Of course the arguments were made in the body of the piece. They immediately point out that the higher taxes were in larger cities that cost more to run... really? Why do they cost more? Do roads and bridges really cost more to upkeep and develop in NY than in Houston? No it's government largesse that costs more and draws in people who want a nanny state. It is a horrible combo of low productivity (in most cases) that leads to spiraling unemployment and inefficient bureaucracy. Gotta love progress.
Urban planners argue that suburban sprawl is too expensive and cities like Baton Rouge need to constrict so infrastructure costs will go down.
Now someone is saying that highly dense cities are MORE expensive to run?
It doesn't add up.
I'd think that the more dense a city was, the cheaper it would be to provide basic services.