The City Council will continue to debate questions relating to procurement proceedings for the city's proposed $4.3 billion commuter rail project when they meet this morning.

The main question is whether the city can legally solicit bids to begin construction of the system.

The council's Transportation and Public Works committee passed a bill that would remove a technical glitch preventing the solicitation of proposals to begin construction of the first phase.

The original ordinance authorizing the city to build the system requires the administration to seek council approval before soliciting proposals.

That provision was added as a way to keep the council and pubic informed about key project details. However, the provision also violates state procurement laws, according to the state Procurement Office.

"We don't want to violate state procurement law. There are those who feel they need to stay involved in the project but the trick is to what extent can we remain involved without slowing down the process," said City Council member Nestor R. Garcia. "That's the balance we're trying to strike. People are very interested in this project, and we want to see how we can oversee this without getting in the way."

Bill 63 would eliminate that provision and allow the city administration to seek construction proposals without council approval, but that issue also isn't expected to be resolved until early next year.

The bill is up for second reading, and if it passes will go back to the committee for further discussion.

City Council member Charles K. Djou said the section should not be removed because the public should know about design and build specifications and timetables tied to the rail transit project.

"I think it's a good thing for the city to be as open as possible and share as much information as possible about the largest public works project in the history of the state," said Djou, who voted against the project. "There is a difference between putting up another water pump station and building a rail system. Should the public know where, when, how the system is being built? Yes!"

Djou said the city's argument that leaving the bill intact violates state procurement law is evidence of the "sloppiness of the administration" in pushing the rail transit issue through.

Wayne Y. Yoshioka, director of the city's Department of Transportation Services, said the City Council's responsibility is to set policy regarding projects like the Honolulu High Capacity Transit system.

Yoshioka pointed out that the council voted to select elevated fixed guideway as the Locally Preferred Alternative, the alignment of the project, the termini and alignment of the minimum operable segment, and the creation of the technology panel whose recommendations were used in selecting the technology for the project.

When the request for proposals and request for bids are issued, the information contained in them will become public, he said.

"All of the points above emphasize how open the project has been in the past and will continue to be in the future," Yoshioka said. "The state procurement law is designed to ensure that all qualified vendors have an equal opportunity to propose or bid in an open and fair environment. The only reason this action to delete Section 7 from the ordinance is being taken is to assure compliance with the state procurement law. Any other characterization misleads the public and only serves to create unnecessary and unwarranted controversy."

City Council chairman Todd K. Apo said language is being worked out to "hit the middle ground" so the council and public can continue to receive information about how the project is moving forward without costly hangups.

"The council and the public need to understand how the project is moving forward. The administration needs the autonomy to move this project forward in a timely manner," Apo said. "The hesitation to the (current) proposal to completely wipe it (council oversight) out is too far in one direction."