I have a question for Minnesotans: Which is worse?

[SmileyBoy]

Having the state legislature pass a bill to give some assistance to the Twins and Vikings to construct new PUBLIC sports facilities (These will not be private stadiums or playgrounds for billionaires - They will be publicly-owned facilities being partly financed with actual public bonds, not taxpayer money) so the teams can stay in Minnesota,

Or, the Twins and Vikings eventually moving out of the Twin Cities, thus leaving an empty white elephant Metrodome next to downtown, leaving the city and state out of millions of revenue dollars (that would have come in if the teams stayed), and with the state legislature also eventually having to spend TWICE as much money in the future to attract other franchises to relocate here (and believe me, they will be doing it with YOUR tax dollars this time) and build a new stadium anyway after all this is through???

(Just an honest question for those of you anti-stadium people who think no consequences can come out of refusing to budge on the stadium issue.)

[Worst Username Ever]

1. Sounds like a loaded question to me

The vikes and the twins can go to hell as far as I'm concerned. I've heard enough wining form the owners to last a lifetime. A developer would pay MILLIONS for the prime property the dome is sitting on, I don't think that would be an issue getting rid of that thing.

Pohlad has stated that he is more than willing to build an entire new outdoor park, but he gets to keep all revenues for vending, advertising, ticket sales, etc. Fine by me. But the state won't let it happen, they want their share of the revenues. Pohlad won't bend on his revenues, the state won't bend on theirs, time to go.

[SmileyBoy]

5. You think he's pocketing all that money???

Do you know that he has to spend all that money on rent for the Metrodome, the player/staff payroll, and team operations expenses, and that he's still coming up in the red???

PLEASE don't tell me you think that money is his. Every single thin dime of that is being spent on team upkeep, and there's not enough. With a new stadium, the Twins can make more money, hence generating more revenue from on/site businesses and the indirect revenues from many other businesses (bars/hotels/restaurants) in the immediate area.

[Worst Username Ever]

7. I didn't say the money was his now

I said it would be if he built his own stadium, which is what you were asking. Go reread my post.

[shockingelk]

13. Why do you assume a staduim is the only way to make more money?

What kind of team could you put together for the cost of a new stadium. The Minneapple could have the Miniyankees!

People go to a stadium to see a ball game, not the stadium. I'd rather my tax dollars be used to buy some great hitters.

[no name no slogan]

19. The Twins are Pohlad's tax shelter

By keeping the Twins, Pohlad is able to avoid paying taxes. He owns a lot of other things that make him piles of money each year, and keeps the Twins because he can deduct the loss on his taxes.

This is standard procedure for most "good" businessmen-- keep one loser on the books to offset the profits you're raking in hand over foot. You keep more of your money, and Uncle Sam foots the bill.

[kikiek]

2. I love the Vikes and Twins..have hoped for a stadium and public

ownership. But even I can't condone it when medical and housing and child care assistance and teachers are being cut. Sorry..no support here. The time has passed.

[SmileyBoy]

3. But do you folks understand the consequences???

Can you comprehend the negative outcomes for the city if the Vikes and Twins leave??? Did you know that 2/3 of all the TV's in the state are tuned in to the Vikings game every Sunday??? If so many of you in this state claim to support the Vikings and the Twins, yet are against keeping them secure in Minnesota, aren't you being hypocrites???

(And believe me, all of the Vikings and/or Twins fans in this state compromise a majority.)

[liberalhistorian]

9. Yeah, like the horrible outcome

we in Cleveland suffered when the POS SOB repuke selfish as sin Browns owner decided that decades of strong support and millions of dollars in promised fees, abatements, etc., weren't enough and pulled the team out from under the city. Five years without a team before we got another one, and as far as I know we still somehow, someway managed to survive. In fact, we did pretty well. We were actually able to focus on some REAL problems, for once.

[kikiek]

11. Hey I want one..but how can you justify it?

I will be devastated if the teams leave. I will sleep at night though. If they stay and we fund it while cutting off people who need help I won't. Talk to the asshole Pawlenty. The whole budget is about to collapse. Did you see the article in the Star and Trib? You know the budget woes will be on the backs of the least able to afford it. More social cuts are forthcoming I bet. I know business' in Mpls will no doubt go out. That is on McCombs and Polads conscience not ours. They have plenty of money and can build one if they want to and it wouldn't cost them a dime anyways. We know that.

