The late U.S. Sen. Daniel Inouye left a very deep imprint on his home state. In addition to the part he played in its history, from World War II onwards, his advocacy for Hawaii brought federal support for many programs and investments — in government, as well as in developments now part of the private underpinnings of the island economy. They touch almost everyone here, whether or not they realize it.

That’s why the University of Hawaii approach to memorializing him seems so ill-advised. It isn’t so much the notion of creating the Daniel K. Inouye Center — few would dispute that his lifetime achievements merit a permanent presence — as it is the process that has been unnecessarily cloaked and hurried.

The center is being proposed as a public-private partnership, involving foundation funding sources at least at the start, but support for building it will become a state budget item at some point, with a further draw likely to come from federal sources.

UH leadership has essentially shut out the public from discussion at a point when people might become engaged in the project, ultimately developing some sense of ownership. Since funding for constructing the center almost certainly will involve a donation from the public purse, openness and support are essential.

Some members of that public might have some ideas about whether or not a UH facility makes sense in terms of the university’s mission, or whether even simply naming an existing institution would be more appropriate.

Preliminary letters of solicitation were sent out June 3 to design firms potentially interested in the project. This suggests UH was trying to get ahead of the curve, before a new law took effect that changed the way contracts are overseen.

The Legislature passed a bill last session that arose from concern about insufficient supervision of university construction projects, after allegations of favoritism in the contracting process set off alarm bells. The oversight responsibility was shifted to the administrator of the state procurement office, effective July 1.

However, because the letters went out before the law took effect, this contract would remain under UH oversight, according to Aaron Fujioka, who heads the procurement office. UH contends it intends to work through Fujioka’s office, in which case there should be no reason this has to be rushed.

UH-Manoa Chancellor Tom Apple said that there’s nothing secret about the project, but so far the discussions with the Board of Regents have not happened in a public setting, and that’s what counts. The center was an item on the July 18 regents’ agenda, but it was a topic for executive session, a closed-door meeting.

The solicitation letter describes a center housing the late senator’s archival documents, a gallery for photos and memorabilia, an audio-visual area for viewing or listening to accounts of Inouye’s legacy, research and seminar rooms and other elements.

It’s being conceived as a center for advancing educational initiatives, global awareness and other benefits Inouye no doubt would applaud. But there are other institutions with similar or compatible aims, not least of which is the East-West Center, a project favored by Inouye for decades. There may be a piece of the Obama library legacy coming here, too, when the Hawaii-born U.S. president leaves office.

If there’s something that distinguishes the proposed center, a justification that will ensure it can compete for sustaining funds against the UH’s many other pressing facilities needs over the coming years, it has not been made apparent.

A conversation about this needs to happen, and soon. The public would be buying this center, at some point, so buy-in at this point would be a prudent idea.

Without a doubt, the UH is rarely criticized for moving too quickly on anything, but in this particular case, more deliberation is what’s required.