Will the fourth time be the charm when it comes to establishing a new mass transit system on O'ahu? It's still an open question, but one thing seems certain: If rail is to become a reality, the process needs to be more open and transparent than in the past.

Mayor Mufi Hannemann has told officials in his administration that the public should be included every step of the way as officials begin work on what could ultimately be a decade-long, $2.8 billion rail project running from Kapolei to the University of Hawai'i-Manoa. In fact, city officials have committed almost $1 million to make sure the public is told what is being planned and has every opportunity to voice its opinions. If it turns out, years from now, that some people say (as they inevitably will) "Hey, we never knew what they were planning," they'll pretty much have no one to blame but themselves.

That's the way good government planning is supposed to work. Sometimes in the past, though, city and state officials here have paid mere lip service to the idea, holding public hearings only when required by law and doing little to publicize them to a wider audience. They often tried to hide or gloss over true costs or ridership potential in the interest of getting the project built.

In 1992, for example, city officials were well into the planning process before the public got its first glimpse at how much the system would really cost. Ridership projections for that system starting at Leeward Community College were overestimated, some officials now admit. When the true cost-benefit picture started to emerge, political and public support began to unravel quickly.

More recently. City Council members complained that former Mayor Jeremy Harris often was reluctant to share all relevant information about his proposed Bus Rapid Transit system with the public until every last thing was in place. Opponents took advantage of that void to raise questions and doubts about the project, hastening its demise.

Even earlier this year, many rail supporters around town were furious when the first cost estimates for the new system surfaced. When reporters began telling voters that a 12 percent increase in the excise tax might add up to about $450 per family each year by some estimates, they were accused of being anti-transit.

So to its credit, the Hannemann administration is trying to ensure that the facts about transit come to light this time before things reach a critical stage.

The city's contract with the planning firm Parsons Brinckerhoff, Quade and Douglas lays out very specific steps the company must take to seek and record public input. Public meetings, design charettes (intensive discussions), Web sites and newspapers all are included in the process. Specific attention should be paid to groups that are most likely to be users of the new transit system and those who are traditionally underserved or under-represented in the public involvement process, including low-income and minority populations.

There will even be a database of all public comments received organized by topic area (alignment, ridership, environmental, etc.), and company officials are required to respond to all comments within five business days.

All of this is crucial if rail is going to succeed where it has failed three times before. If a rail system is as necessary and viable as its supporters claim, there should be no problem selling it to the public on its merits, with full disclosure.

If not, its flaws will eventually be disclosed.

There are going to be plenty of vocal critics along the way. The best way to combat them isn't with denials and obfuscation; it's with a bright light shining on all the facts, good and bad.

Reach Mike Leidemann at mleidemann@honoluluadvertiser.com.