Cost containment needed on rail, Aloha Stadium, Kent tells Hamada

by Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, September 25, 2025

Grassroot Institute of Hawaii Executive Vice President Joe Kent discussed the Honolulu rail project, the construction of a new Aloha Stadium and the rebuilding of Lahaina this week on “The Rick Hamada Program” on KHVH radio.

Kent and host Rick Hamada agreed that costs must be contained on the two Oahu projects and things need to move more quickly in Lahaina’s rebuilding.

Kent noted that extensions to the estimated $10-billion rail project are being explored by the Honolulu City Council and the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation. But there’s a cautionary tale there, Kent warned.

Bill 60: Text, Status

“Have we not learned our lesson over the many years of this project?” Kent asked. “You know, when you’re in a hole, stop digging. And these are plans to continue digging?”

Kent sounded a similar refrain regarding Aloha Stadium. The Legislature has appropriated $350 million for the project, but there is no signed contract to demolish the old structure and build a new one.

And the cost seems to be rising, Kent pointed out: “Right now, the projections are around $450 million to $900 million. But that sounds pretty close to a billion already. And, you know, this is for a project that’s also scaled back too. So, it’s so funny how boondoggles seem to always get smaller and smaller, but the price tag gets bigger and bigger.”

Regarding Lahaina, Kent and Hamada pushed for expedited permitting and building so people can gain certainty in getting on with their lives and businesses, especially for residents on the makai side of Front Street who legally cannot rebuild as readily as those on the mauka side of the street.

Kent called Front Street “the most beautiful street in America. But if those places are not allowed to rebuild, then we may never see that Front Street again. You know, that’s the heart of Lahaina.”

TRANSCRIPT

9-23-25, Joe Kent with host Rick Hamada on KHVH radio

Rick Hamada: Welcome back. It is already 8:12 in the morning. We’re together with Joe Kent and Grassroot Institute of Hawaii — very quickly, a nonprofit, nonpartisan policy research organization founded in 2001. Goodness. To promote individual liberty, economic freedom, and limited accountable government in Hawaii. 

Well, you’re just singing a song I think most of us like. 

Joe, welcome back. Good to see you.

Joe Kent: Thanks so much. It’s so great to be back.

Hamada: Yeah. How you been?

Kent: Good. Good. We’ve been, you know, great, winning, growing, and holding the government accountable with, you know, thousands of people across Hawaii. 

Secret, I think. People who hold the government accountable, don’t necessarily want to be out there brash, loud. But they quietly support us. About 40,000 of them read our emails every week-

Hamada: Nice.

Kent: On Instagram, that’s almost 30,000, you know, [who] subscribe to our Grassroot Hawaii, you know, Instagram page.

Hamada: Right.

Kent: And we’re telling lawmakers what we think. So, yeah.

Hamada: Well, you got a lot to say these days. I mean, even since we’ve been together, there are several issues that are percolating, that have drawn a great deal of interest. And focusing here at home, as you know, for the years that we’ve known each other, and that I’ve been on the air, rail has always been a centerpiece.

And there are issues that still remain. I have harped on, on a regular basis. So, Lori and her team, but still many questions arise. From your perspective, Joe Kent, what should we know about the rail extension phase 2 that we should know?

Kent: Well, there’s a bill at the Honolulu Council, Bill 60, that would basically allow HART [Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transit] to explore, plan, find costs for all kinds of extensions. The Honolulu Council says they want to prioritize the extension to UH Manoa. 

But my question is, have we not learned our lesson over the many years of this project? You know, when you’re in a hole, stop digging. And these are plans to continue digging. You know, who knows for how long?

Even right now, the rail is projected to cost around $10 billion, but those costs could very easily rise, because we’re in the last leg of the project. And anyone who’s hired a contractor at home or something, knows that contractors do 90% of the work, and it’s that last 10% where they hang you over a barrel, and they might say, “Well, sorry, I need a special part,” or, “It takes way longer,” and the bill can sometimes double on that last section. 

Well, that’s what I think lawmakers really need to watch closely right now. Pay less attention to moving forward, and more attention to keeping costs low right now.

Hamada: So, that’s … what’s curious, as I’ve learned speaking with proponents. All the justifiable reasons have nothing to do with pragmatism. It has to do with idealism. We’re going to provide an alternative. The funding is going to be, uh, justified because people have an option. 

