Vikings Stadium Legislation/Financing Package

Introductions - Urban Issues - Miscellaneous News, Topics, Interests
User avatar
Nick
Capella Tower
Posts: 3007
Joined: May 30th, 2012, 9:33 pm
Location: Loring Park, Minneapolis

Vikings Stadium Legislation/Financing Package

Postby Nick » November 26th, 2012, 3:46 pm

I made an executive decision as the great and powerful Grand Poobah moderator to break this off and create a separate topic. I'm really not trying to squelch discussion (because I, even as a stadium supporter, realize the financing package is made up) but it's going to get incredibly distracting in the future as every single new user on the forum feels the need to write three paragraphs about how OUTRAGED they are about the circumvention of the City Charter. They won't be able to tell you a single thing about the rest of the City Charter (Granola: Banned?) but by gummit they have to make their voice heard. The stadium will be built. That topic is for that conversation.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6207
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby twincitizen » December 17th, 2012, 11:40 am

http://journalmpls.wordpress.com/2012/1 ... s-stadium/

City sales taxes are slightly above projected 2% annual growth YTD, especially the 3% downtown booze tax. The biggest overall contributor, however, is the citywide .5% sales tax.

I don't like the bit about how the more sales tax the city generates, the more they contribute to the stadium authority. I mean, where does the extra (unexpected) money go? How dare our city leaders allow that part of the law to stand. The MPLS city council certainly could have taken a stand on that specific provision of the bill, in order to get their approval. I would've argued that the increased proceeds should be used for economic development projects like redeveloping Nicollet-Lake, rebuilding the Northside, streetcars, etc. Or there's always property tax relief, as promised.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7941
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby mattaudio » December 17th, 2012, 11:48 am

Shouldn't it just go away sooner if the city contribution gets paid faster than anticipated?

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5832
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby MNdible » December 17th, 2012, 1:12 pm

Copied:

From the referenced Strib article:

If those tax revenues increase faster, the city's contribution to stadium operations and capital reserves would rise at the same pace -- but no more than 5 percent per year. Under a separate section of the bill, growth in the taxes beyond 2 percent would also give the city extra money for economic development and send a smaller pot of funds to the state.

And...

"If the city taxes come in over 2 percent, and I think they're at 6 percent growth this year, the first million goes back to the city," he said. "But the next 2 million above that ... we get half of the next 2 million. And it's split going forward."

Tyler
Foshay Tower
Posts: 881
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:10 am

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby Tyler » December 17th, 2012, 1:19 pm

Yep. The most idiotic portion of that agreement. Like the stadium is somehow the cause of any growth.
Towns!

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5832
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby MNdible » December 17th, 2012, 1:39 pm

For the record, prior to this agreement, the city did not have access to this money. It was dedicated exclusively for paying off the Convention Center. In theory, this plan will now give them access to a portion of this money. Also, the extra money going to the stadium pot presumably will enable future improvements to the facility that will (hope springs eternal) keep it relevant beyond the 30 year lease.

User avatar
woofner
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1327
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:04 am

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby woofner » December 17th, 2012, 1:58 pm

MNdible wrote:For the record, prior to this agreement, the city did not have access to this money. It was dedicated exclusively for paying off the Convention Center. In theory, this plan will now give them access to a portion of this money. Also, the extra money going to the stadium pot presumably will enable future improvements to the facility that will (hope springs eternal) keep it relevant beyond the 30 year lease.
Diane Loeffler disagrees with you:

http://www.startribune.com/printarticle/?id=147335145
"Who rescued whom!"

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5832
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby MNdible » December 17th, 2012, 4:19 pm

It's much easier to say that she was correct now that the stadium legislation has passed and the DFL controls all of the levers of power in government.

I'm no superfan of the stadium legislation, but I think it's too easy to pick apart legislation after the fact and second guess who could have negotiated harder for a better deal. I'm confident that the city of Minneapolis is better off with the stadium legislation that it would have been without it, even though it disgusts me that the NFL can hold cities hostage.

User avatar
woofner
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1327
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:04 am

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby woofner » December 18th, 2012, 12:00 am

Loeffler wrote and got her bill passed several years before the stadium hail mary was completed. This money has been there for Minneapolis to play with since 2009, and I'll never believe RT that he looked into it previously unless he produces documents.

