View
213
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Draft
MINUTES
HART Board of Directors Meeting
Alii Place, 1099 Alakea Street, Suite 150
Monday, June 21, 2018, 8:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Damien Kim
Terrence Lee
Terri Fujii
Tobias Martyn
Wesley Machida
Ember Shinn
Jade Butay
Glenn Nohara
Hoyt Zia
Kamani Kuala’au
Kathy Sokugawa
Kalbert Young
Wes Frysztacki
ALSO IN ATTENDANCE:
(Sign-In Sheet and Staff)
Andrew S. Robbins
Randall Ishikawa
Cindy Matsushita
William Brennan
Russell Yamanoha
Joyce Oliveira
Michelle Carter
Natalie Iwasa
Jeff Masatsugu
Joan Sato
April Coloretti
Mark Garrity
Peter Wong
Barbra Armentrout
Rose Pou
Frank Kosich
Mel Kahele
Joseph O’Donnell
Larry Cunha
Randall Roth
Roy Yee
Brian Norris
Rick Keene
Nicole Velasco
Peter Lee
Steve Kyauk
EXCUSED: John Henry Felix
I. Call to Order by Chair
HART Board Chair Damien Kim called the meeting to order at 8:08 a.m.
II. Public Testimony on all Agenda Items
Mr. Kim called for public testimony on agenda items, reminding the public that the time limit to
do so was two minutes.
Draft
HART Board of Directors Meeting
June 21, 2018
2
Barbra Armentrout thanked the Board for the presentation at its last meeting on fare systems.
She stated that she would reserve her comments until later in the meeting.
Brian Norris, Construction Manager and Vice President of Stantec, provided testimony in
support of the public private partnership (P3) delivery method. He said that Stantec had seen
great benefit from P3 on other projects, even if it meant a reduction in its scope of work.
Randall Roth provided testimony in support of P3, and said that it should have been implemented
in the past.
Mel Kahele of the Ironworkers Stabilization Fund stated that he would reserve his testimony for
item X.
Natalie Iwasa requested that the Board not enter into executive session as indicated in the
agenda, citing the need for public discussion. She said that HART had indicated in the past that
it would not require more bonds. She also said that HART employees should be recording
interviews as part of the state audit.
Mr. Kim said that he would be taking agenda items out of order, as the Board did not have
quorum to take action.
Board member Jade Butay arrived at 8:17 a.m.
IV. Establishment of a Permitted Interaction Group to Appoint the Board of Directors’ Ninth
Voting Member
Mr. Kim said that he was soliciting volunteers for the permitted interaction group (Group) to
investigate and recommend the selection of the ninth voting Board member. The Group could
contain up to seven members.
The members of the Group were: Board members Terrence Lee, Hoyt Zia, Tobias Martyn,
Wesley Machida, Kathy Sokugawa, Kamani Kuala’au, and Wes Frysztacki.
IX. Strategic Plan Update (Draft)
HART Executive Director and CEO Andrew Robbins said that HART Executive Management
Project-wide Support Specialist Elizabeth Crenshaw gave a PowerPoint presentation on HART’s
Strategic Plan (Plan). The presentation is attached hereto as Attachment A. Ms. Crenshaw said
that the Plan would guide the agency’s activities and focus on the three year period from January
2019 to December 2021. The Plan would validate HART’s mission and vision and, identify and
clarify ways of fulfilling HART’s mandate as an agency, prioritize key areas of focus for HART,
and define HART’s guiding principles. Ms. Crenshaw detailed the elements of the Plan, which
were HART’s vision, mission, key focus areas, goals, objectives, strategies, and intended
outcomes.
Draft
HART Board of Directors Meeting
June 21, 2018
3
Board member Kalbert Young arrived at 8:23 a.m.
Board member Wes Frysztacki arrived at 8:24 a.m.
Ms. Crenshaw outlined HART’s vision of “HART plans, designs, constructs, tests, activates, and
prepares for operations and maintenance an expanded county-wide rail system that provides a
safe, dependable, and modern transportation alternative for Honolulu, demonstrating HART’s
commitment to service excellence in supporting the economic needs and greater mobility for the
Honolulu region. HART’s mission is to plan, design, construct, test, activate, and prepare for
operations and maintenance of Honolulu’s high-capacity, fixed guideway rapid transit system.
Key focus areas are proactive funds management, leadership, capacity and capability, outreach,
project delivery, continual environmental improvement, partnerships, safety and security, and
extensions to the system.
