County and Team officials said as much themselves. The vote passed by a 4-3 margin so there wasn't overwhelming support on the Hennepin County board either. It could have easily gone the other way. And what if it had? What if it had been voted down but polls showed overwhelming support in the public sector? Would you want a referendum then? My guess is yes. The residents of Hennepin County are entitled to have their say on the matter, especially since it seems a majority doesn't agree with the way the county board voted. Also, please note that calling for a referendum on one issue in which county residents aren't in agreement with the ruling of the county board members hardly means that we are "descending into chaos." St. Paul voters shot down a referendum back a few years back and St. Paul seems to be functioning just fine.
And it's not demagoguery to say that this is being done to line Pohlad's pockets. All you have to do is follow the money and see who benefits and who pays. If he REALLY wanted a stadium he could pay for it himself. He wants to profit from public money and that's what this is all about. And yeah, the government funds big business all the time but that certainly doesn't mean it's right. You have to look at who benefits and who loses. Here's an example of Coleman's corporate welfare. He really took St. Paul taxpayers for a ride.
St. Paul's citizens will be paying for Coleman's corporate charity well into the future. Between 1993 and 2000 the total indebtedness facing the city rose from $460 million to $619 million--more than this year's entire budget.
http://citypages.com/databank/23/1140/article10766.aspI really don't think that taxpayers automatically shoot down referendums that call for tax increases. In particular, I believe that those that call for increased funding for schools tend to pass (though I could be wrong on that). It's not the tax per se but rather what the tax will be used for that voters look at. Some, as you say, will vote down any and all taxes but I don't believe that's true of the general public overall. Otherwise every single tax increase that has ever gone to referendum in the history of MN would have been shot down and I don't believe that has been the case. I don't speak for Rybak and McLaughlin so I won't pretend to know what they think. If they are in favor of the bill because they think it will benefit the county economically they should do some research. The "zero net benefits" is even more true in this case since the place where the Twins currently play is already located in Hennepin County.
Oh, the area immediately around Camden Yards might be all shiny and nice but for every store/restaurant/bar that profits from the stadium there's another one that is losing money. The link was included in a previous post but I'll post it here again so you won't have to search the thread for it. It's a short article and doesn't go into a whole lot of detail but I've seen the same info in other articles so it appears that the stats are accurate. Please feel free to post any links that support your side if it's not a problem.
http://www.jhu.edu/~jhumag/0299web/policy.htmlAnd I agree that those weren't the best links. As I said in the original post, I couldn't find the one I was looking for. I took a shortcut and grabbed some of the first ones I found, mainly because the studies I had looked at all said the same thing: zero net benefits. You see, I had already had a similar discussion about this a month or so ago. A couple of my co-workers wouldn't believe me that a few years back when Bush was part-owner of the Rangers, he had pushed thorugh public financing on a stadium for the team and made a bundle in the process. I sent them the links but got the typical argument back: "But EVERYBODY benefits from this." I then looked into whether or not that was true and every study I came across showed the same thing: zero net benefits. One co-worker still denies that and sent me an "impartial" link to support his argument: a link to the Rangers' website extolling the virtues of the stadium. The other co-worker is still in denial that the Rangers built a stadium at all. And yes, they're Freepers in case anyone is wondering. So anyway, while they may not be the best links, they did represent the general outcome of the studies that I came across. If I can find the site I was looking for I will post a link but frankly I really don't plan to spend a whole lot of time looking for it, mianly because the links I posted contain pretty much the same info.
Here's the info on the agreement. It doesn't exactly call for the county to share in any windfall from the sale of the Twins. The COMISSION may get a percentage, depending on when the team is sold, but the county won't get anything. From the Star Trib's article in the OP's link:
The proposal requires the Twins to sign a 30-year agreement with no escape clause that would have to be approved by Major League Baseball. If the team is sold before 2016, the Twins would share some of the gross franchise sales price of the team with a new Ballpark Commission. The longer Pohlad and his family own the team, the smaller the percentage of the sale price that would be shared with the Ballpark Commission.
If the Pohlads sell out after the first season in the proposed stadium, the team would pay 18 percent of the sale price to the commission. By the 10th year of the new stadium, the commission would get no share of the sale.
Apparently the Commission will also own the site, not the county. How the heck does that work?
"Thanks for talking about this based on facts though...some have such a hatred for Pohlad (which I do understand), that that seems to be their only argument."
No problem. Back at you. The "But it's the TWINS!!" arguments really don't add a lot to the discourse either. ;) And while I definitely think Pohlad is an a$$, the argument is the same regardless of who happens to own the team. Who profits from public funding of stadiums? The team owner(s). Who pays? The taxpayers. And that's what I see as the real issue here.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore