Xcel Energy Center

[thespeedmccool]

I feel like I'm the only progressive on Earth not offended by public investments in stadiums.

I get that there are probably better ways to spend $200 million, but that doesn't change the fact that I see stadiums as public infrastructure that therefore deserve public investment.

I also think the side benefits of stadiums vastly exceed the costs. Team spur added development, increase sales tax revenue, are enjoyed by citizens, help foster a sense of common identity in the state, and are the only reason many Americans and global citizens have even heard of Minnesota.

To me, the argument shouldn't be "That $200 million should be spent on something else" but rather "If we can build a legislative majority to spend $200 million dollars on something positive, we should do it."

[uptownbro]

Like any project it depends. What will they spend the money on within the stadium. Do they improve the outside to make it more usable besides when a game is happening. Better connection to downtown. Can we make a deal where the state spends X but then the owner invests X amount in that area of downtown.
Not all stadium deals are bad. I would even say US bank has helped(but not he only reason) turn part of downtown Minneapolis from a sea of parking lots to a dynamic area.

[Didier]

There’s an exactly 0 percent chance that the Wild are angling to replace Xcel Energy Center with a brand new arena.

[BigIdeasGuy]

Correct, there is currently 0 reason to do a full scale replacement of the X. It's still very well thought of across the league, loved by fans and far superior to the Target Center for concerts. For an original construction price of $170 million the X is the best & most important invest in St. Paul has made in DT in the last 25 year(I'll listen to a case for the Green Line). That said it's 25 years old and like any type of building that age it's time that it's going to need investment and updating beyond a new coat of paint and new seats.

Last time I was in the building I remember it being in good shape but just really well loved, used and dated at points. Since it was built new fan amenity concepts, grab and go mini markets have been been created for example, that all fans benefit from. That is the type of stuff that the average fan will benefit from not just the rich. It's not a flawless building, the concourse having flow issues and pinch points being one, that the team & city are hopefully addressed, I would venture a guess there is a laundry list of items like that could use dollars. And yes part of any renovation is probably going to go updating and creating new premium areas, the demand and importance of those areas has only increased in the last 25 year.

It will be interesting to see how extensive and large they are thinking or if they are looking at expanding as well. You could add a bunch of new usable space by building out along both Kellogg and 5th. I think the entrance at 7th and Kellogg could use an expansion along with the one along 5th next to the Roy, my crazy idea is to turn that into a lighthouse looking space in anticipation of Riverview coming through eventually.

I get all the objections to arenas & stadiums they certainly don't pay for themselves on their own and it's debatable at best if you include surrounding developments & bars. All that said there is a lot of really positive intangible benefits from having a NHL/NBA caliber arena in DT. It bring concerts and shows, gets people DT (a constant complaint), it advertises the city and state on national TV, builds civic pride, gives people something to unite around, etc.

I would also point out that the worst decision that could be made is deciding not to invest in any meaningful way and letting the building start to rot. It would cost tens of millions to billions more to rebuild the arena or do a massive rehab vs preforming regular upgrades & maintenance. So in summery complain and bitch about the money being spent then enjoy a Wild game, your favorite band in concert, Disney on Ice with family or watching the niece/nephew in the state tournament in a great building vs a dump.

[thespeedmccool]

Like any project it depends. What will they spend the money on within the stadium. Do they improve the outside to make it more usable besides when a game is happening. Better connection to downtown. Can we make a deal where the state spends X but then the owner invests X amount in that area of downtown.
Not all stadium deals are bad. I would even say US bank has helped(but not he only reason) turn part of downtown Minneapolis from a sea of parking lots to a dynamic area.

Totally agree, but I think the predominant position on the left is that all stadiums are bad public investments. Lots of people who I really respect have exactly the right take on nearly every issue but categorically reject any stadium project getting public money.

And wow, I didn't realize how cheap the X was to build. Great bang for our buck in the era of billion dollar stadiums. So long as the investments are primarily for broader public (i.e., not just luxury boxes), include some streetscape enhancements, and are at least partially privately financed, I really have no problem with a $200 million public contribution.

[Mdcastle]

I don't think anyone's going to argue we shouldn't fix the cracks in the foundation if that's the issue. The problem is I have a feeling the issue is going to be not enough luxury suites rather than cracks in the foundations.

Haven't there been study after study that show that sports teams don't actually generate any new taxes, but mainly shift taxes from other things? After all, if you're buying a Wild ticket chances are your food, clothing and shelter are paid for. If you don't spend it on a Wild ticket chances are you'll buy tickets to Valleyfair or the Zoo or maybe a new graphics card for your computer, all things that also generate sales taxes, rather than squirreling it away in your IRA for 30 years.

Target Center or even the old Met Center would have been just fine for state tournaments and Disney.

What's the benefit to Minnesota if a guy from New York suddenly realizes that Minnesota is a state because the Islanders are playing the Wild?

