I truly believe that this vision of moving around people in "style", because you are either too poor, too cheap, or too "green" to drive yourself around will be proven an expensive and poor choice for the twin cities. Trasit officials will come to the twin cities because it will be a beacon of "what not to do" in transit. People will have to realize that there needs to be a cost benfit analysis done, and the twincities doesn't make the cut. You can always tell when the best justification provided by the Met Council is the temporary "jobs" the project will create. The rationale for building something the taxpayer will be required to support (probably $1 billion annually if they get everything they are asking for), based on the federal goverment handing out free money and temporary construction jobs is poor policy. Too bad there is never any accountability in government and the decision makers will be living off their pension when the public realizes what a boondoggle LRT is.

It's not about being "too poor, too cheap, or too green to drive". It's about being able to efficiently move large masses of people in a growing metropolitan area that can't sustain the current freeway infrastructure. Investing in LTR, commuter rail, and express bus lines is the best way to address this issue we will be facing, and are already facing. If we don't, upgrades to the roads and freeways will take way too long, may never catch up, and be more costly in the long run. Transportation in the metro will be choked. Mass transit should have the added benefit of reduced emissions and lower demand for gasoline.

"...when the public realizes what a boondoggle LRT is"...Over 53 million rides since it opened in 2004 to 2010. 10.5 million rides in 2010 alone. How many government services we pay for every day get > 10 million users every year? I know it's "subsidized", but isn't everything? We all pay for stuff we don't use, or use less than others. As far as "the federal goverment handing out free money", wouldn't you like to get some of that money for MN? Those are your tax dollars. Shouldn't we strive to get as much as possible to benefit MN? Or should we let them go to another state to benefit their people? That makes no sense to me.

Of course, the other side of the coin are those people who are too unenlightened, selfish and self-absorbed that they feel they can continue to "drive themselves around". Always love the criticism that public transit requires "taxpayer support" and the "Feds handing out free money", which must mean that freeways, roads and bridges are free and build themselves. As a resident of one of the two counties in peril, I have no one to blame but my idiotic Tea Party politicians that we're being left in the dust.

Constant road building to keep up with growing area is the "subsidy" you will pay instead and you will never get to a point where traffic moves free. who pays the "subsidy" for air and water pollution, neighborhoods damaged by noise, traffic, and an inability to walk or bike anywhere? Has any city "built" its way out of traffic with roads? LRT and BRT offer affordable long term solutions. They also create livable walkable communities, not just auto infrastructure and pollution. I am from Los Angeles and you cannot build your way out of traffic. I have seen "your future" and it isn't pretty. LA rush hour traffic in some places is all day long at 10mph. Several rail lines have opened over the last 20 years and move hundreds of thousands of people a day. Yes, that many. The LA region has 4 more lines under construction now with another 4 to start in the next three years. Once enough connectivity exists in a system it is trans-formative. It also eases road congestion too. If you want to live in a region with a growing economy you have two choices about how to move more people around. One works and one doesn't. Choose wisely or you may end up with a big traffic mess, $8/gal gas, and no other options.

chance123 - "I truly believe that this vision of moving around people in "style", because you are either too poor, too cheap, or too "green" to drive yourself around will be proven an expensive and poor choice for the twin cities." At $3.89/gal for fuel and rising and at $25,000 per "cheap" automobile (and rising) and at 55 cents per mile (AAA determined cost to drive an automobile) and rising we'll be all too poor to drive ourselves around. When the fuel runs out (and it won't be long) we'll all need trolleys and horse drawn carriages to "drive" ourselves around

TPaw turned down stimulus money when it was first offered but then accepted it. Why? Because he realized that Minnesota sends more money to the Federal Government than it receives! So $1 billion here and $1 billion there simply brings the money that we send to DC back home to flow through the local economy 4 times before winding back up in DC. I just wish that the money would be spent spmeplace other than supporting urban sprawl.

Two words you're sure to read in comments on each and every article posted about transit: Choo-choo, and boondoggle. They're fun to read, and even more fun to say out loud. Go out and yell it at the top of your lungs. It's incredibly energizing, and even good for the soul. :) In fact, I'm feeling so fine now that I'm going to hop in my 2009 Honda Boondoggle, stop at the Holiday boondoggle for gasoline, drive up the 100 boondoggle to the 394 boondoggle and head downtown, where I'm going to have myself one choo-chooriffic evening!

disappointing that Shakopee won't get transit because of the short-sightedness and stupidity of their county government. a light rail extension to Valleyfair would just make too much sense i guess...

I look forward to the day I can take a bus or train downtown instead of my car! One less thing to worry about plus I can get some work done in the process! Looks like I'll have a few years to go yet, but it's coming! I'm glad that the Twin Cities metro area is finally getting serious about transportation, and not just 'roads'.