Tag Archives: Honolulu rail

The Permanent Revolution

In 1954, the Democratic Party organized a revolution that mobilized demographic shifts and anti-plantation (and anti-elite) sentiments that had been building for decades. The formerly non-existent party used union organizing to mobilize voters from ethnic groups whose aspirations had long been repressed. The result, by the time of statehood, was one of the most liberal agendas of any state, including low tuition levels at the University of Hawaiʻi, a well-intended unitary school board, and stated rights for women.

Fast forward to 2012, and the revolution has morphed into an unstoppable machine for preserving the status quo. On election night, Duke Aiona’s defense of the now-decrepit Republican Party’s few victories made the Republicans sound like the party of the grassroots underdog rather than the party of elite business interests that it is.

In their post-election analysis, David Shapiro and Tom Coffman pointed out how Hawaiʻi “doesnʻt throw out incumbents,” and asked who could possibly beat Abercrombie in 2014. They marveled at the machine’s attack on Ben Cayetano, who, despite mounting opposition, admittedly could not come up with a compelling alternative to rail. Likewise, Linda Lingle’s well-financed campaign, it was pointed out, only received the same percentage of votes as Cynthia Theilen’s last minute campaign against Akaka – the automatic Republican vote, in other words. But it was strange, to say the least, that these two old liberals (later joined by Ikaika Hussey, the youngster) were lamenting the weakness of the Republicans. What they were really lamenting was the weakness of any alternative to the business-infused Democratic Party.

Weʻve seen revolutions that were permanent, or claimed to be permanent, before. And those are not examples to emulate: China in 1950, Cuba in 1959, and the many ʻone-man rule’ communist states. Change is not the end-all and be-all of politics, but the underlying conditions are changing so rapidly, it seems clear that another revolution – not permanent – is called for.

Part of this article was used in The State of Hawaiʻi – Part 2

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Oʻahu Transportation Debate

I rarely go to public meetings these days, but I managed to make it to the discussion “What are your Ideas for Improving Oʻahu Transportation?” at R&D in Kakaʻako, sponsored by The Hawaiʻi Independent. The crowd was UH heavy, which by itself made it not representative of the general public. This non-representation, in my view, is one of the primary obstacles to constructive debate in Hawaiʻi and elsewhere. Mainly the debate takes place through elections, specifically the mayoral election, which Ikaika Hussey pointed out was “a proxy for the debate over  transportation on Oʻahu.”

I was in a group that focused on The Bus, and we happened to have a planning official from The Bus in the group. But he became a sort of lightning rod for those who were frustrated with its performance since the Harris administration. He ended up defending himself from those who decried the cuts to bus routes – the restoring of which Caldwell has said is one of his top priorities. But those “cuts,” it was explained, were merely the result of more realistic estimations of how long routes would take to complete. There were budget cuts at the State and City levels, as we all know (Lingle’s school furlough days being the most visible result), but somehow in the minds of critics The Bus was not to be affected.

My main critique was that the discussion centered on busses being too full and passing people by, when the real problem is not too many people on The Bus, but too few. Cayetano had the political muscle to resurrect mayor Harrisʻs unpopular idea of Bus Rapid Transit, but even at one-fifth the cost of rail, it remains outside of the average person’s frame of reference – it was described as a “political football.” And that was the main problem with Saturday’s discussion – like nearly every discussion today, people were not really able to see outside of their own frames of reference.

Another overlooked issue was the stigma attached to riding The Bus. It is seen as the transit option of the very young, the very old and the poor (and the first two are basically synonyms of the last). Anyone who can afford to avoid riding The Bus does so. This is one thing Harris didn’t seem to get – he didn’t ride The Bus. But besides rail, BRT is the only viable option for addressing our transit woes, if it’s paired with a PR campaign to attract mainstream riders. Some have argued for more lanes, but 25% of all land area with the average city is already taken up by roads – this drives up real estate prices and the cost of living. To argue that there should be more roads is like saying that the one million cars we have on this island is too few.