And it’s more an idyllic situation, but when it comes down to fiscal operational, and let’s start with ridership. It’s all off …

Kent: Oh, yes.

Hamada: In the nether regions.

Kent: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, if a lot of times people say, “Well, wouldn’t it be nice to offer this to people? This would be a great service to people.” And sure, I can imagine all kinds of expensive services that people would appreciate.

 But if you look at the cost of, let’s say, let’s compare the bus to the rail. The bus operates at what? Around $25 per ticket. You know, a bus ticket is like $3, right? So, that $3, you might be paying $3 to ride the bus, but the actual cost to taxpayers is around $25 for that ride.

Now, look at the rail. It’s also a $3 ticket, mind you, but the actual cost right now to run it is $100 for that ticket. And so, it’s … you know, it’s no compare … you can’t compare a bus to a rail and say, “It’s just another option.” This is an order of magnitude more expensive.

Hamada: Well, I go back to the original EIS [Environmental Impact Statement] and the cost-to-benefit analysis. And comparison with other projects at the time, we’re going back 15, 17 plus years. That there was a cost of ridership that would range anywhere from $44, and then go up in the $270 per rider. I believe that was the Portland project and expansion. But when it came to Honolulu, it was $4,400.

Kent: Wow.

Hamada: And that was the original red flag for me.

Kent: Wow.

Hamada: I’m like, “Wait a minute.” But again, the justifications came flowing through. No. 1 at the time, we’re the 13th largest city in the country, we need a rail system, so.

Kent: Right. Well, and the same thing’s going on with Aloha Stadium now. Of course, they’re ginning up new numbers every day for this big project. It just, you know, it’s so ironic, it’s right next to the rail. 

And again, have we learned our lesson? We want to make sure to clamp down on costs. The state has given away around $350 million for the project. And Stanford Carr has been selected as the main project developer. 

And kudos to him, by the way. He’s sticking his neck out there to try to respond to what the state wants.

But that money was supposed to expire on July 1st, and go back to the general fund if no contract was signed. 

Now, I’m told there’s a contract that’s been signed somewhere. I’ve been filing open records requests every week for this so-called contract. And it keeps getting denied, because they say the contract isn’t finished yet. Well, if the contract;s not finished …

Hamada: How can it be signed?

Kent: Where’s the money? Right.

[laughter]

Exactly. So, I think that the costs for the Aloha Stadium could also rise. Right now, the projections are around $450 million to $900 million. But that sounds pretty close to a billion already. [chuckles] And, you know, this is for a project that’s also scaled back too. 

So, it’s so funny how boondoggles seem to always get smaller and smaller, but the price tag gets bigger and bigger.

Hamada: Well, one of the issues with NASED [New Aloha Stadium Entertainment District], and well, we’ll have another conversation with them. They were on with us on a regular basis. But recently it’s, OK, I don’t want to go there. Let me go somewhere else. Is that I was very specific in conversations of formalizing, and ensuring that, which are $300 million with a $50 million addendum.

Kent: That’s right.

Hamada: So, 350 total. That’s it, the taxpayers, that’s it.

Kent: Right.

Hamada: And the assurance is coming directly. I have it on tapes, on podcasts, “That’s it. We won’t ask for more.” Then, in a recent conversation online, on, well, Hawaii News Now, Stanford was intimating, “Well, we’re just going to need … We’re going to require more money.” 

And so the question is, where’s that money going to come from? It’s not going to come from somebody sponsoring the stadium. It’s going to take, similar to rail, infusions as we progress.

Kent: That’s right. And they have this tax increment financing, which is a technical term to bore people, and close their eyes, “Don’t pay attention while we take your money.” Right? [chuckles] 

But basically, it’s a legitimate model that’s used across the United States, where you take out a loan, and then once the project’s built, that project produces more revenues, naturally, and then those revenues are taxed, and put back into the project. 

So, okay, the Aloha Stadium could generate a lot of revenues, and those revenues in the future could generate into taxes that could then be used to pay off the big loan that they’re thinking of taking out.

But just remember that those monies then would not be available for other things that are typically needed in Hawaii. 

So, it’s not like Aloha Stadium is going to be a money tree with which lawmakers can use to help pay off, you know, all the unfunded liabilities, and the costs of the sewers, and all these different things. 

