City officials continue to withhold details on how much has been spent on a public information campaign for Honolulu's planned rail project.

Last year the city said it spent nearly $2.6 million from August 2005 through June 30, 2008, on a rapid transit public information campaign that included newsletters and radio and television shows.

However, the city has not responded to several requests by The Advertiser made since June for details on how much was spent since June 30, 2008. The city also hasn't disclosed how much was spent creating a recent "I Love Rail" logo and to hold a June 23 transit symposium, including the costs incurred to make it possible for seven national speakers to appear at the symposium. On other occasions the city has brought in Mainland experts to testify in favor of the project.

Those expenditures come at a time when tax collections needed to build the train are coming in below projections.

The city has maintained that an informational campaign is part of a federally mandated public involvement effort. However, critics have called the effort thinly disguised rail propaganda.

The Advertiser requested updated public information campaign spending figures for rail from city Transportation Director Wayne Yoshioka on June 19 and June 23. The Advertiser then filed an official request for information under the state's Uniform Information Practices Act on Aug. 27. Yoshioka's office acknowledged receipt of that request on Aug. 27 and again as of Friday. The written response from Yoshioka did not specify when or if the city will release the requested information.

As a result, it's still unclear how much the city has spent on a pro-rail campaign that led up to a November vote on the project. Voters last November approved the East Kapolei to Ala Moana rail project, 51 percent to 46 percent.

Tom Brislin, a media ethicist at the University of Hawai'i, said government agencies have a right to advocate. However, when public funds are involved, those expenses need to be transparent, he said.

"I don't think there's an issue of them being an advocate, because they're an advocate for a lot of things" such as public safety, Brislin said. "Certainly if public funds are being used, it should be as transparent as any other public program with an expenditure of funds."