In a commentary piece today at MinnPost, University of Minnesota President Robert Bruininks sounds something like a passenger who has finally taken a seat after arguing with the bus driver, but who is still disputing where the bus should go. It’s couched in more moderate language than he used in a May 23 a May 23 letter to the Met Council, but Bruininks has not yet thrown in the towel on his strong preference for  an alternate Central Corridor light-rail train route through the Minneapolis campus.

In fact, his column today gives the towel a few snaps:

• The U of M "saw great potential in a northern alignment." The past tense sounds defeatist, but Bruininks then vigorously recites five advantages—from greater potential for economic and housing development to less disruption of campus—to having (inserted) the LRT travel along an existing Dinkytown rail trench rather than the Met Council’s Washington Avenue SE.

• "It is disappointing that we have thus far (emphasis added) been unable to share our vision in a compelling way." The "thus far" points to the university’s June 12–13 Board of Regents meeting, at which Bruininks promised (thanks, City Hall Scoop) the U of M would unveil the products of its research into the Dinkytown route.

• "We cannot gloss over the significant challenges that face a street-level train through campus." This time Bruininks lists a half-dozen "specific challenges," from trains vibrating lab equipment to the diversion of more than 25,000 cars and buses off Washington Avenue.