12-21-2008, 08:43 AM
The Makuu construction causes me to think about several points (frequently made here on Punaweb and elsewhere) about the Hawaii DOT and its priorities.
First, it causes me to think that, at least where Scott's company is involved, perhaps publicly bidded and contracted projects of this sort in Hawaii do not invariably have to be over budget and over schedule. If such performance is possible in this case, why not all the time?
Second, political connectivity seems to still take precedence over the lives and safety, not to mention convenience, of the majority. We get an annoying once-a-week, six-hour bottleneck fixed when we have three of the states most dangerous intersections within five miles of said annoyance getting nothing. People will keep getting killed on 130, but it will be easier to get in and out of the market. I guess that is good, but is anyone so naive as to think that the personal and family connections of two prominent local politicians have nothing to do with the priorities in this instance?
Third, as Mr. Lackey points out, we could have had a trial roundabout put in somewhere instead. The DOT, however, does not seem to like the idea. Please see my recent posts in the Puna CDP forum for details of my hapless effort to discuss roundabouts with DOT representatives. It would be funny if people weren't being killed.
And finally, overlaying all this, is the DOT's disdain for listening to the public. They just don't like it. Damon, whom I respect for participating and trying to positively influence the process, is on a DOT citizen advisory board. He sometimes wonders if the whole thing is just a cover for decisions already made. (Please forgive and correct me, Damon, if I have misinterpreted your statements on this.)
And so it goes,
Jerry
First, it causes me to think that, at least where Scott's company is involved, perhaps publicly bidded and contracted projects of this sort in Hawaii do not invariably have to be over budget and over schedule. If such performance is possible in this case, why not all the time?
Second, political connectivity seems to still take precedence over the lives and safety, not to mention convenience, of the majority. We get an annoying once-a-week, six-hour bottleneck fixed when we have three of the states most dangerous intersections within five miles of said annoyance getting nothing. People will keep getting killed on 130, but it will be easier to get in and out of the market. I guess that is good, but is anyone so naive as to think that the personal and family connections of two prominent local politicians have nothing to do with the priorities in this instance?
Third, as Mr. Lackey points out, we could have had a trial roundabout put in somewhere instead. The DOT, however, does not seem to like the idea. Please see my recent posts in the Puna CDP forum for details of my hapless effort to discuss roundabouts with DOT representatives. It would be funny if people weren't being killed.
And finally, overlaying all this, is the DOT's disdain for listening to the public. They just don't like it. Damon, whom I respect for participating and trying to positively influence the process, is on a DOT citizen advisory board. He sometimes wonders if the whole thing is just a cover for decisions already made. (Please forgive and correct me, Damon, if I have misinterpreted your statements on this.)
And so it goes,
Jerry