The same reasoning has prevented light rail from expanding further in the St. Louis metro, too. Unfortunately, the extension to one of the area's largest malls did by all accounts attract at least some new crime:

https://www.riverfronttimes.com/stlouis/out-of-control-shopl...

I haven't followed the stats since then (and there could be other explanations for the reports in that article), but the perception in the region that transit brings crime is very strong.

Same reasoning in Minneapolis.

"I want to thank you for ruining our city," said Donna Azarian, an Eden Prairie resident, during the city's public hearing. She said that the city doesn't have the density to support light rail and that it will "bring crime to our city." Her comments were met with audience applause..."

"as it would have attracted crime."

Source?

San Mateo county voted out of BART for what are probably similar reasons (i.e., belief that transit = poor people and poor people = crime, therefore transit = crime).

Which does a bad job of estimating the kind of people who use mass transit even in the Bay. Caltrain (which has also been targeted by wealthier communities in an attempt to stop it from improving), for example, is packed with young professionals and with middle-class (by peninsula standards) teenagers who use it to commute to school. BART and the ferries and other transit systems are used heavily by tech people and other professionals, because trying to get places by driving is a massive headache. But among a certain class of people the whole transit network is perceived as being for the exclusive use of homeless people and criminals.