Found it interesting that one story is talking about 3 Mpls locations for the new Viking stadium where we kick in $650 million plus. The next story was how the 2012 state shortfall could be between $500 million and 1 billion dollars. 
Good luck Zig, you are going to need it. 
Naw, wilf will do just fine, the fact we’re in over our backsides in debt is not gonna stop them politicans from earning them white unlabeled envelopes they’ll be getting.
Al
According to KFAN today, Wilf bought a new apt. in NYC for only 19 million!! Ya, we should give’em more.
That Guy has been more than fair in all of this stadium crap. If I was him I would of said long ago ” you have to X date to get something done or I will start to look for a new owner or start the process to move the team. It hard to keep asking him to Keep kicking in more and more when there is cities that are not only willing to build him a new stadium at little or no cost to him as well as pay HIM to move the team to their city. Don’t get me wrong I like alot of people don’t want to see taxes raised to pay for it. But i think there are other ways to fund it with out either higher taxes or more money from him.
As of Feb. 15th the Vikings are free agents as they have no lease with the metrodome, so if LA offers a nice incentive plan they could move, obviously with NFL approval, but consider the Vikes organization free agents starting Feb 15th.
I agree Zigi has been very calm with this stadium thing, but I bet his blood is starting to boil.
Ya, if I was gonna take the tax payers of Minn for 300-500? million I’d be fair too..
Don’t let the screen door hit ya milf.
Al
It wasn’t my intent to get into a stadium debate with this but…………
Keep in mind Ziggy would need to sue the NFL to move. The NFL will want between $100 million and $200 million for relocating rights and likely near $500 million for franchising rights to L.A. So, yes he can up and move like Modell did to Baltimore but the NFL would sue him. In the article in the paper the Vikings were asked point blank how much money they were losing. The answer……..they didn’t answer. Don’t fall for the spiel that they are losing money at the dome. They aren’t, they just aren’t making as much as they want to. Which by the way, I’m not making as much as I want to either. Send me some money will you. 
Quote:
As of Feb. 15th the Vikings are free agents as they have no lease with the metrodome, so if LA offers a nice incentive plan they could move, obviously with NFL approval, but consider the Vikes organization free agents starting Feb 15th.
I agree Zigi has been very calm with this stadium thing, but I bet his blood is starting to boil.
I’m sure Zigi knows that NFL approval to move is not a given And there is CERTAINLY NOT going to be any sweetheart deal coming his way from anywhere in the State of California. The state and every city and county in it are teetering on the brink of actual insolvency! Where the heck are they going to come up with money for a stadium?
And before anyone answers “borrow it like we would have to in MN”, be aware that California is in such dire financial straights that it’s unlikely they could borrow the money even if the wanted to. Some of the best muni bond interest rates out there are on California debt. Guess why! They’re the highest risk because the state might become insolvent at any moment. It’s like Greek debt.
Sure, Wilf can move his team to LA LA Land and they’d be happy to have him. As long as he builds a stadium and funds it all by himself.
Much has been made about the team leaning on the legislature, but that’s nothing compared to the pressure that legislators will be under from unions and from the construction industry. It’s not just the Vikes that want public money for a stadium. The construction industry and related unions are licking their chops at the thought of over a billion dollars of spending on this project.
Of course, the first thing that will happen when the stadium bill passes is that the prime contract will be awarded to a company from New York. . . 
Mark my words, all this hand-wringing and wailing, and then the contarct and 400 million worth of taxpayer dollars will go to a non-MN-based company.
Of course, they’ll need to bring with them special high-skill union workers from New York. At a far greater cost than local workers, of course, but you can’t put a price on quality. 
Grouse
G
Put it to a vote and see how many want it, it was voted down already by the people if I remember right…union workers are a small part of the equation.
Al
I kind of think it comes down to how the people of Minnesota get treated in the deal. I have no problem spending the money if we get it all back and make some over the next ten to fifteen years. That’s what states do. The build stuff for the people to use. Parks, roads and what not. The problem I think most of us have with this deal is that we see the ultra rich taking a big chunk home with them and the politicians haven’t really said what happens other than that.
Are the tax payers going to see some return, too? If so, then, hell ya, let’s build it. If not and only Ziggy gets to profit, then, no, not a chance in hell. The Packers and Bears both put out some competitive teams and the cities have survived before.
Think about this.
The NFL could build (9) new billion dollar stadiums each and every year on TV revenue alone.
I don’t begrudge them a nickel of that money. It is us the public who have built them into the Juggernaut they are today. Now when they are swimming in cash they come with their hat in hand looking for more.
I don’t think so. 
Merry Christmas everybody!!
I am for it, lets build it.
I hope they find a way to build this stadium 
Racino..Casino..Lets build them all
I am a tax payer who will vote Yes
Quote:
I am for it, lets build it.
I hope they find a way to build this stadium
Racino..Casino..Lets build them all
I am a tax payer who will vote Yes
Are you willing to have a tax hike to pay for it? Or are you in favor of a Racino / Casino to pay for it? Two totally different subjects there.
Here is some fun with math – I am not too good at math so maybe I am off. Before we continue this craziness of building stadiums to host private businesses, consider this. At the Federal level, we just hit $15 trillion DEBT. That’s about $50,000 per man, woman, child in the US. If we had $15 trillion and by my poor math, if each stadium cost $1 billion, we could build 300, $1 billion stadiums in each of our 50 states. Given where we are at, at what point do we stop spending money we don’t have?
I don’t like it anymore than anyone else, but I would not be happy if they left. And all be it, most of the benefits are intangible, the fact is they will move because someone else is will to pay.
