Stop Rail Now's efforts to place an anti-rail ordinance on the November ballot suffered a fatal blow yesterday.

However, voters will still get a voice on the matter via a separate city charter amendment question that will ask whether the city shall "establish a steel wheel on steel rail transit system."

Stop Rail Now's petition effectively died when the Hawai'i Supreme Court rejected the group's request for emergency relief from an earlier Circuit Court ruling.

Earlier yesterday, Circuit Judge Karl Sakamoto ruled that the group needs about 44,500 valid signatures to get its anti-rail ordinance on the November ballot. That decision came just hours before the Honolulu city clerk's office announced that it could only verify 35,065 of the 49,472 signatures on Stop Rail Now's petition.

The group, which had contended it needed only about 30,000 signatures, was disappointed in the ruling. Its focus now will shift to defeating the project at the polls, said Stop Rail Now co-chair Dennis Callan.

"We've been gearing up for the educational campaign now," he said. "The game plan is the same. It's educating the public all about the alternatives as well as the problems with rail."

Mayor Mufi Hannemann hopes to start construction on the rail project in late 2009 or early 2010. The project is expected to cost an inflation-adjusted $5 billion and take nearly a decade to complete all phases.

Stop Rail Now has criticized the City Council's charter amendment question because it would not prevent the city from proceeding with the project regardless of the vote results. However, it's unlikely the city would proceed with the project if a majority of voters oppose it, said council member Todd Apo yesterday.

"Whatever side you're on, the answer to this vote needs to be the answer for what we're going to do from the city's standpoint," he said.

Meanwhile, the city needs to continue to proceed with plans to build the $3.7 billion, 20-mile rail, Apo said.

"Obviously, we shouldn't be putting out any new contracts, but we need to continue the work that we're doing because if the answer is yes, and we're going to move forward with it, it's going to cost us more if we stop this process."

Rail proponents have expressed confidence that the public will vote for the elevated commuter train that will link East Kapolei to Ala Moana. Recent polls also suggest that a majority of residents support the project.

Pro-rail groups, including Hannemann's campaign committee, trade unions and the city, appear to have the resources to vastly outspend anti-rail groups in the upcoming campaign over rail.

Critics contend that the city's public outreach and education effort has been misleading and blurs the lines between providing public information and outright promotion of the project.

Concerns about city-sponsored ads prompted the City Council to pass a measure this year that requires the city to include a disclaimer informing the public if an advertisement was paid for by "city taxpayers."

Yesterday, the City Council's Executive Matters Committee spent about two hours debating a non-binding resolution that would prohibit the city from advocating for controversial ballot issues such as rail. That measure, introduced by council member Ann Kobayashi, failed to pass by a 4-4 vote.

Council member Charles Djou yesterday expressed concerns that taxpayer money is inappropriately being spent to convince the public to support rail.

"Millions of dollars are being spent on public relations advocating the rail system, but I don't think even tens of thousands of dollars have been spent on advertising against the rail system," he said.

City transportation director Wayne Yoshioka said the city's rail public relations campaign is required by the federal government, which is expected to subsidize about 20 percent of project costs. Yoshioka said that effort, which includes radio and print ads, a radio show, newsletters and public briefings, also is needed to counter what he called misleading information spread by anti-rail groups.

"We feel there's too much misinformation out there," he said. "Our information we know is factual."

City attorneys yesterday said the city's current ad campaign does not constitute advocacy. Advocacy only occurs if the ads ask people to vote a certain way or if they overstate the effect of voting for or against an issue, they said.

Council member Gary Okino said the proposed resolution was "dangerous."

"The city has a right to defend itself ... (and) this bill takes away that right," he said. "It's like sending our soldiers to war and prohibiting them from having weapons."

Forces on both sides of the rail issue have conceded that the city would not have put a rail question on the ballot if it weren't for the Stop Rail Now petition.

"You win some, you lose some," Stop Rail Now backer Cliff Slater said yesterday. "At least we have a question on the ballot and we wouldn't have that without the 49,000 signatures."