I brought up the discontinuity of bike lanes as an issue, but biking (in general, and specifically on the paths) is so unpopular that even my friends who are serious cyclists donʻt use the bike paths. They have kiawe trees growing on the side in Aiea/Pearl City which puncture tires, and homeless encampments in the trees. But the worst part is you can get to Middle Street just fine from as far as Waipahu, and then you canʻt get into town – the bike lane on Nimitz evaporates and the Bike route takes you onto perilous streets (traffic-wise) in Kalihi, which is also far out of the way. Further, once you get to work, there are no shower facilities at most work places. Those who bicycle do so at their own risk and are essentially marginalized by society because of how little thought and resources are put into their safety.

Much has been said about rail, but it seems that it is primarily a job-creation project and little thought has been put into how to get people out of their cars. According to Donovan Dela Cruz, 130,000 people will have to ride rail daily to make it cost-effective – one tenth of the total population of the state. This is unlikely since it only serves the Southwest side of Oʻahu. Procedural hurdles will also likely spring up due to Mufi Hanneman’s unprecedented decision to build from an empty field in Kapolei/Hoʻopili toward Honolulu. They’re apparently taking “rail based development” extremely seriously. The approval of Hoʻopili and Koa Ridge were probably forgone conclusions with the inertia of rail, while open space, which has no voice or interest group, will soon be non-existent on this island as a consequence. [My views on rail and other local issues can be seen in my article “The State of Hawaiʻi – Part 1“].

In breaking news (as I write) we hear that Federal funding has been approved for the rail project. Hawaiʻi News Now reports:

The Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation (HART) says it will sign a full funding grant agreement with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to provide $1,550,000,000 for the rail project.

By law, the FTA is required to notify Congress 30 days before it signs a full funding grant agreement.  Immediately after signing the agreement, the HART will receive $200 million in New Starts funding from FY2012.

photo courtesy of Hawaiʻi News Now

So rail seems to have survived the attacks of the Cayetano/Prevedouros camp and even Hawaiian burial activists. As Caldwell pointed out on election night, the obstacles left by the court are the minor ones only.

Because of our inability or refusal to think outside of our own realities, we are not taking alternatives to auto transportation seriously. The result is that most of us drive and just put up with the traffic that lowers our quality of life and that of the environment.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The State of Hawaiʻi – Part 1

A few days ago, Hawaiʻi celebrated, or failed to celebrate, the fifty-third anniversary of Statehood. The seeming apathy that perennially surrounds this not-so-holy holiday provides a gauge on the political climate in the islands. Most people now know that the history behind statehood, annexation and overthrow is so contested that silence is a better response than engagement. I even find myself avoiding engagement on these topics in some situations.

Overall, there a few issues which come to forefront in the public consciousness today. In this post, I provide my reading of these front-burner issues as an overview of Hawaiʻi’s political landscape. The first, and probably foremost issue is surprisingly limited in scope in terms of the  proportion of people it affects: rail. I say limited – of course the tax burden is massive, but it only applies to Oʻahu, and the project only benefits West Oʻahu, but it dominates headlines in our statewide newspaper like few issues have in the past 20 years.

RAIL

Thereʻs no shortage of views on rail. The project revived the political career of one of most unpopular politicians in recent times, Ben Cayetano (though his tell-all book probably helped build sympathy for his record as Governor). The public has proved fairly fickle on the topic of rail, voting for the project in 2008, then voting in a plurality for the otherwise unpopular, single-issue Cayetano this month. Geography played a key role in the original vote, as the districts rail was to serve voted for the project and Windward and East Honolulu, and even Waianae voting against it (though Nanakuli voted for it). This breakdown shows the distribution of the population is heavily concentrated in the West suburbs -home of the nation’s worst traffic.

The plan for rail is something that few have probably looked at closely. The route snakes through Honolulu on Halekauila street next to the Federal Court house, and ends upstairs at Ala Moana. The station will be suspended above the bus terminal and will likely cause at least a year or two of massive disruptions at that terminal. The other end of the project is even crazier – it ends in the middle of an empty field in Kapolei. When they spoke of rail-based development, they weren’t kidding – they meant from scratch.

