not here to defend Mr.
Elefante’s piece, but we can easily imagine that he’s already thought
through the cost of building the extensions compared to the cost of not building them. Congestion can only worsen for his
generation and all the generations beyond, so his calculation undoubtedly is
that it’s worth it and will be much most cost-effective for all the future generations
of commuters along Oahu’s southern corridor.
The Manoa letter writer
might also reflect on the approval given Honolulu rail by this generation of island residents in the numerous election of pro-rail candidates and approval of rail-related City Charter amendments..
PR and Shibai
Another letter to the editor
today made us smile:
HART PR needed to counter
shibai
(A certain Council member)
asks Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation Director Dan Grabauskas why
HART needs so many public relations people, when there is only one at the state
level for the airports and harbors divisions.
It’s simple: People aren’t
going around town spreading blatant falsehoods about airports and harbors. HART
needs public relations people simply to counteract the sheer amount of shibai coming from (rail opponents') camps.
At least one citizen out
there understands what the rail project’s public relations people do a good
deal of the time!
1 comment:
An important aspect of economics is what's called alternative costs. While we can quantify the cost of rail most can't quantify the alternative costs of not building rail. Peter Calthorpe simply stated that the alternative cost of not building rail means using twice the amount of land for homes than the TOD's which accompany rail. The loss in ag lands will be devastating. The non-rail solution means additional infrastructure for the urban sprawl which happens without rail. The cost of that infrastructure rivals the cost of rail itself. So yes Brandon Elefante is fully aware of the cost of not building rail.
Post a Comment