[Krupskaya]

15. I've got dogs in a lot of hunts here.

Huge Twins fan. Fair-weather Vikes fan. And spouse to a member of the building trades.

We're all for the stadiums here. Just get them done, already.

[wellstone dem]

34. I supported the Twins stadium for many years

have had tickets to all series/playoff games (I cannot tell you how many postcards I sent in to lotteries for these tickets.) But although I neeeeeed an outdoor stadium, and I understand there will be consequences to not having those teams here. I see the consequences now of cuts in child care, requiring the desparately poor to pay co-payments for medical care, lack of legal aid representation of battered women in custody cases, lack of adequate money to have reasonable class sizes, failure to increase MFIP payments in 20 years----not even a cost of living increase. I see those consequences now and cannot support a stadium.

[liberalhistorian]

4. I'm sorry, but as a Clevelander

who's been through this very issue and heard all of the "we'll suffer even more without it, so hand over your wallets" bullshit, I have to respectfully disagree. The much-ballyhooed stadiums (that's right, TWO of the damn things) were supposed to have transformed Cleveland, created thousands of jobs, blahblahblahblah, and they haven't done a goddamn thing. Oh, sure, a couple of hundred minimum-wage service jobs, but that's about it. And the new THREE HUNDRED FIFTY MILLION DOLLAR football stadium isn't domed, so it can only be used EIGHT FUCKING TIMES a year.

NOTHING that was promised has happened, with either the baseball or the football stadium. The only thing we have more of is taxes and debt, and even higher unemployment and homelessness rates. And the schools are suffering horribly because the gazillionaire playboys who sold the city this bullshit bill of goods made sure they got a nice, fat tax abatement so they'll never, ever have to pay any taxes at all, thereby shifting the burden, yet again, to the people and small businesses who can least afford it. And these were built partly with public bonds as well, and that doesn't at all mean no taxes involved, no sireebob.

And when the Browns owner pulled his sneaky bullshit and pulled the team right out from under us, and we didn't have a football team for five years, the sky didn't fall, the earth didn't crumble, the city didn't die. In fact, it was not at all the disaster those who'd demanded public funding (whether through taxes or bonds, it's all public funding) claimed it would be if we lost a team. Let the gazillionaire selfish spoiled, self-centered playboys fund their own goddamn playgrounds. They hate taxes unless it involves the public paying for their playthings, so fuck them. And even if they do get their new stadiums, that's often not enough for them, they sometimes find another reason to pull their teams out. That's happened more than once, as well. And there have been economic studies done showing that sports stadiums really do not do much for the economy of their host city, in fact, as in Cleveland's case, it can sometimes have the opposite effect.

[SmileyBoy]

6. Please remember: These are PUBLIC facilities.

These are NOT private playgrounds for millionaires and billionaires. These are as public as your local library, school or park.

[Worst Username Ever]

8. If thats the case, then I get in for free?

[liberalhistorian]

10. BULLSHIT!

They are NOT public like a library, school, or park, that is crazy!!! It costs an arm and a leg and then some just to get into one of those places, among other things.

I find it absolutely fascinating that so many people get all worked up about stupid shit like this, and are so concerned for the gazillionare spoiled crybaby selfish owners and players, but when kids and families are going without health care, people don't have jobs or affordable housing, thousands of teachers are being laid off all throughout the country, they couldn't fucking care less. And I'm SICK OF IT!!! That just shows where their priorities are, frankly. People will always find money for the things that are important to them. They refuse to pass school levies, but hell, they've gotta have those stadiums!!! Just like in Cleveland, and we're no better off than before all of these razzle-dazzle buildings.

[kikiek]

12. And Cleveland was tops as far as team support went. They pulled

it anyways. It is bullshit that they can't make money where they are at. It once again boils down to they want a playpen for their corporate sponsors. Need more suites...yah I can learn to root for the Bears if I have to. The whole sport has lost its loyalty anyways. They leave us at the drop of a dime and wonder why we aren't as enthusiastic.

[dflprincess]

14. We could use the Dome for roller blading year round!

Instead of just a couple days a week in the winter. It's a great place to rollerblade.

Seriously, I would miss the Twins, and I have some sympathy for them - they were never happy with the Dome and it is a lousy place for baseball. Though I haven't been convinced my taxes should be used to build a baseball stadium.

