Vikings Stadium Gets Deadline

[MineralMan]

Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton has demanded that detailed and complete proposals for the proposed new Viking stadium be on his desk by the 12th of January. Apparently, there are something like four proposals, but only one that has all the details in place, the Arden Hills site on the edge of the metro area. The other proposals are for a stadium in Minneapolis at various locations.

The Arden Hills proposal is essentially complete already, with financing all laid out. The others have been vague and noncommittal. Of course, any proposal has to get through the state legislature during an election year. Public sentiment is far from clear on this. Fans are very vocal about wanting the Vikings to stay, but represent a minority viewpoint among the general population, who are concerned about spending tax money on a professional sports facility that would be used 8-10 days a year.

For myself, I say, "Go, Vikings, Go!" To California, or or just about anywhere else. Buncha losers!

[Angry Dragon]

1. Poor attitude

[MineralMan]

4. Ya think so? I don't.

First, the taxpayers who will be paying for this are not the ones going to the stadium. Sales taxes hit everyone. Most of the people who will be paying for it will never see the inside of it, given the outrageous ticket prices for NFL games. They do go to the Twins games and the Timberwolves games, and the Wild games. Tickets to those are actually fairly affordable.

Personally, I'm not a Vikings fan. I'll tune in to the fourth quarter to see how badly they're losing, but that's it. I can do that if they're in L.A., too.

I am opposed to any taxpayer funding for professional sports teams. Period.

[Goblinmonger]

5. In theory I'm opposed to taxpayer funding, too.

But if it is kept to those that will benefit, and you have to admit that there is a lot of tax revenue that comes in with the stadium, then that at least makes some sense.

[MineralMan]

6. Well, none of the other facilities that have been built with taxpayer funds in the Twin Cities

have had any benefit that pays back the taxpayers. They're all in the hole. And so it goes. It is my opinion that all commercial enterprises should be sellf-funded. I can see a tax incentive, perhaps that helps draw in the business, but tax dollars should not be used to build facilities of any kind for commercial corporations. It's just bad business and bad public policy.

If the government entities in Minnesota have that kind of money, well, we have schools in trouble, libraries closing, and roads full of potholes. Spend the money on that. The fact is, we don't have the money, so additional taxes will have to be levied for this contribution to a corporation. I can't see it.

Let Zygy Wilf build his own damned stadium, if it's such a good business idea. The trouble is that it's not a good business idea, so he wants everyone to pay for his project. No, thanks.

That's not a bad attitude. That's common sense.

[madinmaryland]

2. How much of the financing relies on taxpayer money?

[MineralMan]

3. About a third of the roughly $1 billion cost.

Last edited Fri Jan 6, 2012, 05:10 PM - Edit history (1)

It varies a little from project to project. That doesn't include road construction costs to get people to the location.

Right now, $300-odd million is kind of not available. One plan raises the sales tax in the county where the stadium goes. That's supposed to go to the voters, but the legislature has found a loophole, since it's a lock that the voters would not support it. So the County Board has already decided to do it anyhow.

There's some talk of using gambling to pay the freight, but that has a lot of opposition in the legislature.

Minneapolis is in a snit over it being built anywhere but in Minneapolis, but hasn't seemed to come up with a way to fund that third.