[thespeedmccool]

Haven't there been study after study that show that sports teams don't actually generate any new taxes, but mainly shift taxes from other things? After all, if you're buying a Wild ticket chances are your food, clothing and shelter are paid for. If you don't spend it on a Wild ticket chances are you'll buy tickets to Valleyfair or the Zoo or maybe a new graphics card for your computer, all things that also generate sales taxes, rather than squirreling it away in your IRA for 30 years.

The overall tax impact is murky, but it's worth pointing out that the X draws sales taxes to St. Paul, away from Shakopee and Apple Valley. Cities kinda compete for spending in that way. There's a reason municipalities compete for stadiums.

The tax logic can make the state's stake in it questionable, but St. Paul has huge incentive to keep the Wild in downtown.

What's the benefit to Minnesota if a guy from New York suddenly realizes that Minnesota is a state because the Islanders are playing the Wild?

The benefit there is admittedly hard to quantify, but there is serious benefit to being "seen" as a state. I have a buddy from NYC who only knew Minnesota from the Timberwolves before we met. That we have teams reminds people, at a very basic level, that Minnesota exists, and adds to the cultural clout of the area; we're otherwise a very nondescript area and region. It might sound silly, but there are absolutely CEOs that won't start a new company or office in a city without an NHL team, or might not even be aware of that city because they don't have a team.

Not to mention that teams can draw international attention too. The Wolves have a strangely large following in Brazil, which has doubtlessly influenced some tourist spending, and maybe even immigration.

Again, this is hard to quantify and does sound kinda silly, but really put yourself in the shoes of someone for whom spectator sports are everything, and it makes some sense. It gives the impression that Minnesota is a real state, not some entirely irredeemable flyover state full of country bumpkins like Iowa, Nebraska, the Dakotas, etc.

[BigIdeasGuy]

I don't think anyone's going to argue we shouldn't fix the cracks in the foundation if that's the issue. The problem is I have a feeling the issue is going to be not enough luxury suites rather than cracks in the foundations.

I absolutely get where you are coming from on this, I really do. I feel like you are viewing any renovation as a binary, black and white choice of either only structural & critical system or only doing things the top 1% will benefit from. I believe that is the incorrect way to look at any renovation, it's a continuum with every shade of grey possible.

There are plenty of improvements everyone who buys a ticket would benefit from not just the people in the luxury suites. Things like improved concourse flow, more efficient bathrooms, improved concessions (choices, speed, quality, etc.), faster entrance & exits, more vertical circulation, better lighting are all examples of things everyone would benefit from. There are so many additional things that could also benefit everyone.

Based on what we currently know it's far to early to say exactly what the Wild are planning, what the funding sources would be much less what it would cost. I would venture a guess that if this is the first large scale renovation funding would come from both a public body along with money from ownership as well. I would point to Target Field as a great example of how investing and improving a facility like this can benefit everyone who walks in using money from both the public and ownership

[thespeedmccool]

I think a lot of the reaction against stadiums comes from the feeling that so many were replaced from 1990-2020 (and truly many were), but that was because so many stadiums built from 1950-1990 were cheap junk.

A lot more stadiums built today have the feeling that they're designed to be the permanent homes of their teams than cookie-cutter, bargain-bin trash. I don't think, for example, that the Twins are moving from Target Field in my lifetime; that's a great stadium, great location, great amenities, etc. Bound to be a classic stadium in 20 years. Build it great, and they will stay.

All this to say that I think the wave of anti-stadium sentiment is ignoring the fact that a lot of teams may have moved into "permanent homes" over the last 20 years that won't be asking for a new stadium for many, many years.

(Maybe I'm underestimating the miserliness of the capitalist class. I guess we'll find out.)

[HKM]

Don't kill the messenger, but maybe the most under-covered local news story imo is how the Timberwolves/Lynx and Wild all have leases expiring in 2035. If (when) Minneapolis considers publicly funding a shiny new arena with a bunch of new premium seating, there is a very real possibility that a deal adding the 41 NHL dates and other (currently at Xcel) events to a new Wolves/Lynx arena helps give the project significantly more cover for Minneapolis politicians than doing just a new arena with no net new event days.

[thespeedmccool]

Don't kill the messenger, but maybe the most under-covered local news story imo is how the Timberwolves/Lynx and Wild all have leases expiring in 2035. If (when) Minneapolis considers publicly funding a shiny new arena with a bunch of new premium seating, there is a very real possibility that a deal adding the 41 NHL dates and other (currently at Xcel) events to a new Wolves/Lynx arena helps give the project significantly more cover for Minneapolis politicians than doing just a new arena with no net new event days.

My take on that is that I think it's more likely that the Wild renew their lease than not in 2035. The X is still one of the better NHL arenas and will be right back up near the top with renovations. IDK if the Wild or Wolves/Lynx want to share an arena either.

[BigIdeasGuy]

Getting off topic on this but I would be shocked if either DT is willing to give up their NBA/NHL franchises to the other along with the additional dates the arena is booked with WNBA/PWHL/concerts/events/shows/conferences/etc. I also have the impression that both ownership groups would prefer to stay in current DT's vs switching. All that's to say both all parties involved have the incentive & motivation to extend the status quo. The unknown I see is where is MPLS city politics at that point and how much interest do they in supporting the DT business community?

