A legal cloud hanging over a vote taken by the Honolulu City Council in 2012 is pushing current Council members to rush through a new measure to ensure the rail project doesn’t incur millions of dollars in late payments and debt.

City officials say Bill 73, essentially a revote of a bond OK given in 2012, needs to be given final approval by January to avoid late payment or interest that could cost taxpayers about $3 million a month.

Council Chairman Ernie Martin on Thursday called a special meeting for Wednesday to take the first of three Council votes on the bill, which would authorize the city to issue up to $450 million in general obligation commercial paper, or short-term bonds for the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation’s $6 billion rail project, among other things.

The language of the new bill mirrors that of Ordinance 12-17, one of a number of bills called into question in a lawsuit filed last month by Campbell Estate heiress Abigail Kawananakoa. The lawsuit seeks to invalidate a number of ordinances Kawananakoa contends were passed with votes cast by Council members who took the actions in violation of city ethics laws.

The reason for expediency was detailed by city Budget Director Nelson Koyanagi in a letter to Martin on Thursday. The city is working with its bond underwriters to establish a new tax-exempt commercial paper, or TECP, program. In order to complete the bond issuance, however, Corporation Counsel Donna Leong must sign off on a memorandum that “confirms that no pending litigation affects ‘the right of the city to levy taxes or to issue evidence of indebtedness.’”

Because of Kawananakoa’s lawsuit, Koyanagi told Martin, Leong cannot sign off on such documentation. “Moreover, the city’s bond counsel would be unable to issue an unqualified bond counsel opinion necessary for issuance of the TECP,” Koyanagi said in the letter.

The bond money is important because “based on the most current information available, HART estimates that debt financing is needed to pay current contract invoices in January 2016,” Koyanagi said. “Should financing not be available to pay for currently contracted costs, approximately $3 million a month could be incurred in late payment and interest costs to HART.”

It’s unclear whether the Council intends to revote on other measures that are clouded by the lawsuit.

Kawananakoa’s lawsuit was triggered by a series of events that began with comments made by former Councilman Romy Cachola last year after he agreed to a settlement payment in exchange for the city Ethics Commission dropping an investigation that he took illegal gifts from lobbyists.

While he did not admit to any wrongdoing as a condition of the settlement, Cachola said five other current or former Council members received the same gifts and did not disclose that information when casting key votes related to rail and other West Oahu development from which the lobbyists benefited.

As a result, the Ethics Commission began looking into gifts received by the five others: current Council members Ikaika Anderson and Ann Kobayashi, and former members Todd Apo, Donovan Dela Cruz and Nestor Garcia.

Earlier this year Garcia reached an agreement with the Ethics Commission to settle similar claims that alleged he cast votes on rail and other projects that benefited lobbyists from whom he received gifts.

Commission Executive Director Chuck Totto has stated that investigations into the other four Council members are ongoing.

Meanwhile, Totto and Commission Vice Chairman Michael Lilly said it’s their opinion that votes taken by Cachola and Garcia are null and void. Lilly went on to say he thinks the votes in question should be retaken by the Council.

Leong, the city’s top civil attorney, told the Honolulu Star-Advertiser in August that there is no need to review the votes that were called into question because both of the commission’s advisory opinions involving Cachola and Garcia made “no findings of misconduct or ethical violations.”