It is not hyperbole to say that this Honolulu mayor’s race is among the most pivotal elections in the city’s history. Will Honolulu get the progressive, forward-looking mayor it critically needs over the next four years? Or will it be mired in frustrating gridlock that prevents it from advancing, much like the morning traffic into downtown from West Oahu?
Three smart, seasoned politicians are vying for the right to become Honolulu’s next mayor: former acting Mayor Kirk Caldwell, incumbent Mayor Peter Carlisle and former Gov. Ben Cayetano.
If any one of them gets more than half of the votes in the Aug. 11 primary election, he will become the next mayor; if not, a runoff between the two top vote-getters will be held in the general election.
The process of elimination is easy: Cayetano’s anti-rail position must take him out of consideration. The former governor came out of a 10-year retirement to try and kill Oahu’s rail transit project — but unfortunately, he has neither a viable alternative to help ease traffic nor an inspired vision for nurturing our dynamic Honolulu, the 12th largest city in the U.S.
Caldwell and Carlisle each has had a turn as the city’s leader. As city managing director, Caldwell became acting mayor in 2010 when Mufi Hannemann resigned to run for governor. Later that year, Carlisle was elected mayor over Caldwell and has served for nearly two years.
Both have emerged as dedicated leaders deserving of another turn, with strong support for rail, and a clear vision of Honolulu’s problems as well as its potential.
On balance, though, Caldwell conveys a deeper understanding of the issues, and gets enthused talking about such mundane but important city matters as sewer systems, roadway repaving and "safe zones" for the homeless. He gets our vote.
Caldwell has not fared particularly well in recent televised mayoral debates, sometimes looking strained and sounding too eager to please. In person and in smaller groups, however, he conveys an engaging passion for the job — and a command of details such as terms of the EPA sewage treatment settlement that would serve him well as mayor.
Like Caldwell, Carlisle has been a staunch supporter of rail, and he has championed Honolulu’s Asia-Pacific ties via numerous overseas trips —too many, some say, leaving the unfortunate impression of Carlisle as an absentee mayor.
Caldwell has garnered numerous public labor endorsements, which could be a double-edged sword: helpful, should he need workers’ support in carrying out policy and initiatives; concerning, as labor contracts come due for renegotiation. In a recent interview with the Star-Advertiser editorial board, though, he pledged to be fiscally prudent on future OPEB (Other Post-Employment Benefits) costs, saying unions can expect more reductions in the future.
Caldwell vows to foster more workforce housing, notably around the rail transit stops and to leverage property tax incentives to develop affordable rentals. And, whether it’s called Pathways by Carlisle or Housing First by Caldwell, both favor finding a site to house and help chronically homeless people afflicted with mental or substance abuse problems.
Both touted HPOWER’s expansion for waste management, as well as other methods to further reduce landfill ash.
But it’s rail that looms large. After years of studies, environmental approvals and budget calculations, Oahu’s rapid transit system is under way, with $1.55 billion in federal funds just an election-heartbeat away. If it falters now, leaving thousands idling daily in the status quo, this race will be to blame.
There’s no doubt that Cayetano is a plain-speaking scrapper, and that has always been part of his appeal. But going all in to kill the $5.26 billion, well-vetted rail that will benefit so many here is not the right thing to do. Providing efficient rail would allow working residents to save significantly on gas, parking, time and traffic aggravation.
At the outset of Cayetano’s candidacy, we were eager to hear about his traffic initiative: a profound, workable alternative, perhaps? Disappointingly, no. There is no revelatory plan, just a half-baked proposal hastily hatched from a 2003 bus rapid transit study.
Cayetano talks vaguely about a dedicated bus way using the freeway’s Zipper Lane, a new "flyover" ramp approaching town, and perhaps taking a lane each of King and Beretania streets for buses, which would still need to heed the stop-and-go of traffic signals.
Is that enough to get motorists to leave their cars behind? Hardly. Also vague were the financial and political means to make this BRT scheme happen.
It’s indisputable that Oahu will continue to grow — how it does, though, is at stake and integrally tied to rail transportation. Caldwell and Carlisle both get it. Do we invest smartly for growth — or naysay with phantom plans? Growth is not a dirty word; stagnation is.
