The Minneapolis Star Tribune has a big story today on contention over plans for a Minnesota United stadium in St. Paul, and it sheds a smidge more light on what the public expense could be for such a project:
- St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman has suggested that the city-owned portion of the site could be offered to United tax-free.
- City staffers have also itemized other possible subsidies that could include a sales-tax exemption (this would presumably require state approval) or a tax increment financing district to kick back property taxes from the project (or from surrounding parcels?) to pay for needed infrastructure.
That infrastructure piece is going to be key, as the site needs a fair bit of prep work to make it ready for development: A study last year concluded that, in the Star Trib’s words, “the cost of streets, parking and landscaping for an urban village would outstrip the site’s property value, making it risky for developers.” Minnesota United owner Bill McGuire still hasn’t said squat about what he wants out of the deal: Also up in the air is whether he’d pay for the land, and if so how much, with city officials having indicated they could “assemble” the part privately owned parcel for the project, but not what if anything they’d get paid for it once assembled.
It’s possible we’ll know more after today, when MLS deputy commissioner Mark Abbott will meet with Coleman to discuss the site, or tonight, when there will be a public forum at Midpointe Event Center about community concerns about any stadium project on the site. (As one community activist told the Star Trib of the land involved, “It’s way too important a parcel to be wasted on grass, period.”) Given that the former will be behind closed doors and the latter won’t involve anyone with any inside info, though, probably best not to hold your breath.
From my past experiences of watching this ownership group they will never negotiate in public. I wouldn’t be surprised if we never see anything agreed upon until the very end when the deal is done. For good or bad everything is always done behind closed doors.
MLS should DUMP MINNESOTA! they don’t even have a stadium plan…..it’s a joke! give the expansion rights to Sacramento or another expansion group that is serious and ready to go!
In fairness, most developers (or prospective developers…) don’t want to negotiate large or small details in public. I understand why given that the more people involved in any proposed deal creation the more it tends to become completely unmanageable. What tends to happen is that by the time all parties have “implemented their improvements” both the developer and city are no longer interested. And two decades have passed.
This process can be roughly paraphrased thus: “It is impossible to put together a group of more than X people without including at least one complete f**king idiot”.
The key for me is that once an agreement in principle has been reached (whether behind closed doors or otherwise) it needs to be fully aired in public and those who are being asked to pay for it (invariably tax payers when it’s a sports stadium) need to have time to review it and provide feedback to legislators. It then needs to be subjected to a free and open vote (including a plebiscite if we are talking about wants rather than needs like roads, fire stations, hospitals, schools etc)
In fact, none of the latter happens. Which is really the problem in my view. People create corrupt agreements all the time. The problem is that they don’t get weeded out where sports (and defense…) deals are concerned because there is a failure of oversight.
Yeah, I don’t expect McGuire to be negotiating in public, either. Until he (or Coleman) starts divulging details, though, there’s no point in trying to assess whether this would be a good, bad, or middling deal for the public — and given that developers always tend to announce the rose-colored parts of their deals first, I think it behooves us to always be on the lookout for more shoes to drop.
That is actually a great site for a soccer stadium. Unfortunately, not clear to me at all why the city needs to be helping one of the richest men in the state build one there.
Maybe if the subsidies are only similar to what would be needed to get other development there? It is very distasteful to have taxpayers covering the business operations of a private concern.
“This process can be roughly paraphrased thus: “It is impossible to put together a group of more than X people without including at least one complete f**king idiot”.”
When it comes to stadiums and politicians, the “X” in the above equation is generally equal to 2.
What’s behind this is that the proposed site–the old bus barn–has been tax exempt for at least 50 years already. Thus, a stadium there that didn’t pay property taxes would not take any land off the tax rolls. It would still be a benefit to McGuire et al but, as the tax ledger stands now, wouldn’t change anything. The loss would come in the form of potential future tax revenue that could be earned by some private development on that piece of land in the future, but it’s likely that St. Paul would offer the tax-exempt status to any development for that ~10 acres given how desperate it is to get the site developed.