A 2007 report by a Colorado firm hired to provide an independent evaluation of the risks involved in developing the Thirty Meter Telescope on Mauna Kea warned of serious headwinds, the high probability of litigation and a complicated and lengthy regulatory process.

The report also described a perceived poor history of stewardship of Mauna Kea and a "great mistrust" of the University of Hawaii by Native Hawaiians developed over many years — "heavy baggage" that the TMT would have to carry and overcome.

"Should TMT decide to pursue a Mauna Kea site, it will inherit the anger, fear, and great mistrust generated through previous telescope planning and siting failures and an accumulated disbelief that any additional projects, especially a physically imposing one like the TMT, can be done properly," the report said.

The Keystone Center report, commissioned by TMT funder Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, detailed some of the potential tripwires and showstoppers facing the proposed next-generation TMT, billed as the most powerful optical telescope in the world, capable of seeing more than 13 billion light-years away.

While it didn’t predict a new generation of Hawaiians would take the opposition to a new level, the report does provide some insight into what’s happening today on the mountain, where the $1.4 billion project, following a seven-year regulatory review, remains at a standstill while "protectors" guard against construction vehicles.

Despite the gloomy prospects outlined in the document, the Moore Foundation, which had already donated $50 million to TMT’s design phase, committed an additional $200 million to the construction phase.

Vicki Chandler, the foundation’s chief program officer for science, said the California nonprofit wasn’t deterred by the report’s findings. Rather, they were held up as inspiration to create a better project.

"The report was very frank in calling out the concerns and challenges facing the TMT," Chandler said.

The author of the report was Peter Adler, then-president of the Keystone, Colo., consulting firm. Adler arrived on Hawaii island in 2007 with more than an outsider’s perspective, having moved to Colorado from Oahu, where he held positions with the Hawaii Justice Foundation, the Hawaii Supreme Court’s Center for Alternative Dispute Resolution and the Neighborhood Justice Center.

Adler, who returned to Hawaii four years ago, recalled last week that he was well aware going into his investigation that the development of Mauna Kea was an extremely sensitive topic, but he was still surprised by the depth of the opposition.

"I had no appreciation of the hurdles the TMT would have to clear," he said.

The 19-page Keystone report concluded flatly that there would be no fast track to bringing the TMT to Mauna Kea.

"Potential funders and supporters of the project must be prepared to be extremely patient and pay a premium in social, political, and legal transaction costs," it said.

In preparing the report, Adler and another Keystone employee interviewed 60 people, including government officials, lawmakers and community members whose views fell on all sides of the issue.

During the interviews, people described a history of poor planning, bureaucratic bumbling, broken promises and technocratic arrogance, and a persistent failure to engage the Native Hawaiian community in meaningful and appropriate ways, according to the report.

Most of the objections were not to science, the report said, but to the way science had been conducted on the mountain. Issues included placing telescopes on inappropriate sites, poor disposal of rubbish and waste, and offering inadequate access for cultural and spiritual practices.

"The history of poor or no consultations with Hawaiians, both Native and non-Native, was chronicled repeatedly in our conversations as a serious problem. None of this is TMT’s fault, but all of it will be inherited," the report said.

The report added that to succeed at a Mauna Kea site, "TMT must run a gauntlet … of potential challenges, not all of which are of TMT’s making and some of which could be potential showstoppers if TMT’s schedule and timing do not have great flexibility."

The report noted that intensive discussions with the Native Hawaiian community would be imperative early and often if the TMT were to go forward. It recommended "the broadest possible range of consultations with the widest possible range of stakeholders" in Hawaii island’s Native Hawaiian community and added that it must acknowledge astronomy’s long and difficult history on the mountain.

The report offered no recommendation on whether the TMT should be built but added that "if early hurdles can be overcome, TMT has a chance to model a new kind of dialogue" with Native Hawaiians and others affected by or interested in the future of Mauna Kea.

Michael Bolte, an astronomy professor at the University of California at Santa Cruz, and board member with the TMT Observatory International LLC, said the report was commissioned so that TMT officials could fully understand the situation in Hawaii.

"We reviewed it in great detail and took its suggestions and recommendations into account early on," he said by email. "The report informed many of the decisions we made and the steps we took during the planning and approval process."

Bolte said TMT officials engaged the Native Hawaiian community fully and often as the report suggested and "their willingness to speak freely enabled us to develop a comprehensive plan that addresses the many concerns this project touches on."

But Kealoha Pisciotta, a longtime critic of Mauna Kea astronomy and one of those interviewed for the report, said TMT officials didn’t live up to the report’s advice. She said TMT officials were dishonest in telling the community all options were on the table, including a "no build" option.

Instead, she said, they engaged in "a contrived form of conversation," "lip-service" and dialogue that suggested: "What would it take to buy you off?

"We were offended," she said.

Chandler disagreed: "It was really important to TMT that the process and procedures and permitting were appropriate every step of the way. We never took those steps for granted, and we worked to be respectful and to address concerns all the way through."

There were more than 20 public hearings and an extensive number of informal conversations, she said, resulting in a number of beneficial modifications to the project.

Chandler said TMT officials were well aware of the troubled history on Mauna Kea and set a goal to be an agent for positive change, committing to be the most culturally and environmentally sensitive observatory on the mountain.

She said the TMT ended up offering more benefits to the community than any other telescope project, including creating a Hawaii island education fund with a $1 million annual contribution and committing to a lease payment that would eventually reach $1 million a year, with 80 percent going to mountain stewardship and 20 percent to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

Bolte said the selection of the project site, cultural training programs, exterior and interior design, facility operations and community outreach programs addressed the concerns raised in the report.

The larger issues surrounding Mauna Kea, he said, come under the purview of the University of Hawaii, Office of Mauna Kea Management, state Department of Land and Natural Resources and other entities.

"We understand that the roots of dissent are deeper than whether the plan for TMT should move forward. It’s also important to understand that these issues are out of TMT’s area of influence, and that the power to answer these concerns lies elsewhere," Bolte said.

UH officials have acknowledged making mistakes in the development of the science reserve atop Mauna Kea, but have also pointed out that oversight has improved dramatically in recent years under the Office of Mauna Kea Management.

Adler, now principal of Accord3.0, a Hawaii-based public policy consulting firm, maintains the TMT and Moore Foundation took the report seriously and tried their best during the review process to engage everyone with an interest in Mauna Kea, including Native Hawaiians.

Time marched on, however, and now, he said, there’s a new generation of Native Hawaiians, bolstered by a firestorm of social media, with a new perspective.

"There’s a different set of eyes on this now," he said.

Adler said Hawaii has reached a critical point that demands a larger conversation about the future of Mauna Kea.