There’s so many needs out there. So, all of that money would go back to the rail. I mean, to the … did I say rail? [laughs]

Hamada: All I’m saying is Dr. Freud, line 2, please. No.

Kent: I meant the Aloha Stadium. Sorry about that.

Hamada: We have to keep our boondoggles straight, so that’s it …

Kent: Yes, that’s right. [laughs] There’s so many of them. That’s right.

Hamada: Oh, that’s good. I’m going to play devil’s advocate for a moment, and that the assurance is that there will not be additional monies, if we take NASED at the word, we’ll take them at their word. However, whenever bond revenue comes into play, oftentimes, they say, “Well, we’re going to go ahead and float bonds.” 

Please be specific. We are going to take out bonds in the name of the state of which the taxpayer is responsible for paying the interest on set bonds and the principal. So, it’s a back door. It’s not a direct tax, but it’s still taxation where the public pays.

Kent: Yeah. And it can work. There have been places across America … I always point out Sandy Springs [Georgia], which was the first city in America that did tons of public-private partnerships, and built all kinds of things, and had no unfunded liabilities, had huge surpluses, right? 

And how did they do that? Well, they set up the contract the right way. And that’s why it’s so important for everyone to know what’s in that contract. And that’s why we keep on trying to do open records requests for it. Unfortunately, no one can see that yet.

Hamada: Yeah, but you’re saying that there was a drop dead new fiscal year July 1st.

Kent: Right.

Hamada: That those monies would be returned to the general fund. Now, they haven’t literally been, but it …

Kent: Right.

Hamada: Yeah. It would be replenished. So, as of right now, limbo?

Kent: It’s limbo and a little fuzzy too. We’ve been asking the state. We asked everyone. It’s just all fuzzy right now.

Hamada: Well, good luck on the pursuit, without a doubt. Last thing on NASED. I’ve been assured that the demolition of the old stadium is on schedule.

Kent: Yes, that’s right.

Hamada: And is that the same that you’re hearing as well?

Kent: That’s what I’m hearing too. What is it? October, November, so on?

Hamada: Yeah, October. So, we’re 10 minutes away. It should be within, about the next two weeks. I haven’t been to the site, I don’t peruse around a closed stadium. But is there anything to indicate that the preparedness, that they’ll be able to demo in two weeks?

Kent: All we have is the word of Stanford Carr, and other lawmakers. And so here we are again, where taxpayers have to trust your leaders, right? [chuckles] And I always get anxious at that time.

Hamada: We’re talking with Joe Kent, Grassroot Institute of Hawaii. How do we connect with the Grassroot?

Kent: You can go to grassrootinstitute.org to get on our email list, or just scroll to Instagram @grassroothawaii.

Hamada: Executive orders, my man. Plenty, plenty, plenty. I know that a lot of attention on Lahaina, and the Ex Os that were issued by Governor Green, have brought either affirmation, “Thank goodness,” or concern, “Oh my gosh.” 

The most recent one has to do with traffic safety, which I found interesting, that would come out of the governor’s office. Share about Lahaina, and where we are today.

Kent: Well, Lahaina is rebuilding, thankfully. We’re two years out now, and there have been hundreds and hundreds of permits granted. I think around 500 permits have actually been approved. 

Then, there’s around 200 people who are actually building right now. And about 60 homes have actually been rebuilt so far. So, that’s great. 

Now, what was standing in the way, is a ton of regulations that we had to cut through. And when I say we, I mean the state Legislature, the county councils, and, you know, plucky Grassroot Institute trying to point out where to cut. 

One of those cuts was SMA rules. This is Special Management Area rules. This is a nest of rules that could take people 10 years to get through. 

There is a bill that passed at the Legislature that the governor signed, and that helps to let people skip that process in Lahaina, except for the people on the shoreline, by the way. And so if you have ever been to Lahaina, you see Front Street there on the ocean side of Front Street, there’s about a 100 homes and buildings that are not allowed to skip those SMA rules. And it’s just crazy. 

You see one house that looks just like, or one plot of land that looks just like another plot of land, but it happens to be on the wrong side of the road, and that means they can’t rebuild.

And all of those homeowners are pulling their hair out like, “What’s the problem?” I mean, anyone who has walked down Front Street in Lahaina, you know, the most beautiful street in America, I’d say, but if those places are not allowed to rebuild, then we may never see that Front Street again. You know, that’s the heart of Lahaina.