The fight over the development of (or paving over of) Hoʻopili farmland was basically a done deal by the time of the Land Use Commission’s (LUC) vote. The lone dissenter in that vote noted that Hoʻopili constituted a third of farmland on Oʻahu. On a side note, the approval of Koa Ridge the same week moved our island far in the direction of having no open space between Honolulu and (practically) the North Shore. UH West Oʻahu’s campus opening this week at least would bring population to the Kapolei area, as will Hawaiian Homes development adjoining the campus. But probably the thing that will be the most unpopular will be the development of the Pearlridge to Kapolei segment first, which will cause it to run empty for years while the “first” (or what should be first) segment is built from Pearlridge to Ala Moana. This plan is politically smart, however, in the most cynical sense, in that it locks the taxpayers into committing to the entire project, and avoids the project being stopped at Pearlridge as voters begin to resent the costs.

All of this makes it sound as if I’m anti-rail, but that’s not exactly the case. Unlike others, I don’t believe that people will continue to drive as they now do, because oil prices will almost certainly skyrocket to $9 – $15 per gallon. Rail will then look attractive, and possibly (though it’s hard to imagine) like a good deal in retrospect. Honolulu is actually a city in which it makes sense to have a mass transit system – itʻs long and thin, crammed between the ocean and mountains, snaking from downtown to Pearl City, before opening up in the central plain. But this geography would have been as well served by a bus rapid transit system, which Mayor Jeremy Harris proposed, no one noticed, and Mufi Hanneman killed. The costs would have been a fraction of rail’s cost, but would include a lost auto lane in each direction – a small cost that people, foolishly in my view, are unwilling to pay.

EDUCATION

Always present on the political agenda, always given lip service, but never put in the hands of capable people, is the public school system. The voting away of the public’s right (by the public) to select the Board of Education (BOE) was a mind-boggling use of the democratic process – we (though not I) used our very empowerment to disempower ourselves. It’s true that the candidates were weak, and maybe it would have worked out if the Governor would select authentic experts  to the new appointed board, rather than the business-oriented members that now sit on the BOE.

It’s too early to say exactly what the effect of the new board will be, but the programs already in motion have put incredible strain on the schools – some of which, but probably not all of which, they need. Apart from the BOE, the DOE’s organizational chart is so hierarchical that it takes a pamphlet (or something more like a small book) to merely display it. As an outsider, it’s difficult to say what exactly the effect of these layers is, but it’s clear that the gap between policy-makers (especially  on the federal level) and students in the classroom is a large one. In my years of observing the DOE from inside and out, many of the unnoticed aspects of institutional culture are where the problems lie: the relation between teachers (many of whom are brought in to fill in because of the high turnover of teachers), home life, and societal culture (how many people are actually reading these days?) are all factors that remain unmeasured for the most part, and contribute as much to student performance as teaching methodology.

The furloughs were a hot topic a couple of years ago, and Lingle’s campaign for Senate will hinge on the public perception of this decision. She was lucky, because test results actually went up that year, but public outrage was high and she was protected by being in her second term. My view is that history will look more kindly on her – she was being consistent, every department took a cut with no exceptions, but the public may still feel that their children’s schools should have been an exception.

POLITICS (I.E., POLITICIANS)

One political observer said to me recently that today’s local politicians have “no vision.” I think this is true, and it may be a result of the times. I mean that in two ways. On the one hand, few seem able to predict even the near future at this historical moment. Even fundamental assumptions such as the dominance of tourism, can’t be taken from granted as global warming threatens our beaches, and hotel executives pay no attention to the phenomenon. I’m no fan of Lingle, but at least she executed an agenda for developing an infrastructure for electric cars, the result of which we see at Kahala mall and Pearlridge in the free charging stations.

Today’s politicians, by contrast, are a cult of appearance and personality. Take Tulsi Gabbard’s stunning defeat of Mufi Hanneman. The only explanation is that the public soured of his egomania (though the singing probably didn’t help), and their attention was grabbed by her striking looks and mildly interesting backstory. Gabbard grew up in a political family and so it’s no wonder she’s good at it, but where’s the vision? Caldwell seems cut from the same cloth. Mazie is as entrenched in the status quo as it’s possible to be. Until we actually look  for leaders with vision, instead of just letting ourselves be distracted by them (on the side of the road mainly), we won’t find a John Burns, a Tom Gill or even a Jeremy Harris in this or the next election.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized