An uncensored executive summary obtained by The Free Press from an otherwise heavily redacted London rapid transit report shows city staff were still recommending a hybrid bus-light rail rapid transit system for London as late as February of this year.

What — or who — changed staff’s mind between then and May, when a final report recommended a bus-only system?

While Mayor Matt Brown is pledging to make public the entire redacted document — obtained by The Free Press through freedom-of-information laws last month — some councillors were irked Monday after seeing the uncensored executive summary for the first time.

“(It’s) disheartening to hear, as we fought so hard for LRT,” Coun. Mo Salih said of light rail transit.

“I’ll continue to go to bat for London and get our fair share in rapid transit funding.”

Light rail was considered “fiscally responsible and affordable” by London officials as recently as February — just three months before they recommended scrapping it entirely, the uncensored document obtained by The Free Press shows.

The rapid transit report — an executive summary of the draft business case city hall won’t fully release — states staff and consultants were fully behind a “hybrid” system combining buses and light rail.

So, what exactly happened in the three months after February?

In May, city hall’s top manager, Art Zuidema, delivered a report that recommended dropping light rail from the rapid transit proposal. Mayor Matt Brown backed the move, in part due to rail’s hefty price tag.

That recommendation was approved 10-5 by city council, which is moving ahead with a bus-only rapid transit plan.

But the uncensored February executive summary should only raise more questions from citizens and politicians still unsatisfied with the public explanation for staff’s pivot on light rail.

“The project is critical to London’s future and vision for a more compact and sustainable city,” the February document reads.

“The hybrid LRT/BRT (light rail/bus rapid transit) alternative achieves the goals of improving mobility, building strong communities and promoting economic development and is both fiscally responsible and affordable.”

The executive summary also will put further focus on the recent decision by city hall’s bureaucracy to heavily censor the full version of that February business case, vast swaths of which were censored in the copy obtained by The Free Press under freedom-of-information laws.

City officials had the option to release the entire document.

Zuidema defended the redactions, saying they blocked out portions that “included inaccuracies or where significant revisions were needed.”

That’s now created a political problem for council, with Brown pledging to make the entire document public at a debate next week.

The executive summary obtained by The Free Press fills in a key blank: city staff were still pushing ahead the bus-rail “hybrid” system as of February.

Coun. Jesse Helmer said he’s looking beyond the changed staff recommendation to the 10 council members who voted to drop light rail after initially endorsing it.

“Nothing in what our staff or consultants said convinced me that the hybrid (model) wasn’t the better option,” Helmer said. “Why did the councillors who voted for the hybrid before change their minds?”

The bus/light rail system carried an $880-million price tag. Bus-only rapid transit will cost $500 million. In either case, London’s stake is capped at $129 million.

The rest of the money would have to come from both the federal and provincial governments, the latter of which has pledged $2 billion to help Hamilton and Ottawa build light rail.

Many wondered why London city council wouldn’t at least ask for a similar investment here, but council voted 10-5 to follow staff’s May recommendation and pursue the less ambitious bus-only system.

Those who voted against that plan, and wanted to continue pursuing light rail, were Salih, Helmer, Stephen Turner, Virginia Ridley and Jared Zaifman. All others agreed to scrap light rail.

City officials are still trying to secure $370 million from Ottawa and Queen’s Park to build bus-only rapid transit. It will be the biggest single project in city history.

pmaloney@postmedia.com

twitter.com/patatLFPress

--- --- ---

RAPID TRANSIT TIMELINE

— November 2015:City hall’s top bureaucrat, Art Zuidema, recommends an $880-million “hybrid” model combining buses and light rail as London’s “preferred preliminary option” for a rapid transit system. City council unanimously endorses it.

— February: Executive summary of draft business case, obtained by The Free Press, shows staff believed the rail-bus “hybrid” model was “both fiscally responsible and affordable.”

— March:The Free Press reports Mayor Matt Brown’s support for light rail is weakening, the first public sign that the heralded project is falling out of political favour.

— May:Zuidema returns with a business case that drops light rail and recommends council instead pursue a $500-million bus-only rapid transit system. Council approves the less-ambitious plan by a 10-5 vote, even as some politicians question why the staff recommendation changed.

— July: Under freedom-of-information laws, The Free Pressobtains an undisclosed “draft” version of the business case, from February, that appears to suggest light rail was still part of the plan at that point. It’s heavily censored.

— August:The Free Press obtains the uncensored executive summary, as noted above.