I founded and have run a Hawaii-based cost engineering firm for the last 32 years. Seven months ago, I was appointed by the City Council to complete John Henry Felix’s remaining term on the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation (HART) board.

In 2008, this project was $4.8 billion and was projected to be completed in 10 years. By most measures at the time, this was a good project, worthy of support. However, I think it is fair to ask on behalf of the citizens and voters if, at more than $11 billion and another 15 years, does this project still make sense? Despite already spending far more than $4.8 billion, HART would need billions more and another 15 years to reach Ala Moana Center. This would be fiscally challenging even in the best of times.

The city and state are currently facing unprecedented fiscal challenges unrelated to rail. Much of this can be traced to the COVID-19 pandemic, but underlying problems go much deeper.

Without taking 2020 into account, a nonpartisan think tank, Truth in Accounting, described Honolulu’s financial situation as the third worst in the nation, listing the difference between its assets and liabilities as $3.5 billion, or $29,600 per taxpayer. If the $4 billion in rail overruns are added, the per-taxpayer debt swells to $63,400. And, again, this is without considering financial implications of the pandemic. HART will be looking for support from the Legislature and governor, who themselves are dealing with significant shortfalls in revenue.

This is a good time to reassess rail. The existing guideway construction contract ends at Middle Street, and HART has not yet designed or contracted for any guideway beyond Middle Street. Based on recent experience, there is no reason to believe that we will not encounter problems in relocating utilities such as those on Dillingham Boulevard as we move toward Ala Moana Center.

Some contend that the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) would demand a return of federal money if rail were to stop short of Ala Moana Center. However, there is reason to believe that the FTA would be open to working out a revision to the existing contract. Other jurisdictions have renegotiated project scope and monies as circumstances changed. Even under prior administrations, these jurisdictions have not been forced to return all the funds.

Rail ridership projections, which had assumed a 2018 completion, are now badly outdated. I doubt, for instance, that anyone could have predicted the impact of full-self-driving car in earlier studies. Before this decade is out, autonomous vehicles could well replace most of our current automobiles. One does not need a vivid imagination to see how “trains” of cars, vans and buses linked by artificial intelligence will make transit faster and safer, changing every metric of traffic management along the way. Due to their efficiency, the autonomous car promises to reduce traffic far more than rail. This revolution in transportation could solve not just the first and last mile issues that have always existed with rail, but also solve our “last four mile” issue as well.

Continuing to frame the future of this project with short-term mentality based on old data and assumptions, without a real, unbiased consideration of “Plan C” alternatives, would be our mistake — but it would be paid for by future generations for decades. Ignoring the enormity of the growing debt will create even larger political and social problems down the road. In 15 years, how will we be remembered for this moment of opportunity?

Joseph Uno is president of J. Uno & Associates, a construction-cost consulting firm, and a HART board member.