This is an archived version of a Field of Schemes article. Comments on this page are closed. To find the current version of the article with updated comments, click here.
February 15, 2010
MN legislator: I'll sell that for a dollar!
Well, here's an interesting idea: Minnesota state representative Paul Kohls introduced a bill on Thursday to sell the Metrodome to the Vikings for a dollar to keep the team in town. "I wasn't really looking to get in the middle of it, but as I was thinking about it, candidly, I was concerned about taxpayers being put on the hook for tens or hundreds of millions of dollars," Kohls told the St. Paul Pioneer Press.
This would basically have the effect of abolishing the Vikings' lease, which is one of the few where teams actually have to share a significant chunk of revenue with the state. (Though the lease expires after 2011 anyway, and the Vikings have been absolved of paying rent in recent years.) It would also stick the Vikings with paying property taxes, which they currently don't at the state-owned facility, though I suppose the legislature could always tack on a tax exemption as well — it'd still be cheaper than building a whole new stadium with public money.
Vikings officials, needless to say, weren't enthused about the idea, with VP for stadium grubbing Lester Bagley declaring, "The Metrodome no longer works in sports economics or for our fans' game day experience. We need to build a new facility to secure the long-term future of the Vikings in Minnesota. This doesn't get us there." In other words, they'd rather get a new stadium for free than a used one for free. We'll see whether the governor and the legislature call their bluff.
My brother in law says that when the Twins facilities were paid for in part by a lottery that promised money to the schools (I don't know how much lottery $$ went to the Twins), the government didn't tell the voters that the schools funding from the general fund would be reduced by however much money the schools got from the lottery. So taxpayers thought they would be getting more money for the schools, when instead a bait and switch happened in which the schools didn't get anything extra, and the government got extra dollars to do with what it wanted. Minnesotans remember what happened with the Twins facilities, and I don't think they will let themselves be duped again for the Vikings.
Posted by SantaClaraTaxpayer on February 15, 2010 03:11 PM
There was no lottery money for the Twins stadium — it was all a sales tax hike:
http://www.fieldofschemes.com/news/archives/2007/01/3099_twins_stadium_t_2.html
It's very possible a lottery was proposed and rejected somewhere along the way, though. Maybe that's what your brother-in-law was thinking of?
Posted by Neil on February 15, 2010 03:19 PM
The governor has proposed a lottery ticket to help pay for the new Vikings stadium. But even best guess estimates say it will only account for a quarter of the $42M/year cost. Needless to say, stadium proponents are touting about how the lottery will pay for the stadium (implied: in full) and to get it done.
Here's an interesting comparison from the Vikings supporters who say they had to pay for the Guthrie theater which they don't use, so it's only fair that they get a Vikings stadium which they will use. Both the Guthrie and the Vikings draw roughly the same number of people downtown: around 600,000. The difference is the Guthrie spreads it out over 300 days a year, and the Vikings just 10. Businesses are *much* more interested in the steady revenue the Guthrie provides (where *everyone* goes out for dinner) than the Vikings crowd, which generally speed home after dropping $20-$30 out of their dining budget just to park.
Oh, and the Guthrie got 20% of their costs paid by taxpayers, or around $20M. I'm all for the Vikings getting the same deal ($20M) for their new stadium, as the impact to the area will be similar (actually worse, but lets not quibble).
Posted by Geoff on February 17, 2010 12:00 PM