Many of us (well, not me so much as Diane Loeffler, Lisa Goodman, and Gary Schiff) were picking apart the stadium scam before the fact, too. It's not so much about negotiating for a better deal as it's about the fact that any stadium that the City finances is a bad deal for the City. We already have an arena and a convention center, what really do we gain by keeping this stadium here? I can see the argument for the state to finance a football stadium downtown, but frankly the City is only blowing dough that it otherwise pretends not to have.

But this is yet another argument we've already had. *Le Sigh*
"Who rescued whom!"

min-chi-cbus
Capella Tower
Posts: 3131
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 9:19 am

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby min-chi-cbus » December 18th, 2012, 8:13 am

Maybe the team should now be called the "Minneapolis Vikings" if the State isn't doing anything to help support the team/stadium?

moda253
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 145
Joined: June 27th, 2012, 3:28 pm
Contact:

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby moda253 » December 18th, 2012, 9:02 am

I love me some grapes. I prefer that they aren't sour but still. Love me some grapes.

Didier
Capella Tower
Posts: 2438
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 10:11 am
Location: MSP

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby Didier » December 18th, 2012, 9:19 am

Can we just stop this discussion before it goes further? The state is paying a substantial amount for the stadium through electric pulltabs. Minneapolis is hardly paying for the thing by itself.

min-chi-cbus
Capella Tower
Posts: 3131
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 9:19 am

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby min-chi-cbus » December 18th, 2012, 9:46 am

That's what I thought but got the indication that it was somehow falling unfairly upon the City only. No harm, no foul.

User avatar
Nathan
IDS Center
Posts: 4003
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:42 am

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby Nathan » December 18th, 2012, 10:12 am

I've read a number of articles with a lot of really good economic facts about the impact of a stadium saying that they never pay for themselves, especially the city, and I don't argue against that. I do however disagree that the city isn't getting something out of it. If this stadium is as iconic as one can hope, the builders, and stadium association promise, we'll all be privileged to have it in Minneapolis. I think that having it in the city guarantees that it is a good investment for the state and team as well. While we may have gotten a large functional decent looking stadium in Arden Hills, you know the design and selection process would not have been as meticulous. This is big for the city, and I don't think we need to doubt that they don't want another Metrodome Area. We talk about how Stadiums never engage the city (especially development), but Minneapolis isn't a city that likes to follow a lot of rules, so why not figure it out. We're a very diverse city, this will continue that tradition, and sense of civic pride.

moda253
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 145
Joined: June 27th, 2012, 3:28 pm
Contact:

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby moda253 » December 18th, 2012, 1:09 pm

Here's a hint that it will benefit the city... once it looked like the team was either going to leave or go to Arden Hills, it was tooth and nail to keep them in the city? Why? Because the city wanted the headache? Please. Stadiums do not make money on the gate. they make money in a lot of other ways in attracting people to your area. And when they are there they do other things than just go to the game. Some may even choose to relocate to the are after visiting here and tehn we collect tax on them every single day of the year. It's called having a mix of attractions and the NFL (even if only 8-12 games a year) is a major attraction. Aside from that the stadium will house other major events which are also a draw to the area.

Above and beyond that there will still be roller dome.... Which will probably pay for the the stadium all on it's own.




^^ that is a really bad joke.

User avatar
Nick
Capella Tower
Posts: 3007
Joined: May 30th, 2012, 9:33 pm
Location: Loring Park, Minneapolis

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby Nick » December 18th, 2012, 1:21 pm

Soooo...votes in favor of splitting the Vikings Stadium thread into one about the stadium and one about arguing about the stadium?

User avatar
Nathan
IDS Center
Posts: 4003
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:42 am

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby Nathan » December 18th, 2012, 1:55 pm

Nick wrote:Soooo...votes in favor of splitting the Vikings Stadium thread into one about the stadium and one about arguing about the stadium?
Is there a difference? Is there any pure stadium talk until we see actual info in February? At which point the thread will moderate itself?

Viktor Vaughn
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 607
Joined: July 10th, 2012, 6:37 pm

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby Viktor Vaughn » December 18th, 2012, 10:41 pm

Nick wrote:Soooo...votes in favor of splitting the Vikings Stadium thread into one about the stadium and one about arguing about the stadium?
Sorry, but this stadium is inseparable from the bs that got it built. I'm sorry your tired of hearing it, but this folly is just getting started. As we go along, we get to see how these "negotiated" details are implemented, such as where the 2,500 subsidized parking spaces will be built in Downtown East. The taxes for the Minneapolis contribution won't start getting collected until 2020, and we have yet to see if the epulltabs will cover the state share -- and whether they'll muck up every decent bar in the state.

