HART oversight must be tougher

Recent updates about Oahu’s rail project make it increasingly difficult to ignore unease about money handling for the $5.26 billion project now underway. A new city auditor’s report casts doubt on whether consultants are being overseen tightly enough, and a lingering yearlong dispute over rail cars with the builder-operator does not bode well at this early stage of a long-term relationship.

What’s emerged as equally troubling is less-than-vigorous questioning by the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation board on the public’s behalf.

At a HART board meeting Thursday, rail transit officials, including HART executive director Dan Grabauskas, touted a total switch to four-car trains from two-car models, saying this would save $20 million and provide better customer service.

Sounds good. But the public presentation failed to fully disclose that the firm contracted to build and operate the trains, Ansaldo Honolulu JV, contends the switch would actually cost the city $4.2 million. The issue remains unsettled.

We’d like to believe that Grabauskas is right on this, and that he will prevail in contract savings without being gouged. But it’s puzzling why the fiscal dispute was not divulged in the presentation, until a HART board member asked about it.

That ongoing rail-car dispute, which represents a $24 million swing in bookkeeping, was reported by the Star-Advertiser’s Marcel Honore earlier last week. Also reported were discrepancies about ridership projections due to the four-car switch: While HART has cited gains in ridership from the switch, one HART project consultant who’s helped oversee the trains’ engineering called such gains misleading.

As Honore reported, there would actually be 11 percent fewer new riders over rail’s first decade, according to the systems engineer with consultant HDR/InfraConsult. Recent ridership models show that 104,300 daily riders would use the four-car train rail in its opening year, compared with 117,000 on a two-car model, noted consultants’ email exchanges; in 2030, the four-car trains would have 119,600 daily riders compared with 133,800 in two-car trains.

But the HART board on Thursday failed to even question Grabauskas on ridership accuracy, another puzzling omission if the goal is to vet this project properly. That goal for HART board members is more essential than ever, as construction proceeds from East Kapolei and heads toward Waipahu.

Lax oversight of some rail consultants came under severe scrutiny in a city auditor’s report released early last week.

"More oversight and accountability needs to occur at HART to justify the millions spent on public involvement," stated the report, which looked at some $14 million of public outreach spending since 2005.

In a 15-page response, Grabauskas disputed many of the auditor’s findings, saying improvements are already underway or have been accomplished, in areas ranging from transfer of consultant jobs to the city, and cutting "public involvement" positions from 24 full-timers to 8.5 to save nearly $3 million.

He noted, though: "One thing that I think (auditor) Edwin Young is right on, is an auditor can do a lot to point out where you can do better."

Indeed, with the rail project now transitioned into the building phase, taxpayers deserve better and fuller disclosures of the financial landscape. Rail’s first segment, from Kapolei to Aloha Stadium, is slated to open in 2017; the final leg to Ala Moana, in 2019.

Just as Grabauskas needs to press Ansaldo and other contractors to keep work on budget and on time, so must HART board members press the pointed questions and provide crucial oversight on the public’s behalf.