Mr. Robbins said HART differed from other transit agencies, as it was a special purpose agency
that was focused on delivering the project. The remainder of the presentation would focus on the
topic of delivery: the main goal is to deliver the project for $8.165 billion with the existing
available funding, with the focus of providing interim service by 2020 and full service by 2025.
Mr. Robbins detailed the various delivery methods utilized on the project to date, which include
design-bid-build, design-build, and design-build-operate-maintain.
He said that on the west side, the ten miles of the West Oahu/Farrington Highway Guideway and
Kamehameha Highway Guideway projects had been completed by Kiewit. The contracts were
being negotiated for close-out, after which funds would be returned to contingency, and overall
project risks would be reduced. The Rail Operations Center (ROC), which was 100% complete,
was also due to be closed out. The nine west side stations, under two separate contracts, were
approximately 30% complete, and were scheduled to be complete by mid-2019. The Core
Systems contract, under which Ansaldo develops vehicles and installs communications,
signaling, and power supply, and will test the entire system. The ROC yard, from which the
trains would be dispatched onto the system, has also been energized.
On the east side, the Shimmick/Traylor/Granite (STG) contract for the Airport Guideway and
Stations contract is 22% complete – the contract is on time and under budget.
In the City Center section, the Utility Relocation and Roadways contract was awarded to Nan,
Inc. in May. Under the indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract, there will be no change
orders; rather, task orders were utilized for fixed prices. Mr. Robbins said that HART was
continuing to consider construction and traffic impacts on the community, as work progressed
through the Dillingham corridor through Kakaako.
Mr. Robbins said that in an effort to ensure that all delivery methods and global best practices
were considered to complete the project on budget and under schedule, HART had undergone a
public-private partnership evaluation.
Draft
HART Board of Directors Meeting
June 21, 2018
4
Mr. Robbins said that the Plan would go through another draft following members’ comments; it
was expected to be finalized in August.
Board member Wes Machida suggested including words such as “effectively and efficiently” in
the vision and mission areas, to describe HART’s cost containment and sustainability efforts.
Mr. Robbins agreed to take that comment into consideration.
Board member Ember Shinn expressed her appreciation for the efforts made regarding the Plan.
She expressed her belief that the Plan should be broader, responsive to the public and have a
public purpose in addition to ensuring public trust in rail. She also suggested including rail’s
role in an integrated, multimodal transportation system in the Plan.
Mr. Robbins said that the draft Plan touches on the comments from Board members.
Ms. Shinn asked whether the Plan would be subject to change, depending on whether HART
embarked on P3. Mr. Robbins said it would.
Board member Kathy Sokugawa praised the Plan. She asked for clarification on the Board’s role
for adopting or implementing the Plan.
Board member Tobias Martyn said that the Plan felt more tactical then strategic, and urged staff
to think in a more strategic manner. Mr. Robbins acknowledged Mr. Martyn’s point, and said
that project delivery is in many ways tactical by nature.
Board member Hoyt Zia asked about next steps. Mr. Robbins said that another draft would be
available in the July/August timeframe, with the goal of finalizing the Plan by the end of August.
X. Discussion Regarding Public Private Partnership Commercial Viability Analysis
Mr. Robbins reminded the Board that HART had engaged Ernst & Young Infrastructure (EY) to
analyze the viability of employing a public-private partnership (P3) to complete the City Center
Guideway and Stations (CCGS) and the Pearl Highlands Transit Center (PHTC), and to
introduce long-term operations and maintenance with the City and County of Honolulu.
Following EY’s presentation of its report, a copy of which is attached hereto as Attachment B,
the Board’s feedback was that a white paper was needed to focus on the specific P3 strategy.
Mr. Robbins said that EY had done a financial model to study the affordability of the design
build finance operate and maintain (DBFOM) model, based on what potential bidders would
likely do, and concluded that P3 was affordable. HART was currently developing the white
paper with a specific strategy on what it would include in the request for production in
coordination with City departments, as DBFOM would involve a joint procurement. HART was
also conducting a risk workshop that week to analyze DBFOM as compared to design build
(DB), then leaving the operations and maintenance (O&M) of the system to the Department of
Transportation Services (DTS). The results of the risk workshop would be included in the white
paper and presented to the Board. Mr. Robbins said that the white paper would be provided to
Draft
HART Board of Directors Meeting
June 21, 2018
5
the Board the following month, with ample time for review. Mr. Robbins said that HART was in
the process of fielding and answering questions from the various City departments involved.
