A critical state audit renews troubling questions about the Hawaii Tourism Authority’s stewardship of taxpayers’ money. While we appreciate HTA President and CEO Mike McCartney’s assurances that progress is being made on the report’s key findings, the fact that similar problems were identified in previous state audits signals that greater urgency and accountability is needed.

The vice chairman of the state Senate’s tourism committee predicts that a public legislative hearing is likely, given the audit’s findings. That prospect is welcome, as such a forum would supply a much-needed opportunity for greater scrutiny of an agency that receives an average annual appropriation of $140.5 million in public funds. The HTA’s mission is to bolster Hawaii’s $14.4 billion visitor industry — which accounts for nearly 20 percent of the state’s economy — a vital undertaking to which the highest public-policy standards must apply.

State tourism marketing would clearly benefit from improved plans, reporting and oversight, the audit asserts, finding that the HTA’s "incohesive, self-described ‘marketing plan’ and poor reporting on measures of effectiveness impede transparency."

The audit is pointed in its conclusion that HTA’s leadership "mistakenly believes" that the agency’s Brand Sustainability and Execution Plan satisfies statutory requirements for a tourism marketing plan "aimed at holding the authority accountable for the $58.9 million in taxpayer funds it spent in 2012."

That amount includes $42.5 million for marketing contracts for five major market areas — North America, Japan, Other Asia, Oceania and Europe — and the Hawaii Convention Center; $7.1 million spent on contracts for the Access program, designed as a collaboration with airlines and travel agencies to stimulate travel to Hawaii during historically slow periods; and $9.3 million to support festivals, Hawaiian cultural events and sporting events such as the Pro Bowl and the PGA tour.

Obvious deficiencies in the HTA’s policies, procedures, training and contract reporting are doubly lamentable given that the state auditor identified similar problems in 2002. The HTA’s failure to ensure that contractors submit final reports and the lack of routine contract-performance evaluations are particularly concerning, since without them the agency cannot guarantee that all contracts are properly fulfilled and taxpayers’ money is well spent. While some progress has been made, much more is needed to stem this inconsistent management and oversight.

McCartney responded to the audit by saying that the HTA had already addressed some of the concerns and would use the audit’s recommendations to develop a work plan that will be presented to the HTA board this month. That’s laudable.

But he also said that HTA staff will analyze tourism marketing plan requirements as outlined in HRS Sections 201-6 (a-b) and pursue changes during the legislative session. That’s worrisome.

According to the audit, the HTA fell far short of the statutory requirement to have a tourism marketing plan for the whole state. Rather than a cohesive, strategic vision, the audit found fragmented plans dispersed across nearly 600 pages in more than a dozen documents. Legislators should be leery of any attempt to dilute the statutory requirement, and, instead, insist that the Hawaii Tourism Authority work harder to meet the letter of the law. Achieving that goal would surely make the agency a better steward of the public’s funds.