Hamada: Right.

Kent: So, now, at the Legislature, it was interesting. There, we had about 500 people from our followership who submitted testimonies saying, “We want Lahaina to be rebuilt. Everyone should be able to rebuild if their home was burned down.” And lawmakers felt the pressure, and actually put it into the bill. And at the last second, they pulled it out. They yanked it.

And so I think they’re just afraid. I don’t know why they’re afraid. I mean, hopefully, they come to their senses, and include those people. But until then, I guess we can celebrate the people mauka of Front Street, who are allowed to rebuild, but, you know, the fight’s not over yet.

Hamada: So, it’s already 8:28 in the morning with Joe Kent. The interesting, is that you have people that own property that is titled to their name. They owned homes that they either owned free and clear, or perhaps, were still paying a mortgage. 

One would think that once the flames died, the process of rebuilding is immediately underway, because you’re simply repairing what you have lost.

OMG. The furthest thing because of regulatory that you cited, and the invocation of new restrictions that would prevent, one of which are homes with swimming pools, and the caterwauling about that. Anyway, that’s just a sidebar.

Is there going to be an ability that you see, legislatively or legally, to let these people back on their property, and let’s get them built, and let’s get them living again?

Kent: Well, if you look at any lawmaker, they all point to the other one, right? But actually, they all have the power to do something. The governor could issue an emergency proclamation. You know, he’s not shy of doing that, right? [chuckles]

Hamada: Right.

Kent: Then, there’s the state Legislature. They, like I said, had an opportunity to do that, and they ducked out of it. The county, of course, could do something about this. I’m sure there’s commissions that could do something about this. So, at every level of government there’s the power, but not the will, though. 

And, you know, unless I think more people make it safe for our leaders to do the right thing. You know, the founder of The Grassroot Institute, his name was Dick Rowland. And he would often say that politicians are not leaders. They’re followers. You know, they follow the public, really. 

And actually, you know, they’re scared of the public. And so if the public can actually rise up, and tell lawmakers what to do, you know, we need to supervise our supervisors really, and make it safe for them to do the right … I think it’s so noncontroversial. Anyone whose home or business burned down, should be able to rebuild as it was.

Hamada: Just seems so, so common sense. But here we are now, over two years later.

And so, the politics of inertia, which we suffer from in many quarters, except when there’s something deleterious that could be fast-forwarded. I will say this final on my point, is that whenever you have this inertia set in, it’s because parties have not been given the green light by the central authority of whoever that might be.

Could be the governor, could be commercial interest, could be corporate, whatever it might be. And when that sets in, it could be ages. Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, didn’t want to bring it up, but I thought I would. Final thoughts, and then more importantly, how could we support the Grassroot Institute?

Kent: Well, actually, things are starting to change. Hawaii, of course, is mostly Democratic. But those politicians are actually supporting some reforms, and housing as of late. This is how Grassroot Institute has gotten so many wins. And Republicans, by the way, also support these. 

There’s broad support about trying to make it easier to build. And Grassroot actually has an event coming up on October 15th at the Japanese Cultural Center. You can go to our website to find out more.

But on October 15th, we are going to partner with Hawaii Appleseed. Now, you know, there’s two big think tanks in Hawaii. One is Grassroot Institute and the other is Hawaii Appleseed. And oftentimes, we’re at odds on every single issue. It’s almost like, you know, Spy vs. Spy or something. 

But on this one issue, we agree, which is that, you know, we should be able to build more easily in Hawaii. Also, Brian Schatz agrees with that too. He’ll be at the program. And so, you know, there’s a silver lining here. I think that there’s hope for this building, and trying to find people a place to call Hawaii home. So, yeah.

Hamada: Love all of that. Website, social media, what’s best?

Kent: Well, grassrootinstitute.org is our website where you can subscribe to our newsletter, and our Instagram is Grassroot Hawaii.

Hamada: It’s been too long, but I’m so glad we got together today.

Kent: Yeah. Thanks so much, Rick.

Hamada: And hopefully we’ll connect very soon.

Kent: Yeah, hope so too.

Hamada: All right. Thanks so very much.

Kent: Yep. Aloha.

Hamada: Joe Kent with the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, giving you a glimpse of all the great work that is done.

---30---

Bill 60: Text, Status