My formerly anti-stadium Mayor decided to tax every citizen of Minneapolis to replace a perfectly good stadium that had become economically obsolete. Meaning, the millions of private profit generated from this public asset was not enough for the wealthy team owner to earn return on investment equal to his peers. So we're paying for a new stadium that can generate more money for the owner because it has luxury boxes to be rented out to corporations and amenities for rich people to enjoy. Minneapolis politicians went against the vast majority of residents, issued a bogus legal opinion to evade a charter amendment, and voted to redistribute wealth upwards. Now because it's law, all this is a moot point? You're tired of hearing about it?

Split comments off into a different thread if you want, or delete them all together. But this stadium is inseparable from the deal that created it, so it's going to keep coming up.

User avatar
Nick
Capella Tower
Posts: 3007
Joined: May 30th, 2012, 9:33 pm
Location: Loring Park, Minneapolis

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby Nick » December 18th, 2012, 11:06 pm

Viktor Vaughn wrote:
Nick wrote:Soooo...votes in favor of splitting the Vikings Stadium thread into one about the stadium and one about arguing about the stadium?
Sorry, but this stadium is inseparable from the bs that got it built. I'm sorry your tired of hearing it, but this folly is just getting started. As we go along, we get to see how these "negotiated" details are implemented, such as where the 2,500 subsidized parking spaces will be built in Downtown East. The taxes for the Minneapolis contribution won't start getting collected until 2020, and we have yet to see if the epulltabs will cover the state share -- and whether they'll muck up every decent bar in the state.

My formerly anti-stadium Mayor decided to tax every citizen of Minneapolis to replace a perfectly good stadium that had become economically obsolete. Meaning, the millions of private profit generated from this public asset was not enough for the wealthy team owner to earn return on investment equal to his peers. So we're paying for a new stadium that can generate more money for the owner because it has luxury boxes to be rented out to corporations and amenities for rich people to enjoy. Minneapolis politicians went against the vast majority of residents, issued a bogus legal opinion to evade a charter amendment, and voted to redistribute wealth upwards. Now because it's law, all this is a moot point? You're tired of hearing about it?

Split comments off into a different thread if you want, or delete them all together. But this stadium is inseparable from the deal that created it, so it's going to keep coming up.
I have not heard any of these arguments before. It's totally new information that isn't repeated more or less verbatim on this thread every page back to page one and back to page one of the Minnescraper thread.

The point is that if every new user feels the need to write three paragraphs about how they're mad the stadium got approved, I'm going to have an aneurysm before any shovels even get in the ground.

User avatar
Nathan
IDS Center
Posts: 4003
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:42 am

Re: Vikings Stadium

Postby Nathan » December 18th, 2012, 11:28 pm

Nick wrote:
Viktor Vaughn wrote:
Nick wrote:Soooo...votes in favor of splitting the Vikings Stadium thread into one about the stadium and one about arguing about the stadium?
Sorry, but this stadium is inseparable from the bs that got it built. I'm sorry your tired of hearing it, but this folly is just getting started. As we go along, we get to see how these "negotiated" details are implemented, such as where the 2,500 subsidized parking spaces will be built in Downtown East. The taxes for the Minneapolis contribution won't start getting collected until 2020, and we have yet to see if the epulltabs will cover the state share -- and whether they'll muck up every decent bar in the state.

My formerly anti-stadium Mayor decided to tax every citizen of Minneapolis to replace a perfectly good stadium that had become economically obsolete. Meaning, the millions of private profit generated from this public asset was not enough for the wealthy team owner to earn return on investment equal to his peers. So we're paying for a new stadium that can generate more money for the owner because it has luxury boxes to be rented out to corporations and amenities for rich people to enjoy. Minneapolis politicians went against the vast majority of residents, issued a bogus legal opinion to evade a charter amendment, and voted to redistribute wealth upwards. Now because it's law, all this is a moot point? You're tired of hearing about it?

Split comments off into a different thread if you want, or delete them all together. But this stadium is inseparable from the deal that created it, so it's going to keep coming up.
I have not heard any of these arguments before. It's totally new information that isn't repeated more or less verbatim on this thread every page back to page one and back to page one of the Minnescraper thread.

The point is that if every new user feels the need to write three paragraphs about how they're mad the stadium got approved, I'm going to have an aneurysm before any shovels even get in the ground.
Maybe you need to take some lessons from Leslie Knope, see how she makes it through public forums ;) or the chances you'll off yourself will increase with every batch of fresh faces... And I don't think anyone wants that...


Return to “Anything Goes”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest