Regardless of who wrote it, inserted it, or what have you, it's unproductive - I would think/hope most would concur.
A suggestion: how about simply labeling this article "Opinion: What's Good for the Goose..."
It seems that the disconnect, from my vantage point, is that most folks are readers of this site for the information and unique perspective - whether it's the photo shoots, "learning froms" or the analysis of the BRT.
One gets used to a steady daily stream of interesting information and insight - and then boom, a stick of opinionated dynamite gets tossed into the pond. As noted, if you're going to toss the dynamite, it ought to have a return address (signature).
Maybe it's just me, but such verbage just doesn't fit with the overall tone and demeanor of the rest of the content on this site. I'm trying to think of an analogy - here's one. It's like listening to a classical music station that gets suddenly interrupted by a heavy metal song. What's that doing on my channel?
As noted above by Kevin (who I look forward to meeting, by the way), questioning and investigating sheds light, which is a great thing. The BRT articles are well-done and moves the needle on public opinion. Which is a good for the site. Good for the city. Heck, good for democracy. More of that, please!
Best wishes to all,
Pavers