Members of the Honolulu City Council had more harsh words Wednesday about the direction of the island’s rail project — but then the group signaled its support of a rail tax extension with key votes.

Meeting in a special session deliberately scheduled to fall on April Fools’ Day, the Council voted 7-1 to approve on first reading Bill 23. That measure would remove the Dec. 31, 2022, sunset of Oahu’s 0.5 percent surcharge funding most of the project. Councilwoman Ann Kobayashi, a staunch critic of how the 20-mile, 21-station project has taken shape, cast the dissenting vote. Councilwoman Kymberly Pine was not present.

The move came about two weeks before a key deadline for tax-extension bills still alive in the state Legislature, where lawmakers first would need to approve such an extension for it to have a chance at passing.

Several of those state lawmakers have openly questioned why they haven’t heard formal support from the Council for the controversial and politically risky move. Wednesday’s special session was aimed at answering those concerns.

Council Chairman Ernie Martin previously said he picked April 1 for the special session "as an indication that members will not be fooled again by misrepresentations or insufficient information."

The Council also voted 7-1 Wednesday to adopt Resolution 15-7, an agreement between the city and the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation that sets the terms for city-backed debt financing of rail construction. Kobayashi again dissented.

The Council’s Budget Committee, which Kobayashi heads, had previously deferred the so-called "memorandum of understanding" twice in the past couple of months.

Without the deal, rail officials said, the project could run out of cash to pay its construction bills as early as this summer.

However, the Budget Committee had expressed concerns that agreeing to a short-term borrowing plan could expose city taxpayers to risk, especially now that rail faces as much as a $910 million budget gap and it’s not clear whether state leaders will approve the tax extension.

Nonetheless, the Budget Committee approved the deal Wednesday morning with a 3-1 vote, paving the way for the full Council to adopt Resolution 15-7 later in the day.

The agreement allows the rail project to borrow $350 million in the first year to help cover construction costs in the short term, when the revenues won’t keep up with expenses. HART officials will have to come back to the Council to make a request each time they need to float more bonds. They said they would probably make that first request in June or July.

Once again, in committee, Kobayashi was the dissenting vote.

She levied blunt critiques at HART and rail officials, accusing them of misleading the public over the years and obfuscating financial details.

"You can’t keep playing with people, and you can’t keep playing with taxpayers’ money," Kobayashi told HART board Chairman Ivan Lui-Kwan and HART Executive Director Dan Grabauskas.

"I just want the truth. It would do so much for public confidence. … I never get a straight answer. I can’t trust the company that is asking to borrow city money," Kobayashi added, referring to HART.

She noted that three years ago HART had planned to borrow $100 million in the first year of a debt-financing plan. Now the agency plans to borrow $350 million in commercial paper in the first year instead. Grabauskas and HART officials said after the meeting that the revised $350 million plan will save the project money in borrowing costs.

Several rail opponents spoke out against Bill 23 and Resolution 15-7, including Katherine Kupukaa. The Mililani resident referred to rail’s price tag of $3.7 billion in 2008 and noted that it has nearly doubled since then.

"Who is kidding who with this deception?" she testified Wednesday. "With the project less than 10 percent completed and the $1 billion contingency used up, do you dare ask for more money from the taxpayers?"

Dolores Mollring, a downtown resident, said this week’s nightmare traffic on the H-1 freeway showed that the rail line remains desperately needed on Oahu.

"I’m not thinking of the cost, I’m not thinking of the dollars — I’m thinking of the poor people who were stuck in traffic yesterday," Mollring said. "Their concern was four hours in traffic, and these people are complaining and complaining about their taxes."