And the Vikings - who cares? The stadium we have now is the stadium they wanted. Now it's not good enough for them.

[no name no slogan]

20. The Dome gets other usage besides the Twins & Vikes, too

It's used for a variety of sporting events, concerts, shows, etc. And IIRC, the team owners get a cut of all revenue that comes from those events, too.

New stadiums are horrible investments from a community perspective. They do little to create REAL jobs and don't bring in nearly as much revenue as do investments in better infrastructure do.

I believe there's a term for it: "welfare for the rich". Seems they already get a fair amount. No need to give them more.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

16. The Mpls Parks Department is having to scrimp on maintenance

Talk about something that makes Minneapolis distinctive--the lakes and parks. I live near Lake Harriet and Lake Calhoun, and every day, hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people get actual EXERCISE for FREE, as opposed to paying exorbitant prices to sit on their butts drinking beer and eating hot dogs while watching some spoiled semi-delinquents get 100 times the average annual income for chasing a ball around.

Any rundown, rat-ridden dump of a city can have a sports team--and many of them do. Only Minneapolis has an amazing network of lakes and creeks and rivers connected by parkways, bikepaths, and footpaths.

I absolutely would not miss any of the professional sports teams. They'll leave even after new stadiums are built if someone in another city cuts them another deal. They are utterly unworthy of the worship that sports fanatics give them, because they do not return the loyalty. It's a co-dependent relationship. The millionaire team owners play on the abject devotion of the fans, many of whom are struggling to get by financially, and play them for suckers. They're the perfect Republicans.

Pro sports teams are purely money-making operations, and as such, they don't deserve to have governments build them new facilities any more than say, Marshall Field should have come to local governments and said, "We won't sell our stores if you build us new ones."

Losing the Twins and the Vikings would be a momentary blip on the history of the Twin Cities. Losing our parks--and our schools and libraries and public health facilities and public infrastructure-- would be a disaster that future generations would curse us for.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

17. Nice loaded question. It's not "honest" in any sense of the word.

Public money for rich team owners is the same as corporate welfare.
They give the same excuses: "investing in Company X will bring money back to the community." Ask St. Cloud about that. They waived the property taxes on Fingerhut's new warehous for 20 years, put the city out $25 million dollars, and the company FOLDED less than ten years later. They also moved over 400 jobs to the Twin Cities, after promising to create 400 jobs in St. Cloud.
They guaranteed that they would create 400 jobs. We didn't trust them. When we tried to warn the city council of this, we received this smarmy reply: "the reality is that they're creating 400 new jobs."

No public money for rich team owners. It's that simple, and it's a progressive answer. It's the same as corporate welfare. Pohland is one of the richest team owners in MLB. He got this team for a steal back in the day. And the Twins are not his only business venture, I assure you. Even if the stadium is "public", like Northwest states, it will be extrememly expensive to host any kind of event in there. Ticket prices for Twins games will double, at least, as will Vikings tickets. And Northwest forgot about one other thing. The Vikings don't want to share their stadium with anyone. Period. The U of M wants their own stadium, too, so that's what...three stadiums now? The Metrodome is used for Twins/Vikings events almost 190 days out of the year. That leaves around 175 days for other events. (I'm not including the Gophers becuase I don't know how many games they play).
Red McCombs wants to sell the Vikings for probably around double what he paid for it, so he obviouly thinks they're valuable.
The dome is used less than 190 days out of the year for Twins/Vikings games. That leaves approximately 175 days where there are other events going on, or the Dome lies empty. So who's fault is that that they can't bring in the revenue?

Paying public money for this is corporate welfare, becuase the statiums will not be totally for public use. We've got serious issues to solve in Minnesota, and right now, honestly, there's a lot more important things to deal with than whiny sports team owners.

[Worst Username Ever]

18. I don't understand how people can confuse a private enterprise with being

a public piece of property. The Vikes are a privately owned company, purchased by an individual in 1998. Like all corporations, the Vikings are in business to make money for their owner. Otherwise the owner would not have made the investment to begin with. The company is not public property.

That being said, why would be give public money, or even have a state-sponsored bonding bill, that would give money to a private company?? Yes, tax revenue can certainly be used for the common good, but there are other corporations in MN that make a hell of a lot more money than the Vikes, and they don't get state-sponsored monies. Target Corp and TCF Bank, noteably, both built their new headquarters/places of business in downtown minnepolis. Target Corp brings in MILLION UPON MILLIONS in tax revenue via sales and state income tax for the state. I believe the Vikings ENTIRE operating revenue was under 200 million last year, not even close. So why do Target and TCF have to create their place of business with their own money, whereas this other company, the Vikings, get help from the state? It is corporate welfare, nothing else.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

21. I don't understand, either.

I think what the original poster is saying is that the parks would be "public" (except for 162 plus days the Twins are using it and the 21 plus days the Vikings are using their stadium) But it would still be pretty expensive to rent either place. As for concerts, the Twin Cities have two excellent concert venues (Target Center and XCel Center) and we'd still have that damn Metrodome, because neither team wants to play somewhere else for the five plus years that we'd have to demolish the dome and build something else in its place.
Like I said, this state's strapped for cash. Fix the roads, the schools, the poverty. Then give the Vikes and the Twins their precious stadiums.
And no, I don't care if Minnesota becomes a "cold Omaha". We'll survive. Even thrive. We've got a LOT more to offer than just the Twins and Vikings. We've got hockey, and next years NBA champions. (Hey, I can dream, can't I?)

[Nobody]

22. Hop on down to your local bank, Pohlad

And do what I have to do when I want to make home improvements. Get a loan and pay it back.

The voters have spoken three times and three times we have said no to blackmail.

The Twins and Vikings aren't going anywhere. No other city wants to build a new stadium either.

I'd be in favor of the state of MN buying the teams. Green Bay did that and look how well it's worked out.

[Morning Dew]

23. Too many remember

how the ugly, friggin' Metrodome got crammed down our throats - that'll leave a bad taste for a loooonnnnnnnggggg time

[loveable liberal]

24. where can i help the twins and vikings pack?

pohlad is a scumbag, mccombs is a scumbag, police, fire depts and teachers are being let go and these two want free stadiums?scum-bags, scumbags scumbags, sperm gurglers....st paul saints game is more fun any day of the week, and believe me, high school football is more fun to watch than plastic old vikings crap. lemme know where i can help move'em out of state. believe me....we'll manage to survive.

[shaggy_b_nasty]

25. You people slay me!

This whole business with the new stadiums has been going on for years now. The sanctimonious attitude of “I’m not paying for a billionaire’s playground” completely misses the point. The reality of the situation is this…I WONT GO TO THE DOME TO WATCH BASEBALL!!!!

I love baseball, I will sit and watch the Padres vs. Expos on a Sat. afternoon, on TV, to the detriment of my lawn getting cut, but if you gave me FREE tickets to the dome I wouldn’t go. And the reason is simple … IT SUCKS!!!

Now don’t get me wrong, I think the utter selfishness of the ownership of both the Twins and Vikes is a big reason for why the attitude in the state is the way it is when it comes to new stadiums. Both owners have clearly indicated that the teams are “investments” for which they deserve to make a profit with above all else. Both have threatened to move or closedown the teams if they don’t get what they want, unlike Glen Taylor and the Wolves. Glen is a true fan of basketball and (I’m pretty sure) took a loss on earnings with the team last year.

But the thing I don’t understand is this … why is it ok to spend MILLIONS of taxpayer dollars every winter putting lights on every damn tree in the metro area?

Seriously, 4 years ago I watched as no less than 12 guys using two trucks that had to cost $250,000 a piece, spend a week … yes A WEEK … putting lights up on the trees in Mears Park in downtown St. Paul … A WEEK OF LABOR AND EQUIPMENT TO PUT LIGHTS UP ON TREES!!! That is your and my money kids!!!! But the best part was the homeless people they chased out of the park “for their own safety” … And I thought to myself (after wondering how in the hell the St. Paul leadership, local media, and BOTH Political parties could sleep at night with that constant smell from having their head so firmly shoved up their ass) … “Hey, if maybe we skipped this exercise in insanity for a year, maybe we could build the new stadiums and a few homeless shelters to boot.”

I fully understand the rational of the people that don’t want to spend taxpayer dollars on “private business”, but what I don’t understand is the brain dead closed mindedness of people that feel that way, yet love to drive around the cities in December saying “look at all the pretty lights” … if you are wondering what that smell is … pull your head out … and let me have a place to go and watch my favorite sport …

And if you are going to tell me “go watch the St. Paul Saints” … I do, but I will never see the likes of Greg Maddox or Barry Bonds at a Saint’s game.

