Why couldn't Stones reschedule concert?
I'm sure Rolling Stones fans in Hawaii, like me, feel let down by the cancellation of the Nov. 22 concert at Aloha Stadium
While it is unfortunate that Mick Jagger's sore throat is the reason for the cancellation, fans should know that the Stones cancelled two previous August shows in Spain because of Mick's laryngitis.
If the Stones knew that Jagger has had some health problems, why didn't they try to allow time off between shows so he could rest?
Isn't it unfair for the Stones to not even consider rescheduling a future concert?
Smoking ban clears air for asthma sufferers
I support the new smoking ban law because I am 7 years old and I have asthma. Smoke is a trigger. A serious asthma attack can make someone with asthma go to the hospital.
I think the new law is fair because smokers can smoke 20 feet away from doors or windows, and people who don't want to be near smoke don't have to be.
Maybe smoking ban will push some to quit
As I read about businesses likely to suffer from the state's new smoking restrictions (Star-Bulletin, Nov. 1), a number of thoughts came to mind.
When Hawaiian Brian's became a no-smoking establishment, some customers went away, but more non-smokers chose to come in. I suspect the same will happen for most other businesses.
Restaurants in Honolulu that allowed smoke from their bars to infiltrate the food section drove me away. I can now return to them and as soon as Las Vegas bans smoking in their casinos, I will return there as well.
My primary thought is this: How has the simple message that smoking kills eluded so many? I was brought up in a time when all homes had ash trays on the coffee table whether the family had smokers or not.
I can remember my father lying in a hospital bed, dying of lung cancer, while smoking cigarettes provided by the hospital. As hard as that is to believe, the tobacco companies gave hospitals small gift packs containing four cigarettes to put in bedside drawers.
My hope is that the inconvenience will push some smokers to quit.
Story about cost of rail was misleading
Wednesday's Star-Bulletin article
regarding the cost of fixed rail for Oahu is wrong. The 20-mile fixed guideway alignment would cost $3.6 billion for construction, vehicles, control systems, right-of-way and all other costs associated in completing the system for operation in 2006 dollars.
The 28-mile alignment would cost $4.6 billion, again in 2006 dollars, which was included in the information we released Monday.
Apparently, your reporter misread the Alternatives Analysis and added cost for bus replacements. Buses will have to be purchased no matter what happens with rail mass transit. And those bus costs would be paid out from a different source of money than a fixed guideway would. That is why we make the distinction between rail and bus costs.
To say the "Short rail system to cost $4.2 billion," as your headline did, is inaccurate and misleading.
An article the previous day reported that cost of the shorter route had risen over Mayor Mufi Hannemann's previous cost estimates. The mayor made no such projections. That was the purpose of the Alternatives Analysis that was just completed. What the mayor has been saying for several months is recognizing that construction of the full 28 miles from Kapolei to the University of Hawaii-Manoa would cost considerably more than $3 billion and he would present a proposal and price tag for that full route and a shorter one that would cost about $3 billion.
That is just what we've done.
Melvin N. Kaku
Department of Transportation Services
Editor's note: The Nov. 1 headline and story are in alignment with the analysis of transit options released Monday by the mayor. The headline on the Star-Bulletin's Nov. 1 story read: "Short rail system to cost $4.2 billion/The 20-mile route's price includes bus costs, a report says." The story includes this sentence: "The less-expensive plan would be the $4.2 billion plan, which has $3.6 billion as the costs for the rail-transit system."
A summary of the capital costs in the city's transit analysis says that when bus expenses are included, "The costs would be $4.2 billion for the 20-mile alignment, of which $3.6 would be for the fixed guideway system."
Light rail at-grade would reduce costs
Although I am happy that rail transit was found to be the most cost-effective transportation alternative for south Oahu, I am equally convinced that a feasible Kapolei-to-Manoa line can be built within Mayor Mufi Hannemann's $3.6 billion limit
if largely built on at-grade -- ground and/or street-level -- exclusive and reserved right-of-ways, rather than the bridges and tunnels that have been proposed.
While this decision would require that light rail transit be used, this technology is successful in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Portland, San Diego, and dozens of other U.S. cities. Based on lines now being planned for mainland U.S. cities, it should be possible to build a 28-mile light rail transit line from Kapolei to Manoa and Ala Moana Center for $2.4 to $3 billion. All segments Ewa of Ft. Weaver Road and Diamond Head of Iwilei can definitely be built on reserved street lanes, with major cost savings. Ala Moana Center should be served by a circular line from King Street, following the path of current TheBus routes 5 and 6.
The mayor should ask the City Council to select rail, but also send his planners back to study light rail transit on reserved and exclusive at-grade right-of-ways.
Back away from plan for $5 billion rail
People will not give up their cars. Five billion dollars will not even start to pay for this monstrosity.
Instead, improve TheBus system. Let private enterprise develop a toll system. Listen to and heed the advice of the University of Hawaii's Engineering Department.
Do not bankrupt us with pie-in-the-sky dreams.
Victor and Pat Meyers
Deployed Guardsman highest in Dec. 2004
Please allow me to respond to Adjutant Gen. Robert Lee's Nov. 2 letter
, and set the factual record straight. My campaign's radio spot states that Ms. Lingle has permitted a disproportionate percentage of Hawaii National Guard troops to be deployed to Iraq; that fact is indisputable.
That fact is based on official data from the National Guard Bureau covering December 2004 -- the period when the most Guard units nationwide were sent to Iraq.
At the request of my campaign, the data from the National Guard Bureau was provided to us by Sen. Daniel K. Inouye. The percentages clearly reveal that Hawaii has been asked to shoulder a disproportionate share of this unjust war. Hawaii's deployment of 50 percent of its Army National Guard was matched by only one other state, Washington.
Note what Senator Inouye said in a statement he issued at a press conference I held on Oct. 31: "The National Guard Bureau data clearly shows that Hawaii's governor and adjutant general willingly supported the deployment of a larger percentage of Hawaii Army National Guard forces, while other governors were saying they could not commit such a large percentage of troops. Obviously, those governors did not make such a commitment because they know that National Guard troops and equipment are needed at home in the event a natural disaster strikes."
Democratic nominee for governor
To win terror war, we must kill more of them
In a letter to the editor Tuesday
, John A. Broussard asks how will we know when we've won the war on terror.
We will know when terrorists decide we can live together in peace and they do this by stopping attacks.
Terrorists are fighting a war of attrition; their goal is to destroy us. For us to win we must make it too costly for them to continue, too costly in money and lives. We must kill more of them than they kill of us.