As expected, Honolulu moved quickly to formally anoint the engineering firm Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas as the consultant on its planned mass-transit system.

The company has the task of analyzing and costing out various transit alternatives for the city. The Hannemann administration understandably wants the job done before January 2007, when the transit excise tax kicks in.

That's not a lot of time, considering the task of thoroughly examining all alternatives, including ones that might not have been high on the radar last time.

Parsons Brinckerhoff has an advantage, since it was the lead consultant on previous Honolulu transit studies in the early 1990s. Of course, this analysis must be much more than just a version of previous studies with a 21st-century gloss.

Despite the time constraints, it is critical that the city continue to demand a comprehensive, forward-looking review of all options, routes and technology. What's truly needed is a plan that projects forward 20 years or more, anticipating new growth patterns as well as emerging technology.

It is also imperative that all options, including the do-nothing option, be given a fair hearing. Taxpayers deserve no less.

Now, the Hannemann administration has all but rejected the do-nothing option. And it has made clear it has little patience for a proposed HOT — high-occupancy toll — system proposed by rail transit opponents.

Fair enough. But the alternatives analysis should not be driven by the political thinking at City Hall.

Parsons Brinckerhoff has the talent to do this right. That's what must happen if the city has any hope of getting strong public buy-in for its most ambitious public works project ever.