Mr. Robbins said that he would address two topics at a later time: the Ansaldo core systems
contract, and the DB “off ramp,” as they were still under discussion. Those two topics would be
addressed the following month with the white paper. He urged members to read an article from
Public Works Financing’s October 2017 issue on P3, as well as a PowerPoint presentation from
the LA Airport DBFOM project, which was recently awarded, both of which he provided to
members.
Mr. Robbins said that P3 would encompass the remaining work on CCGS and the PHTC. The
purposes and objectives of P3 would be to provide a life cycle approach to a long term
community asset. HART was looking at DBFOM partnership that would assure budgetary
discipline and cost and schedule certainty, and eliminate change orders. The private sector
partner would ensure that the project is on time and under budget via private finance. DBFOM
would also encourage robust competition internationally amongst premiere organizations,
particularly as the segmental bridge construction field is limited. Mr. Robbins said that HART
had received positive interest following its Industry Day earlier that year.
Mr. Robbins said that transferring risk to the private sector would be key to DBFOM.
Previously, the public sector had been exposed to many risks, which would be reallocated to the
private sector, which was the entity that could best manage the risk. Technical innovation and
best practices would also be encouraged under DBFOM; Mr. Robbins opined that schedule could
be reduced.
Combining the construction and long term O&M would result in a benefit to life cycle
management, through asset replacement that would be the responsibility of the private sector.
Synergies in building PHTC would be enhanced by packaging it with CCGS and the O&M
component.
Mr. Robbins said that the recommended DBFOM strategy would include the $1.4 billion in
construction for CCGS and PHTC, long term O&M of the system and the completion of core
systems, and integrated testing.
DBFOM would not include the entire west side, to include guideway and stations, and the
Airport Guideway and Stations, as well as the Rail Operations Center.
The CCGS and PHTC projects would be funded mainly through general excise tax (GET) and
transient accommodations tax (TAT) surcharges, which both sunset in 2030, and the Full
Funding Grant Agreement; that arrangement would remain unchanged.
Private finance would be required due to the sunset of the GET and TAT; the private sector
would be asked to provide short term private financing to pay off the capital debt by 2030. This
would reduce the cost of financing, as well as the cost of risk transfer. The private partner would
finance two thirds of the construction cost through the construction period; HART would make
Draft
HART Board of Directors Meeting
June 21, 2018
6
milestone payments through 2025, which comprise one third of the capital costs. Beyond that,
HART would make availability payments with a five-year “tail” based on the contractor’s
performance.
Mr. Robbins said that would be the recommended structure for DBFOM that HART would be
presenting to the Board the following month.
Mr. Machida requested that HART ensure that unallowable costs under Act 1 be excluded from
DBFOM. Mr. Robbins said that under DB, HART would be making milestone payments
through construction; prior to revenue service, it would have paid the contractor 95% of its costs,
with payments at 100% at revenue service. At that time, DTS would be leading O&M, which
would be pay as you go to Ansaldo. Under DBFOM, HART would only pay approximately 33%
of the construction costs, with the contractor paying the remainder; the contractor would be
responsible for operating the system per DTS’ specifications, upon which availability payments
would be then made, should those specifications be met.
Mr. Martyn asked who would make the availability payments to the contractor over the 20 years
following the sunset of the GET and TAT surcharges. Mr. Robbins responded that by 2030, all
debt would be paid for when the GET and TAT surcharges expired. DTS would then pay the
O&M costs. Mr. Martyn said that bidders would be factoring that into their bids. Mr. Robbins
said that HART would want to enforce the risk transfer to incentivize the contractor, and that
there would only be a five-year tail beyond the opening of the system between 2025 and 2030.
O&M payments would be the same as without P3. Mr. Martyn asked whether the City would be
paying for 20 years of O&M; Mr. Robbins responded that the City would continue to operate and
maintain the system without P3.
Mr. Martyn expressed his concern that staff time was focused on P3 to the exclusion of DB. Mr.
Robbins said that as the underpinning of DBFOM is DB, DB specifications were being prepared
at the same time as DBFOM specifications.
Ms. Shinn requested confirmation that two thirds of the construction costs would be paid by
HART during the five-year tail from 2025 to 2030. She also asked for clarification that under
DB, the contractor would be paid 95% of the cost relatively soon after completion of
construction; the gap between 2025 and 2030 had to do with the fact that HART and the City
would have to pay back the frontloading of capital costs during the five-year tail. Mr. Robbins
said she was correct, but that there would be additional risk transfer under DBFOM. Ms. Shinn
requested that the white paper reflect the financial difference between the two models, such as
the higher financing costs for DBFOM for private financing, and the financial impact of risk
transfer.
