A hands-on approach can be a good thing, but not when there are too many hands in an undertaking better handled by a few.

In the case of the city's planned rail system, the nine City Council members will complicate more than help matters if they retain approval power at every step of the process for issuing contracts to plan and build the system.

The best use of the council's time is not on micromanaging such details of planning and construction but on broader policy questions, A principal part of that task was done almost two years ago when members approved the basic framework of the system. Now the proper focus for its work is to see that the buildout of the rail meshes well with the communities it will serve.

Besides — according to Bill 63, now under council consideration — the city administration's chief procurement officer can't legally hand over contract approval power to the council, anyway.

The current draft of the bill, which passed a key vote yesterday, would amend a section of the 2007 ordinance approving the fixed-guideway route.

The problem language compels the city administration to submit to the council "specifications in each proposed request for proposals or invitation for bids for work that includes the planning, design or construction of any portion of the locally preferred alternative before issuing the request or invitation."

It only takes a moment to consider what set of hurdles that places in the project's path. In the proposed revision, the council would be notified of procurement steps but would not be called to approve them. This is a better approach, enabling the city to meet its crucial deadlines.

City Councilman Charles Djou has aired his worries that relinquishing council control will undercut adequate oversight of the project.

But those are separate issues. Oversight can and must be maintained, but that can happen without the legislative branch exerting executive approval at every stage.

Wayne Yoshioka, director of the city Department of Transportation Services, argued that the state's procurement law already ensures that procurement happens "in an open and fair environment."

He's right. And now the council has an option to debate the bill further, pushing the final decision until next year, or to call a special meeting this month and make the amendment now. It's clear that the better move is to move quickly to correct the language. Anything less simply throws obstacles in the path of a critical city project and makes it difficult to bring it in on time and on budget.

The last thing the city needs as it revs up Honolulu's biggest public works project is a complication that offers little other than padding to the bottom line.