Field of Schemes
sports stadium news and analysis

  

This is an archived version of a Field of Schemes article.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.

May 11, 2011

Ramsey County Vikings plan has a $175m hole

MinnPost has a good wrapup of the aftermath of the last two days' dueling Minnesota Vikings stadium plans, including media and politician response. The upshot:

  • There's still a whopping big hole in Ramsey County's stadium budget, as the $1.05 billion stadium price tag apparently doesn't include an estimated $175 million in road improvements (and possibly as much as $240 million if the rest of the Arden Hills site is developed) that the state would have to pay for — on top of its $300 million contribution to the stadium itself. State senator Julie Rosen told the Associated Press that going over $300 million in state funds was a "non-starter," so it sounds like it's back to looking under sofa cushions if this deal has a hope of moving forward.
  • Several Ramsey County legislators already hate the plan, with three of them — state reps Alice Hausman and Mindy Greiling and state senator and longtime stadium critic John Marty — issuing a joint statement declaring: "Ramsey County is facing massive and damaging cuts in human services. To choose to raise taxes for a Vikings stadium represents not only misplaced priorities, but a lack of sensitivity to human needs." (Greiling further told the AP: "The vast majority of Ramsey County legislators don't support it," said Rep. Mindy Greiling, DFL-Roseville. "They're smoking up the wrong pipe. The public is not for this if you poll them, and if they are they want it to be as cheap as possible.")
  • The Star Tribune editorial board thinks the Minneapolis stadium deal would be a better one for the state legisature because it would cost the city government less than the suburban plan would cost Ramsey County. Which doesn't exactly make sense (the state legislature made it eminently clear in the Twins deal that it's only going to safeguard its own pocketbook, not those of local cities or counties), though it makes somewhat more when you read the disclosure note on the editorial: "(Disclosure: The Star Tribune owns property near the Metrodome site, and the value of that property is likely to be affected by the location decision.)"

COMMENTS

I am writing you to suggest that the Government should NOT be subsidizing the Viking�s stadium with a any tax
nor any other public money outside of state run gambling. Also I think the Vikings would be better suited if they
stayed in MPLS. Any jobs �created� are merely jobs now held at the Metrodome and will not help one bit in our
unemployment rate. Many of the construction jobs would be awarded to the lowest bidder, often to out-of-state
contractors. Personally I feel the Metrodome suits the Viking just fine and if they want to remodel it that�s fine as
it could be done with only a fraction of the $1.1 Billion dollars that is not being considered. Those considering spending
that kind of money on a stadium should be ashamed of themselves for their misplaced priorities.

Posted by James Steiner on October 27, 2011 03:55 PM

Latest News Items

CONTACT US FOR AD RATES