Shortly after the conclusion of the last legislative session, an area paper ran a short note about Rep. Dean Urdahl, R-Grove City, teaming up with Rep. Al Juhnke, DFL-Willmar, in calling for a transit plan for western Minnesota.

An outstate Republican legislator supporting public transit? What in the name of House Minority Leader Marty Seifert was going on here?

Republicans have been seen as largely anti-transit, opposing anything that sounds remotely like it might get people out of their cars and into trains — especially if it cost anything.

With that as my limited background on the topic, I was surprised that Urdahl might stick his neck out on an issue that was so unRepublican, especially in an election year when the loyal conservative base has held his feet to the fire on other issues on which they feel he may stray too far to the center.

Yet, there it was, Urdahl joining Juhnke in championing the Little Crow Corridor, which will focus on a transit plan for western Minnesota.

Any doubt of Urdahl’s support was erased by the name, which implicated the history-minded local legislator’s participation.

I finally discussed the topic with Urdahl Monday, and the conversation quickly ended my surprised admiration.

Support of a transit corridor does not necessarily mean light rail, Urdahl explained

“I have a bus plan for transit,” Urdahl said. “We’re looking at ways to take the pressure off Highway 12, a more efficient way to get people to the Twin Cities (from western Minnesota).”

The idea for a bus plan, Urdahl said, comes from a constituent.

So, does that mean the representative doesn’t support passenger trains? He would not allow himself to be tied down.

“I’ve never been a big booster for rail, generally because I question the economics and the efficiency,” Urdahl said. “(The Little Crow Corridor) doesn’t have to be rail, and at that point, only if it makes sense, if it’s affordable.”

There’s the rub. What’s affordable? It might be less expensive in the short run to lay another ribbon of asphalt than it would be to build the infrastructure necessary for passenger rail. But the long-term environmental and economic costs of rail may be less.

Don’t get me wrong. Like Urdahl, I think you have to weigh the cost and efficiency of any transit plan. There simply may not be the population along the Little Crow Corridor to warrant passenger rail. But I think you have to keep all ideas on the table, not disregard some because you believe Minnesotans enjoy the freedom of driving their own vehicle, rather than sharing a rail car with dozens of others.

That’s an outmoded thought process in these times.

You don’t have to look any further than Minnesota’s first — and only, so far  — light rail system for evidence.

The Hiawatha Light-Rail Corridor, a 12-mile line that runs from downtown Minneapolis to the Mall of America, carried 9.1 million passengers in 2007 — an average of about 27,000 riders per  day, according to the Metropolitan Council. That’s 8 percent higher ridership than predicted — for 2020.

Urdahl and Juhnke deserve credit for forcing western Minnesota into the transit planning process — at least there’s a name for it.

It would just be more reassuring if I could believe Urdahl would support rail as a good transit plan, not just in western Minnesota but anywhere in the state — even if it meant going against the Republican mainstream.

“The Republican Party was founded on the idea of mass transit,” Urdahl offered, explaining that the Pacific Railway Act of 1862 was an important plank for the party back then. Just when you think there’s a glimmer of hope, though, Urdahl returns to form: “Do (passenger) railroads make sense today? They’ve discontinued them because they didn’t.”

Sometimes you want to tell the legislator and novelist to skip the political plot twists and just get to the final chapter.