Politicians, consultants and bureaucrats have spent nearly three years developing a commuter rail system for Honolulu. Now voters get to say whether they want it.

A "yes" vote on Nov. 4 would give the city the political authority to begin construction on the 20-mile rail project, advancing this plan further than three previous mass transit proposals that fizzled in the past three decades.

A "no" vote would all but kill the $3.7 billion project.

"If the voters turn it down, I think that's the end of the story," said Ira Rohter, a political science professor at the University of Hawai'i. If the rail issue passes, "It's not the end of (the debate), but this inning is over."

Rail gained momentum about three years ago when Mayor Mufi Hannemann proposed linking East Kapolei to Ala Moana via an elevated train. He won the endorsement of the City Council and the state Legislature, which adopted a 0.5 percentage point increase in the general excise tax to pay for the plan.

Gov. Linda Lingle allowed the tax bill to become law without her signature in 2005, and for a while the rail plan took on an aura of inevitability. Most politicians supported it, and there was no plan to ask voters for their approval.

INFLUX OF OPPOSITION

Then came Stop Rail Now, a coalition of rail opponents who launched a petition drive in April to put rail on the ballot. The group collected 49,000 signatures by mid-July.

While Stop Rail Now eventually failed to get its ordinance on the ballot, it succeeded in forcing the City Council to place a separate version of the rail question before the electorate.

The result is the following Charter amendment that will be on the Nov. 4 ballot:

"Shall the powers, duties and functions of the city, through its director of transportation services, include establishment of a steel wheel on steel rail transit system?"

The ballot question is non-binding, so even if the majority votes "no," it doesn't mean the city can't legally move forward. Also the wording, which specifies "a steel wheel on steel rail transit system," leaves open the possibility that voters could reject the amendment and the city could move ahead with another type of commuter line, such as trains propelled by magnetic levitation or that run on rubber tires.

Likewise, a "yes" vote doesn't mean the city has to build the rail system; it only authorizes the city to do so.

Despite the legal limitations, the rail vote will carry substantial weight. It will be the first time in three decades of discussing rail that voters have had a chance to register their opinions.

"If the people vote at the polls that they do not want rail, then it would be very difficult for me to go forward and that has been clear from the beginning," Hannemann said.

It would be equally tough for anti-rail groups to continue their fight if voters approve of the plan. Still, opponents have been reluctant to commit to ending their campaign if they lose the vote.

"I'm going to deal with that (losing the vote) when I come to it," said Cliff Slater of Stop Rail Now. "I just don't think we're going to be faced with that."

DEBATE TO CONTINUE

The rail question has generated fervent support and opposition, and the Nov. 4 vote is not going to end all debate.

Rail proponents argue the system will give commuters an alternative to travel on congested roadways while reducing urban sprawl. The 19 planned transit stations also are expected to foster live-work-play communities and opportunities for moderately priced, high-density housing.

A recent economic downturn locally and nationally has spurred rail proponents, including trade unions, to also argue the project will provide a much needed boost to construction sector jobs and the economy. The city expects to spend an average of about $400 million a year on the project over a nine-year span and generate an average of 9,100 jobs during nine years of construction.

"Given the best guess as to where the economy is heading, there's a need for these kinds of projects so that we can keep our labor force going," said City Council member Todd Apo, who supports rail.

Rail opponents argue it's a mistake to saddle the city with a massively costly project during a period of great economic uncertainty.

Some oppose the project for tax reasons or cost concerns. Others argue the planned commuter rail line won't prevent traffic congestion from getting worse.

"For me, it's whether or not rail makes financial sense," said City Council member Charles Djou, who along with Council chair Barbara Marshall opposes rail for financial reasons.

"My inclination is this project is far too expensive. The numbers are significantly higher than what I think (taxpayers) can afford," Djou said.

So far, the city has taken in nearly $250 million in transit taxes and awarded about $108 million in contracts.

The often quoted $3.7 billion cost of the project rises to $5 billion when inflation is taken into account. It wouldn't surprise most observers if the cost rose even more ahead of the start of full service in 2018.

SUPPORT AT POLLS MIXED

While both sides will likely continue the debate after Nov. 4, the winning side will be able to claim an electoral mandate to bolster its arguments.

The history of rail projects at the polls is mixed. Major rail projects in Seattle, Miami, Phoenix and Austin, Texas, have suffered setbacks at the polls. In contrast, rail transit projects in Houston, Denver and most recently Charlotte, N.C., survived ballot votes.

Regardless of the outcome in Honolulu, those for and against rail need to accept the results, said Apo.

"If the voters say yes, then we all need to abide by that the same way that if the voters say no, people like me who represent West O'ahu need to abide by that as well," he said. "That principle has to work both ways."

Michael Schneider, managing partner for InfraConsult LLC, which provides management support on the train project, said there will always be a vocal minority opposed to rail. A public vote in favor of the project could help marginalize the opposition while providing the project a boost.

"It certainly provides momentum and it provides the will of the community to move forward and it underscores the public's view that this is a step in the right direction for future life in Hono-lulu," Schneider said.

If a majority votes against building a train, the city could pursue other fixed guideway alternatives including monorail, maglev and bus rapid transit. Other potential proposals include subsidizing job creation in Kapolei to eliminate the need for some area residents to commute into urban Honolulu.

A victory for rail opponents also could provide a boost for competing proposals such as mayoral candidate Ann Kobayashi's EzWay transit plan, which involves building a fixed guideway for buses and managed lanes.

RAIL ALTERNATIVES

"Most people think it's either steel on steel or nothing and that isn't so," Kobayashi said. "There are other forms of mass transit that will qualify as a fixed guideway system.

"There are other options, monorail, my rubber tire on concrete (proposal), maglev. There are other options as long a it's a fixed guideway system" that can qualify for local and federal funds, Kobayashi added.

A defeat of the rail project also could force the city to revise development plans, which now direct growth to the 'Ewa plain. Future growth may need to be redistributed around the island if voters reject building a train, said council member Gary Okino.

However, the development of a decentralized growth policy could be a political nightmare.

"It'll be a huge battle for sure, but I don't know if we're going to have the choice," Okino said. "I don't think we can keep growing Leeward."

This current rail effort marks the fourth time in three decades the city has tried to develop a new mass-transit system for O'ahu.

Previous efforts — including two rail projects and one bus rapid transit system — failed because of cost concerns or changes in political priorities.

The one difference is voters will be able to voice their opinions on this transit plan, unlike the previous three that were decided by politicians.

"It's never been brought to a ballot vote," said Lowell Kalapa, president of the nonprofit Tax Foundation of Hawai'i, which opposes the transit tax but has no position on rail. "It will (be) put to bed once and for all. Do the majority of people support it? If it gets killed, it gets killed. If it gets support, we should just shut up and move ahead."