Mr. Robbins explained that DBFOM was more than a financing solution; it was a total project
delivery solution that would include technical innovation and higher performance standards. An
evaluation of DBFOM must involve all the components to get to the total outcome. Equity
companies Mr. Robbins had spoken with had indicated their short term finance ability on their
own balance sheet, thereby reducing the difference between public and private finance. Ms.
Draft
HART Board of Directors Meeting
June 21, 2018
7
Shinn said that the cost savings would likely be on the capital side, and not the entire package.
Mr. Robbins said that there would be major O&M and schedule benefits to DBFOM.
Mr. Lee reiterated his concern that Act 1 may not allow the use of GET and TAT surcharge
proceeds for the availability payments. He stated his belief that the private sector could perform
functions that government had historically done, but in a more efficient way. He said that HART
should have considered P3 from the beginning, and that he had strongly advocated for it. He
encouraged HART to vet P3 firms carefully, and disagreed that private finance would be more
expensive than public finance because of the large size of interested firms.
Mr. Robbins said that staff would come to the Board the following month for legal and financial
advisor costs in the amount of approximately $6 to 7 million. The procurement process would
occur in two steps: the qualification process, and the development of full proposals. HART had
indications of four teams that were already forming.
Mr. Nohara asked about the effect of delays from utility relocations and right of way issues on
DBFOM. He asked how it would affect the FTA’s approval of the Recovery Plan. Mr. Robbins
said that delays from utility relocation and right of way issues would be addressed by HART and
that the concessionaire would be entitled to relief for any such delay. The FTA regarded the
project delivery method as a local issue that would not have much impact on the Recovery Plan.
Mr. Robbins indicated that the U.S. Department of Transportation has put out guidance
documents on P3.
Ms. Shinn expressed her concern that HART was driving the P3 effort as the City had not
allocated adequate resources to evaluate the O&M component. Mr. Robbins said that the
deadline for the CCGS procurement was approaching, and that HART’s mission was to prepare
for O&M. HART was very engaged in working with DTS on benchmarking O&M costs, which
would be a valuable endeavor even if P3 was not pursued.
Ms. Shinn said that the City needed to know the O&M model it would utilize, as well as the
costs.
Mr. Frysztacki said that DTS was getting its resources together, and was very familiar with the
O&M aspects of P3, as the City was engaging in P3 in various projects. Additional DTS
positions were in the current budget for rail, and other efforts were underway to prepare for DB
or DBFOM. He expressed his concern that the City, who will be responsible for the contract,
must anticipate as many changes as it could and bear the costs. He was doing his due diligence
with other transit authorities regarding the owner’s perspective and concerns. Mr. Frysztacki
expressed his concern that the EY report did not contain enough fact checking, as in the cost of
the Denver Eagle Line, which did not save money due to P3, but rather reported savings were
due to de-scoping.
Mr. Kim called for public testimony.
Draft
HART Board of Directors Meeting
June 21, 2018
8
Jeff Masatsugu requested that HART consider utilizing a project labor agreement should it
embark on P3 for new construction, repairs and maintenance in order to create a level playing
field for unionized labor.
Mr. Kim responded that regardless of the delivery method, labor would fall under the existing
project labor agreement.
Randall Roth provided testimony that P3 was receiving renewed attention because of the rising
costs of the project. He expressed his opinion that the project would not have enough money to
go past Middle Street.
Joseph O’Donnell of the Ironworkers Union testified in the union’s strong support for P3.
Mr. Kahele registered his strong support of Mr. O’Donnell’s statement, and said that the project
should be completed all the way to Ala Moana.
Natalie Iwasa provided testimony requesting the Board to stop the project at Middle Street. She
said that Mayor Caldwell had testified at a prior City Council meeting that P3 would need to
save $200 million in order to make sense.
Peter Lee of the Laborers-Employers Cooperation and Education Trust testified in support of P3
and the existing project labor agreement.
Mr. Kim acknowledged two pieces of written testimony from Mayor Mufi Hannemann and the
Operators Stabilization Fund in support of P3. Testimony is attached hereto as Attachment C.
III. Approval of Minutes of the May 14, 2018 Meeting of the Board of Directors
Mr. Kim called for the approval of the May 14, 2018 minutes of the meeting of the Board of
Directors.