[SmileyBoy]

26. Thank you, and welcome to DU!!!

:hi:

[loveable liberal]

27. lights? thats a pretty weak argument

lets say each of those lights is 1 watt. that single light has to run 1000 hours to equal 1 kilowatt hour, which equals after taxes etc 7.5 cents. now admittedly, there are thousands and thousands of the lights, but dont compare seasonal lights in city streets to millions and millions of dollars in public debt. thats if those lights are even 1 watt.....week of labor, still hardly compares.....dont tell me the winter carnival doesnt bring money into downtown st paul, the lights are part of the ambience.

you'll never see maddux or bonds at a twins game either, unless the schedule allows for it. pohlad is too cheap to bring a guy like that in.

[shaggy_b_nasty]

30. I was talking about the labor to put them up and take them down

I hadn't even considered the cost of running the lights, that just makes me more pissed off.

Thanks for pointing that out to me... and I know I wont see bonds or maddox (especially since they are NL) but the point I was making is that the best players play in MLB not the Northern League

[newyawker99]

31. Hi shaggy_b_nasty!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[LTR]

28. Government-funded stadiums should only be built as a civic investment, IMO

Whoever foots the bill should make some sort of generous return. And I believe it can be done. Imagine another lucrative revenue stream that can be used to fund other projects, such as libraries, parks and schools.

Plus, surrounding businesses and businesses that make money off teams like the Vikings and the Twins make money, enhancing the local employment and revenue bases, and tax money is sent back to the government.

No government should be blackmailed or shafted by a stadium project. But a win-win situation can be achieved. Look what happened in St. Paul with Xcel Arena.

I hope new facilities are built for the Vikings and Twins. Whether you are a sports fan or not, they do contribute to civic pride.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

29. The only deal I could even consider would be:

1) Insist that the government entity have full ownership of the stadiums

2) Charge the teams an arm and a leg to use them--so that it they end up paying as much in the long run as they would building the stadium on their own dime.

3) Insist that for each sky box seat or VIP seat, there be three "affordable" seats, which are sold on a first-come, first-served basis for no more than the price of a movie ticket.

But even then, the experience of other cities has been that the jobs generated are mostly minimum wage, and the spillover business is not large enough to offset the cost of the stadium.

Civic pride? Give me a break! A private business, owned by millionaires, that hires other millionaires who have no personal connection to the city to run around chasing a ball, and that serves as a way to give still other millionaires "entertainment" tax breaks is your source of civic pride? That's really sad when you thnk about it, and it shows how much our society has been brainwashed into thinking that pro sports are really, earthshakingly important and the source of one's identity.

I'd rather be proud of Minneapolis' thriving arts scene, where people do what they love for very little money, or of our splendid park system.

Any rust belt dump of a city can have a stupid sports team.

[Spike from MN]

32. Xcel Center not a win-win situation

Sorry to have to disagree with you on this one RatTerrior but St. Paul taxpayers really got shafted regarding the Xcel Center. John Marty had an excellent write-up about this years ago that detailed just how badly Norm Coleman and friends stuck it to the taxpayers of St. Paul. Basically, St. Paul sees ZERO revenue for anything -- not tickets, not concessions, not parking...nothing. Most of those things were contracted to out-of-state buddies of Norm and friends so we don't even get the taxes on those things. What's more, it was specifically written in to the contracts that St. Paul is NOT to receive any revenue. So what do St. Paulites get out of the deal? We GET to pay maintenance on the building. Yes, that's right. We see NONE of the money coming in and we get shafted with the bill for upkeep. Yep, ol' Norm really screwed us over big time.

I always like it when the pro-stadium groups argue that the increased business will result in a greater tax revenue and thus enable the city to LOWER tax rates for taxpayers. If that was true, how come my taxes continue to go up every year? According to them, I shouldn't be paying a dime in property taxes by now thanks to the Xcel Center the the huge increase in business it has brought to St. Paul. Using public money to build a stadium is nothing more than corporate welfare and I will actively campaign against any and all stadium bills that take so much as one dime of taxpayer money.

[newyawker99]

33. Hi Spike from MN!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Spike from MN]

35. Thanks!

Happy to be aboard!