It's the part where he writes, "...Kansas City's support for Google's network went well beyond deregulation to outright corporate welfare," that I found strikin

It's the part where he writes, "...Kansas City's support for Google's network went well beyond deregulation to outright corporate welfare," that I found striking. Maybe it's just a poor choice of words but it seemed to me like it set the tone of the article as a condemnation of Google building out their network at the expense of the taxpayers, and completely ignoring that they were providing what would from any of the established telcoms be a very expensive service to the city in exchange.