Mr. Machida noted an incomplete sentence on page 6.
Mr. Martyn noted a typographical error in the word “financier” on page 5.
Mr. Kim called for the approval of the minutes with amendments. Mr. Lee so moved, and Mr.
Frysztacki seconded the motion. All being in favor, the minutes were approved as amended.
V. Resolution 2018-4 Adopting Operating and Capital Budgets for Fiscal Year 2019
Fiscal Officer Michael McGrane outlined the HART budgeting process, which began in the fall
of 2018 with the Board’s approval of an operating and capital budget. The budgets were
forwarded to the City Council for review. The budgets were now before the Board for adoption
via Resolution 2018-4, attached hereto as Attachment D.
Draft
HART Board of Directors Meeting
June 21, 2018
9
Mr. McGrane detailed the changes in HART’s proposed operating budget from the version
originally presented to the Board in the fall. The original operating budget was $24.7 million.
The operating budget was decreased by $700,000 due to a recent agency reorganization, as well
as a shift of monies to the capital budget due to a change in HART’s capitalization policy, which
brought HART’s practices in line with accounting standards. The operating budget being
proposed for adoption includes $7.6 million in salaries, benefits, and rent, and $30.8 million in
debt service, totaling $38.426 million.
Mr. McGrane detailed changes to the capital budget. The original capital budget as approved by
the Board contained the costs for CCGS, PHTC, and contingency, which comprised
approximately 85% of the capital budget. Changes to the original capital budget included a shift
of $17 million from the operating to the capital budget as a result of the capitalization policy
change, and the inclusion of $44 million by the City to address the FTA’s concern regarding
funding. The capital budget thereby increased from $1.743 billion to $1.773 billion.
Mr. Machida questioned the separation of fringe benefits from other post-employment benefits
(OPEB). Mr. McGrane said that the fringe benefits and OPEB constituted 100% of what HART
was required to pay, based on figures received from the actuaries. Mr. Machida said he wanted
to ensure that items were not being accounted for twice.
Mr. Kim called for the adoption of Resolution 2018-4, the fiscal year 2019 operating and capital
budgets. Mr. Lee so moved, and Mr. Frysztacki seconded the motion. All being in favor,
Resolution 2018-4 was adopted.
Ms. Iwasa provided testimony that the net increase given to rail was $13 million. She expressed
her concern that no plans were in place to conduct the FTA-recommended peer review. She
requested more detail about the $17 million addition of personnel costs to the capital budget.
VI. Resolution 2018-5 Relating to the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation’s
Request to the Honolulu City Council for Approval of the Issuance and Sale of General
Obligation Bonds ($44,000,000)
VII. Resolution 2018-6 Relating to the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation’s
Request to the Honolulu City Council for Approval of the Issuance and Sale of General
Obligation Bonds ($450,000,000)
Mr. McGrane said that HART was required to petition the City for the authorization of bonds.
The $44 million being requested in Resolution 2018-5 represented the City’s inclusion of funds
to address the FTA’s funding concerns. Resolution 2018-6 was a request for authority up to
$450 million for HART’s cash flow requirements; should the $44 million request to the City
Council pass, this request would be reduced. The resolutions are attached hereto as Attachments
E and F, respectively.
Mr. Kim called for questions. There were none.
Draft
HART Board of Directors Meeting
June 21, 2018
10
Mr. Kim called for public testimony. There was none.
Mr. Kim called for a motion to adopt Resolution 2018-5. Mr. Lee so moved, and Mr. Frysztacki
seconded the motion. All being in favor, Resolution 2018-5 was adopted.
Mr. Kim called for a motion to adopt Resolution 2018-6. Mr. Lee so moved, and Mr. Frysztacki
seconded the motion. All being in favor, Resolution 2018-6 was adopted.
VIII. Change Order – West Section Construction Engineering and Inspection Consultant
Request for Amendment #3
Director of Design and Construction Frank Kosich gave a PowerPoint presentation on the change
order for the west section Construction Engineering and Inspection (CE&I) Consultant request
for amendment, attached hereto as Attachment G. The purpose of the amendment was to ensure
continuity of construction management services to the west side during the remainder of the
construction period. The amendment would increase the contract by $20 million; funds were
included in the contract budget line item, and were not in contingency. Mr. Kosich said that staff
had examined options to re-procure the contract, utilizing one CE&I consultant for the west side,
and had concluded this was the best course of action.
