It's the political season of change — hope — and growing uncertainty about the future of the world, our country, and the future of Hawai'i.

One of the most critical choices that we have to make on Election Day is whether to approve the city's rail-transit system. In the closing days, I'd like to offer a different perspective that deals less with the technicalities of transit and more with the future of our community and preferred quality of life questions that Hawai'i has recently struggled to address.

It's no surprise that building something from scratch is a lot tougher than doing nothing. Rail transit is a perfect example of the incredible challenges associated with game-changing types of innovative transportation and planning solutions necessary to solve the long-term needs of our state. The obstacles related to funding these types of initiatives through taxes, public and private financing, regulatory issues such as zoning, environmental impact statements, permitting, land acquisition and other related procedures present incredible barriers to accomplishing anything. The present global financial crisis will make this even tougher.

In contrast, blocking a project requires virtually no resources. Opposition groups have relied upon proven tactics to block change and have at times successfully defended the status quo. Tactics like parking a surfboard in a harbor, wearing red or green T-shirts or roving speaker systems trying to simulate the "real" sound impact of rail transit have become the norm, depending on the issue. E-lists and the blogosphere provide no-cost platforms to oppose anything.

In these debates, both sides of the issue have legitimate concerns that deserve an honest conversation and dialogue about the facts. This is an impossible conversation to have on a surfboard or via 10-second sound bites communicated through news media. Throughout "heated" debates such as these, both sides can unintentionally confuse the public, creating a frenzied approach to what should be a thoughtful dialogue.

However, these differences shouldn't divide us — they should help unite us in forging a preferred future for Hawai'i. Recently, I've heard a lot of people asking "What's in it for me?" The question and attitude behind it indicate that we might not only lose rail, but that we're losing a little bit of Hawai'i in the process. Traditionally, Hawai'i residents have shown a willingness to consider the greater good. Once our state loses Hawai'i's local style of sensibility and aloha spirit, we become just another place in the world.

The generational impacts of rail transit will positively impact our children and grandchildren. Parents will enjoy more quality time with their kids. Families will spend less monthly income on gas. Commute times will become more predictable and stress free. Needless to say, this is the greatest quality of life issue Honolulu needs to address.

Perhaps the greatest benefit of rail transit that's had the least discussion is the creation of transit-oriented development along every rail stop. As Hawai'i ranks 49th out of 50 states in homeownership and has the highest rate of intergenerational families living together under the same roof, the creation of affordable workforce housing is a key benefit of having rail transit. Smart growth and the establishment of compact mixed-use communities have immeasurable benefits: reducing our carbon footprint, increased density versus urban sprawl and more vibrant neighborhoods, to name a few.

Does an EzWay elevated freeway provide the same benefits?

Rail transit will directly benefit many people in Hawai'i. Indirectly, it will benefit us all because we came together to support a brighter future for all of Hawai'i's people.

Finally, I truly believe that Hawai'i's silent majority wants to see responsible change and solutions that address our growing community. Change isn't always easy. Yet there are few opportunities in our lifetimes to embrace meaningful real change that we can accomplish with rail transit. We lost an opportunity in 1992. Let's not make the same mistake twice.

Kyle Chock is executive director of the Pacific Resource Partnership. He wrote this commentary for The Advertiser.