I looked into this last night and are 10 examples of an arena being shared between a NBA & NHL franchise so it can work. In 4 cases the arena and teams are controlled by the same ownership (Denver, DC, MSG, Toronto). The other 6 breaks down as follows

Dallas-The city owns the arena & it's operated by a joint venture between the teams
Boston-The arena is owned & operated by the parent company of the Boston Bruins
Detroit-The City's Downtown Development Authority & operated by a joint venture between the teams, it's worth noting the construction was driven by the Red Wings & the Pistons announced they would be moving in well after construction was underway
Chicago-Owned & operated by a joint venture between the teams
Philly-The arena is owned & operated by the parent company of Flyers
LA-AEG owns & operates the arena and they own the Kings as well. AEG had a stake in the Lakers which was sold in 2021. The Clippers are moving out in 2024

So there are certainly model out there that work and can succeed. I doubt that will be the final outcome here but's there is precedent for it. I would also point out none of the cities listed above the 2 centers of gravity that do compete at times like we have.

[Didier]

It's only a matter of time before the Timberwolves get serious about a new arena — both with the condition of the Target Center and new ownership about to take over. On paper there's an argument for just moving them into Xcel, but in the real world that's hard to imagine. The big question will be what the team asks of the public.

Local appetite for subsidizing these stadiums had clearly soured by the 2010s, and Allianz Field as a result was mostly private. But soccer also wasn't established yet, whereas the Timberwolves are, as of this writing, on a trajectory to win the NBA championship this season. Just saying.

As others have mentioned, whenever the topic of stadiums comes up the discussion often resorts to reductive talking points from several years ago. There are of course legitimate reasons to oppose public financing on principal, but a lot has changed, and there's also wide variation in the specific situations. Arguably, the Twin Cities has the best overall stadium situation of any major city in the country in terms of quality / location / public debt. It might not even be arguable.

Another other key factor is that sports owners are increasingly viewing stadiums as part of larger development projects, which, in turn, makes them even more money. This was the (yet unrealized) philosophy around Allianz Field, with the owner clearly believing an investment in the stadium would pay off in part by also being able to redevelop a giant swath of the land around it. So, if the Timberwolves eventually want to build a brand new arena, will they simply look for a new arena, or will they try to find a larger plot where they can also build apartments and an "entertainment district" of some sort? And if so, how will that affect the potential locations and public asks?

Frankly, I can't imagine the Timberwolves wanting to move out of Minneapolis, nor the city letting that happen. There have been rumors about a potential new arena essentially behind the current Target Center, which would still utilize the existing big-event infrastructure (e.g. the A, B, C ramps) while allowing Target Center to remain open during construction, but at this point it's probably way too early to predict what will happen.

[VacantLuxuries]

I think site choice and vision for the area would play a huge role in whether more public stadium investment is worthwhile.

I don't know how they'd fit a stadium behind Target Center, frankly. But if they were hoping to reuse existing parking infrastructure, they could consider the block sized vacant lot at 2nd Ave/9th St., making use of the Convention Center's ramp capacity instead of the ABC ramps. They'd lose the direct train access, but they'd bring a lot of energy and active use to a less activated part of downtown, with a lot of underutilized land ripe for redevelopment.

And there's always the possibility of a Timberwolves version of the MN United vision for the Royalston Station area.

[altus4]

Hmm... multiple signals that they're interested in something.

MinnPost: Minnesota Wild taps former state budget director as lobbyist. Is a public ask for Xcel Energy Center renovations next?

[Didier]

I don't know how they'd fit a stadium behind Target Center, frankly.

This might be the Royalston Station spot you mention, but there's a big parking lot behind Target Field (and adjacent to Royalston Avenue on one side) that I believe is the location I've heard speculation about.

[SurlyLHT]

Hmm... multiple signals that they're interested in something.

MinnPost: Minnesota Wild taps former state budget director as lobbyist. Is a public ask for Xcel Energy Center renovations next?

I wouldn't mind the Wolve's going in on something with the Wild if it meant large development in Downtown St. Paul. There is more space there and less happening overall.

[BoredAgain]

I don't know how they'd fit a stadium behind Target Center, frankly.

This might be the Royalston Station spot you mention, but there's a big parking lot behind Target Field (and adjacent to Royalston Avenue on one side) that I believe is the location I've heard speculation about.

That's the target field loading dock and VIP event parking. I'm not sure they would/could develop at least some of that area.

[Tom H.]

This might be totally ridiculous, but is the Basset Creek Station area at all amenable to a stadium-centric development? It might be too narrow and probably lacking in parking potential, but would have good transit and okay freeway access.

[Mdcastle]

Arguably, the Twin Cities has the best overall stadium situation of any major city in the country in terms of quality / location / public debt.

So how does our region compare with how much the average taxpayer is paying for them? I know every single person in Hennepin County is paying for the Twins Stadium every time they buy anything other than food or clothing even if they don't like baseball and never even go downtown, but how does that compare to other metro areas?