Recent commentaries on the rail project indicate no "middle ground" between those wanting to push ahead with the current steel-wheel-on-steel-rail (SWSR) system and those wanting to kill rail entirely.

The anti-rail lawsuit, coupled with issues raised on the viability of Ansaldo Honolulu to deliver train cars on time and within specifications and budget, will undoubtedly lead to delays on actual construction and also jeopardize future federal funding.

Former supporters now question project costs relative to rail’s impact on traffic, and the Star-Advertiser recently called for vigilance and clarity.

Many rail supporters agree, but have been highly critical of the handling of the project by both the city administration and the City Council.

As a result, the project may need to be saved. This can be done by staying positive on rail’s usefulness and pursuing more cost-effective ways to convert the known budget into ways to increase ridership and, therefore, reduce passenger costs per mile.

A partial restart is necessary to bring Oahu the most operationally efficient and cost-effective system — and it must be done through a cooperative effort by Mayor Peter Carlisle, his director of transportation services, the City Council and the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation.

The first step must be development of a supplemental environmental impact statement that covers all technologies because the first EIS was incomplete. For each technology, the EIS must address:

» A new guideway alignment mauka of downtown to preserve historic sites and view planes along the waterfront;

» A financial plan that includes costs for systems and guideway extensions to the University of Hawaii in Manoa, Wakiki and West Kapolei (i.e., the full locally preferred alternative selected by the 2006 City Council);

» Sound measurements in decibels at 50 feet perpendicular to the guideway;

» Overhead views of each guideway’s impact on roadways along the alignment;

» How rush hours’ express service can be provided;

» And yearly operations and maintenance (O&M) costs — a major factor that has been inadequately covered to date.

The city can still meet federal targets with a revised schedule that enables a new technology competition. New requests for proposals should be issued for guideway construction-train supplier teams bidding for a full five-year or longer contract. The Federal Transit Administration will be notified that all requirements shall be met for federal support and the signing of a Full Funding Grant Agreement in time for allocation of fiscal year 2013 funds.

It also would be proper to allow Kiewit Pacific to not only continue its core sampling but be able to team with train suppliers for the new contract. We believe that magnetic levitation (mag-lev), the newest rail technology, is particularly competitive and desirable for its functionality. Along with operational superiority, mag-lev offers considerable savings in guideway construction and O&M.

Jobs and developments are needed, but the focus of Oahu’s rail project should be on implementing the best system for commuters at the lowest cost to taxpayers. The serious uncertainties raised by the anti-rail lawsuit and Ansaldo’s financial viability could be eroding public confidence in this project, perhaps culminating in a negative vote on a new ballot resolution next year. Along with the loss of jobs and materials sales, federal funding would disappear, not to be seen again for decades.