Interesting article. Thanks for posting.

I've have used their light rail -- so they've already got actual transit in place. The article is mostly about the fight to get the tax subsidies to pay for it.

This fight sounds ugly, but its just politics. No different that any other public issues these days. What the article didn't answer to my satisfaction is why was there opposition to transit funding? Was it really just opposition to transit -- or was it opposition to who was going to run the system and whose money was going to pay for it. Typically, that's the real battle.

The article is biased. Makes it sound like any opposition to funding was an opposition to transit. Like in Detroit -- opposition to funding Detroit's spending isn't always distaste for Detroit. Sometimes its just a vote against corruption and waste.

If we want public services, we also need to find a way to provide them efficiently.