If I had it my way, I’d invoke the inter state commerce clause and say no funding, loans or tax breaks, in any form, for sports teams. I would also tack on the same goes for businesses, with the exception of small business start ups. The threshold being set on either profits or number of employees. I think that would be fair for all.
Since that is not going to happen, I say hold out as long as you can and get the best deal for the public you can. But get it done.
Quote:
Put it to a vote and see how many want it, it was voted down already by the people if I remember right…union workers are a small part of the equation.
Al
It’s already been put to a vote. “The people” elected the legislature who will work out the deal and then vote on it. That’s how representative democracy works.
If you meant put it to a vote by a referendum, I’m against it. Want to see what happens to a state that “lets the people vote” by running a billion ballot questions at each election? Just look at the cluster#### they have in California. Multi-trillion dollar deficits and the state teetering on insolvency and getting closer to going over the edge with each passing minute.
A direct sales tax in one county is a non-starter for me. Why should one county pay for a regional asset? There’s no way that the benefits are confined to that county so why should one tax base pay for it while others get a free ride?
As I’ve told my represenatives, fund the taxpayer portion by casino, racino, and a sports salary and memorabilia tax and I’m all for it. With stipulations that at least 50% of the spending on the stadium itself must be spent with local contractors and suppliers and by using local labor for construction.
Grouse
“A direct sales tax in one county is a non-starter for me. Why should one county pay for a regional asset? There’s no way that the benefits are confined to that county so why should one tax base pay for it while others get a free ride? “
Study after study has shown nobody except the sports teams benifit by building a publicly funded stadium. So……..let Zig and the NFL build it.
How about this. What if they stick a $50 tax on every ticket sold to the stadium. Vikings, concerts, high schools sports, Nuns convention, every single ticket sold. That way the users pay for it. Then it truely is a fair tax. 
“”It’s already been put to a vote. “The people” elected the legislature who will work out the deal and then vote on it. That’s how representative democracy works.
“”
Yup I agree to a point, but look how well that’s working, not asking for a billion ballet question, just ones that effect this state like buying a stadium would.
We’re not given a choice of who we want to govern over us, we’re given the option of two or three people and unfortnately it’s come down to the lesser of two evils, yes I think referendums may be the only real voice we have.
Also how about 50% of the profits going back to the taxpayers?
That makes way more sense.
Al
Quote:
“A direct sales tax in one county is a non-starter for me. Why should one county pay for a regional asset? There’s no way that the benefits are confined to that county so why should one tax base pay for it while others get a free ride? “
Study after study has shown nobody except the sports teams benifit by building a publicly funded stadium. So……..let Zig and the NFL build it.
The studies I have have seen show that the immediate area gets a noticable boost, but it mostly comes from the surrounding areas. So, with the current stadium, the hotels, taverns, restraunts, etc., that are downtown get in increase in sales, but that is because people from Bloomington, Woodbury, Mound, etc., are spending their $$ downtown instead of their own neighborhood. That makes a city tax the most appropriate (IF a tax is decided to be appropriate), a county the the next, and a state tax the least. The only way the state sees an increase, is if lots of poeople from out of state come here for a game, like the Vikings-Packers game. That however, is not the norm.
Turns out the anticipated $500 million – $1 billion shortfall is actually a $876 million SURPLUS. How much is that Viking’s stadium again?
Quote:
Are you willing to have a tax hike to pay for it? Or are you in favor of a Racino / Casino to pay for it? Two totally different subjects there
I don’t think that new tax is the right way to go, and I believe everyone agrees with that.
I would Like to see the casion option #1, and the racino option #2;and if it requires a tax as option #3; I would support a user tax or fee those who attend the games or profit from the games.
I saw that too….
coincidence 
Quote:
Turns out the anticipated $500 million – $1 billion shortfall is actually a $876 million SURPLUS. How much is that Viking’s stadium again?
http://www.twincities.com/ci_19447913
Is it a surplus when you’ve already borrowed against it?
“Rep. Ryan Winkler, DFL-Golden Valley, issued a statement just after Schowalter’s press conference began saying “Minnesota politicians should not repeat past mistakes and use a small budget surplus to offer tax cuts or rebates to tax payers. This surplus should be used to move us toward a responsible budget by paying back tobacco bonds and paying down the school shift.””
Quote:
Quote:
Turns out the anticipated $500 million – $1 billion shortfall is actually a $876 million SURPLUS. How much is that Viking’s stadium again?
http://www.twincities.com/ci_19447913
Is it a surplus when you’ve already borrowed against it?
“Rep. Ryan Winkler, DFL-Golden Valley, issued a statement just after Schowalter’s press conference began saying “Minnesota politicians should not repeat past mistakes and use a small budget surplus to offer tax cuts or rebates to tax payers. This surplus should be used to move us toward a responsible budget by paying back tobacco bonds and paying down the school shift.””
In a word, yes.
That said, if it were my personal finances I wouldn’t call it a surplus.
Quote:
That said, if it were my personal finances I wouldn’t call it a surplus.
And neither would I.
I don’t understand how they can go from a $500 million to a 1 billion dollar shortfall, to a 876 million dollar surplus in just a few days. Who the heck does the books down there anyway? 
The naysayer in me would think they are floating the idea of a surplus to help Ziggy get his new playpen.
But hey………whats a few hundred million amongst friends.
Quote:
Quote:
That said, if it were my personal finances I wouldn’t call it a surplus.
And neither would I.
Then what…. ??? Fun money ??? 
Sometimes we just have to laugh…
Prediction: The new surplus will be traced back to the unaccounted for legacy money that apparently they can’t keep track of.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
