O'ahu voters will be asked on Nov. 4 if they are for or against Honolulu's much-debated $3.7 billion fixed-rail project, a decision that has long-term ramifications for the island.

Quite simply, transit is an essential component of O'ahu's future.

The transit system will provide a viable alternative for commuters — part of a multi-modal solution that includes buses, ferries, shuttles and more. And it puts us on the greener path, getting people out of cars and into a more environmentally friendly alternative.

The current economic doldrums have fueled fears among all of us, and those fears have been amplified as global markets have gyrated. Voters have become understandably jittery about spending money — on their own daily expenses, as well as the excise-tax dollars siphoned off for the 20-mile rail route.

Some see this as a reason to reject Honolulu's largest public works project. It's not. It's precisely during lean times that Honolulu and the state need the economic boost infrastructure projects provide. The project will bring jobs and an influx of federal dollars into the local economy, and it will spur commerce and have a ripple effect on other businesses and tax revenues.

A city planning a project as important as this has to take the long view, which is that the rail system is an investment in a preferred future and a commitment that must be sustained through economic cycles.

That's why voters should choose "yes" on a City Charter amendment that will appear on the general election ballot.

The question: "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?"

It's critical that federal transportation authorities, who have placed the Honolulu project ahead of the pack, see a demonstration of popular support, because that will help cement the city's standing in securing more federal dollars.

There are legitimate questions on whether the economic slowdown will sap tax revenues enough to deplete the local financing for the project, which is funded by a half-percent increase to the general excise tax. A decline in GET revenues is already happening, as people spend less on goods and services.

But city planners say the tax allotment will accommodate a downturn, at least for the short term. City coffers are already ahead of where they need to be to underwrite an early start to construction.

And breaking ground in 2009 would enable the use of the $15 million already cleared by Congress. In the pipeline is another $20 million for the early phase, with another $865 million expected for construction.

In general, decisions on complex public works projects need to be well-informed through technical study and should not be made by popular vote. But the City Council responded to political pressure for some way to gauge public opinion and passed the ballot initiative.

The proposal that voters will consider is not ideal, but at least it will set up jurisdiction for the project within the city government framework.

Assuming the voters flash a thumbs-up on the project, and polls suggest they will, the city should soon create an autonomous transit authority, with oversight by elected officials, to manage construction and operation efficiently.

City decision-making must keep future needs top of mind, a perspective that acknowledges population growth and a pressing need for affordable housing. The redevelopment of communities along the route, properly planned, will help to meet that need.

Rail should be part of Hono-lulu's future, and not short-circuited by immediate fiscal challenges.

With a potentially protracted recession looming, Honolulu has far more to gain by proceeding prudently with the project than by adopting the passive wait-and-see approach.

A "yes" vote on the ballot initiative will maintain the momentum toward Honolulu's critical goals.