The experts have weighed in on the multi-billion-dollar question about the city's transit future: Which fixed-guideway technology would best suit the needs of O'ahu taxpayers who are footing the bill and who will ride it?

The answer came Friday from an independent technology-selection panel, and the conclusion by four of the five panelists was clear: Steel wheels on steel rails offered the best combination of reliability, capability and cost.

But instead of breathing a sigh of relief that this verdict is behind them, Honolulu residents still have to hold their breath. The political drama may not have been played out fully before the City Council.

This week the council's Transportation Committee will consider a bill to make the final selection of the transit technology.

Council Chairwoman Barbara Marshall, an outspoken opponent of the transit project, said city attorneys have confirmed that the council has not relinquished its right to make the final decision on technology.

That right, she said, was established by ordinance, the bill enacted when the council voted to proceed with the 'Ewa-to-Ala Moana alignment.

And even though a council resolution set up the expert panel as decisionmakers, the original ordinance trumps it.

That's just wonderful: Now there's the prospect of more political wrangling over the technology, even though experts paid by the city have done a rational study with a nearly unanimous conclusion.

Of course, even critics of the rail alignment acknowledge that a council selection of a technology other than the panel's choice is likely to be vetoed by the mayor. And rightly so. Then it will take a "super-majority" on the council — six of the nine members — to override that, landing the whole project back to Square One.

There's no point to such an exercise.

The lone panelist opposed to this option, Panos Prevedouros, stated his preference as HOT lanes — something that did not meet the requirements set in the ordinance. Prevedouros, a longtime vocal opponent of rail — which is why Marshall named him to the panel — seemed determined not to stick to the menu. When pressed to pick one of the qualifying options, he named rubber tires on concrete.

As the rest of the panel has pointed out, steel-on-steel systems have a better track record and would be available from multiple, competitive bidders. Among its strengths: it's a proven technology, widely used and readily available; and it is known for its operational safety.

The choice seems clear. Let's not waste any time or money reinventing the wheel, so to speak, when a rail transit system appears to be the way ahead.