Great article, though I don't agree with all of the items or the order, if order means something (#4 seems far more consequential than #3, though both are undoubtedly mistakes).

The list itself is an interesting mix of systemic and large-scale decisions that will be hard to undo with smaller blunders that could be fixed relatively easily.

To wit, #1, #2, and #4 were huge blunders, and concentrated in about 20 years worth of destruction. The mindset that cars are the only way...

Don't get me wrong, I love parks, and take daily advantage of the park system. Most successful city parks are not just destinations, but on the way to somewhere else, which is often not another park. People from Olmsted to Jane Jacobs recognized this. Central Park -- surrounded by buildings. Rice and Mears Park, great examples, but again in the middle of a [locally] dense part of town.

I'm skeptical we need this much park heading out of the density of downtown.

There's an interesting political economy underlying what Minneapolis has in place, which is an apparently strict zoning code that the City Council (elected and administrative) will compromise on (variances) that also gives neighborhood groups a large, but undefined say, in what gets built.

The idea that neighborhood associations have a right to control what gets built is, when you reflect on it, rather at odds with the classical version of "property rights" and limited government...

Doug, you probably don't mean it, but your analysis plays into the framing the Vikings want that it is a public responsibility to finance a substantial portion of the stadium.

Lets take the Republicans at their words -- they don't want the Vikings to leave (hard to falsify), but why is it their responsibility if the team leaves?

In the end that is the team's decision.

They could choose finance the stadium with revenues (higher ticket prices), but there's no indication...