 Oh, loha. I'm Kayleigh Eakena, president of the Grassroot Institute. Sometimes it feels like the Honolulu Rail is destined to be a continual topic of controversy. But that doesn't have to be the case. In fact, there's one thing that could bring together the most fervent pro-rail and anti-rail advocates, and it's something we should have done a long time ago. I'll tell you about that in a minute. When the legislature adjourned without coming to an agreement on a plan to fund the rail, feelings were running so high some called for a period of, quote, cooling off. A last-minute attempt to tax tourists to raise money for rail brought bad feelings, sniping in the press, and the same complaints that surface every time the tax-to-fund issue comes up. Heart and local politicians are under pressure to come up with a funding plan before the federal government's July deadline so they can get the promised $1.5 billion for the project from the FDA. But it's easy to see why legislators hesitated to pass a tax hike or extend the existing surcharge. Supporters of the rail say we've come too far, that the project needs to be completed, and that it will ultimately be good for the city. They point out that it will cost $3 billion just to shut down the project and that the public wants to see it finished. On the other hand, opponents say that whatever the cost of shutting down is, it's still cheaper than throwing more money away at rail. They doubt the project will ever be able to pay for itself and say it's destined to become an endless financial sinkhole. They look at a project that was originally said to cost $3 billion, then $5 billion, then $8 billion and is now slated at $10 billion plus and ask, when will the spending end? But the fact is, there's one thing both sides, pro-rail and anti-rail, should be calling for, a full audit of the rail, or of heart. No matter where you stand on the rail, you can agree that the public deserves an honest accounting of the money spent so far, as well as a realistic assessment of the costs ahead. We're overdue for a non-political, unbiased, fully transparent look at the rail, its operating costs, the price of shutting it down, and its potential. So how can we begin to make good decisions about the project when we don't even have the numbers we need? Pro-rail advocates might think an audit is just a way to delay things. Anti-rail people might call it pointless, but both sides should realize that transparency and accountability in rail can only bolster their position. People are tired of hearing promises and baseless predictions about rail, both the pie in the sky and the gloomy ones alike. An audit is exactly what we need to restore trust and have a sound reasoned argument about our next steps. Regardless of where you stand on the project, pro-rail or anti-rail, you must agree that it's time to audit the rail. I'm Kayleigh Iacina with the Grasshird Institute.