Mr. Kosich detailed the background of the PGH Wong CE&I West contract and previous
amendment. He said that the CE&I contractor was overseeing nine contracts, versus the five that
were originally budgeted for. He summarized the amendment and its cost impacts. Mr. Kosich
recommended a contract amendment in the amount of $20 million to provide project staffing for
CE&I services on the west side construction contracts for the remainder of the contract period.
Board member Jade Butay asked whether HART was satisfied with the work of the current
CE&I contractor. Mr. Kosich responded that although there was room for improvement, CE&I
senior management had been responsive to HART’s concerns.
Mr. Machida asked when the change from the oversight of five contracts to nine contracts
occurred. Mr. Kim said it occurred approximately three to four years ago. Mr. Machida asked if
the first CE&I west contract had been in place at that time, and Mr. Kosich said it had been.
Mr. Martyn asked about how the delays that resulted in the need for the amendment. Mr. Kosich
said that there were challenges with interface between the different contracts and delivery
models, to include the fixed facility contractors, core systems contractor, fare gates, and escalator
and elevator contractors. These interface challenges were identified in the risk evaluation, as
well as the costs associated with it. There were also access delays. Mr. Martyn asked how
access delays increased costs. Mr. Kosich said it extended the contract period, thereby
increasing costs. He said that HART had discussions with the contractor regarding staffing
levels to address the situation.
Mr. Machida asked whether HART had been able to quantify the benefit of the increased CE&I
work in overseeing the nine contracts. Mr. Kosich said that as part of the reorganization, HART
Draft
HART Board of Directors Meeting
June 21, 2018
11
increased the scope of responsibility for the CE&I contractor. He said that he believed the
contractor was performing to oversee the delivery of the project.
Mr. Nohara said that there were 21 months left on the contract at a current burn rate of $1.6
million per month; he said that the burn rate would need to be reduced to $1 million per month,
or the contract would run out of money by 2021. He emphasized the need for HART to be
responsive to the CE&I contractor’s recommendations. Mr. Kosich said the actual burn rate was
not consistent, that HART was examining staffing down as contracts closed out, and was
focusing on managing to the contract.
Mr. Robbins said that HART had reorganized to empower its construction managers and CE&I
contractors to be responsive in the field, and improve efficiency. He said that the contractor had
spent much time optimizing staff, and had been very responsive to needed changes.
Mr. Lee asked for clarification that HART covered the CE&I contractor’s payroll even if it was
idle due to delays. Mr. Kosich responded that HART expect the CE&I contractor to staff
appropriately to the workload.
Mr. Machida asked whether it was a fixed price contract. Mr. Kosich said it was, for a not to
exceed amount. Mr. Robbins said that it was based on time and materials, not a lump sum fixed
price contract. Mr. Kim said that the $90.2 million total contract value was a not to exceed price.
Mr. Kim called for a motion to approve the change order. Mr. Nohara so moved, and Mr. Lee
seconded the motion. All being in favor, the change order was approved.
Ms. Sokugawa and Mr. Butay left the meeting at 10:56 a.m.
XI. May Monthly Progress Report
Mr. Nohara said that page 42 of the Monthly Progress Report showed that payments had not
been made on the STG contract for four months. He asked Mr. Kosich to check on that. Mr.
Kosich agreed, and said that work with STG was progressing smoothly.
XII. April Project Management Oversight Consultant Report
Mr. Robbins said that the April Project Management Oversight Consultant (PMOC) Report was
in the Board members’ materials for their review and questions.
He said that the final Risk Refresh report was expected from the PMOC at the end of the month.
XIII. Executive Director’s Report
Mr. Robbins reported that he had participated in the VERGE conference, and had been on a
panel that discussed sustainability, and focused on renewable energy and electric vehicles. He
Draft
HART Board of Directors Meeting
June 21, 2018
12
said that he had spoken to the transportation capacity of rail, and that attendees were receptive to
the information.
Mr. Robbins had met that week with University of Hawaii (UH) President David Lassner on
construction access on UH property, HART’s collaboration with Leeward Community College in
its associate’s degree program for training relevant to rail, and the future extension to UH
Manoa.
Mr. Frysztacki said that he would volunteer as a member of the Ninth Voting Member Permitted
Interaction Group.
XIV. Adjournment
Mr. Kim adjourned the meeting at 11:05 a.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Cindy Matsushita
Board Executive Officer
Approved:
Damien T.K. Kim
Date
Recommended