Do you support the proposal for a new Vikings stadium?
Posted at 5:00 AM on May 4, 2010
by Eric Ringham
(84 Comments)
Filed under: Culture, Economy, Politics/Government
Legislators have unveiled a plan to use public money to pay two-thirds the cost of a new stadium for the Minnesota Vikings. Today's Question: Do you support the proposal for a new Vikings stadium?
Comments (84)
I will support the stadium. Go to the new Target Field and count how many people have jobs because of that place. Ask them how appreciative they are of those jobs. Look at the current tax for the dome, which has been paid for, that we are still paying. The Vikings should be able to get an increased tax on apparel and other team merchandise along with paying for at least 1/3. If a small increase in taxes is necessary you wont even notice it. Most people are not even aware of the transportation tax.
Look, if the gvmt can spend my money on airport signs and increasing the size of already giant shopping malls, no to mention construction projects that take way too long(we built a bridge across the Mississippi in a year but we cant figure out 62/35W in how long?), then the Vikings can have a few bucks a year to offer jobs and a revitalization of Mpls.
No. Absolutely not. I firmly believe it will be shot down anyways. But the fact we are considering such an act of idiocy and disrespect is ridiculous. If they can fund it without my money, let them build. If not, go ahead L.A and have your new team courtesy or Minnesota anti tax citizens.
Taking it one step further. Maybe its best L.A takes the team AND the burden financially. Let the illegals pay for it and give them a warm American tax filled welcome to being legal.
I do not support any public money for the Vikings especially when everything else is getting cut. I am angry that the legislature is even talking about it with the other huge problems they need to deal with.
Stupid!!
No more temples to Footbaal! No more sacrificing our young people to Footbaal! The prophets of Footbaal are lying! No public money for Footbaal!
No support for new football stadium. Let them leave!
There is an assumption that Minnesotans like paying taxes. That is an incorrect assumption. There is an assumption that if we are placated by games of professional gladiators, we will turn a blind eye to the inequities in the public infrastructure system. That is apparently a true assumption. This is a ploy to make us turn away from things that truly matter by showing us a shiny football team in a shiny new arena. The inequities are still there and we're being distracted.
Sports fans who would wish this stadium to be built with taxpayer dollars would also wish us to return to a plebeian system of domination by wealthy sport team owners. I'm not willing to sacrifice Minnesota to placate the masses like that.
If it came to a vote, I would vote NO. I would also encourage all I knew to do the same.
If there's political will to spend $500M in tax money on a football stadium, but not to meet the real needs of real people, what does that say about who we are? I wouldn't oppose public funding for a stadium if we weren't also struggling to find funds for GAMC, schools, roads&bridges, transit, etc.
There is never a "good' time to invest money into Professional Sports. However I think there is a payback in this investment. In terms of jobs, ecomonic growth, and state image. Those opposed have vaild claims, but the issues they they mention will be still be issues, whether the stadium is funded or not. Professional Teams add much to the local community. The Vikings have done a good of fielding a competive team. They have added much to the community in terms of supporting various charities, and lately been a positive role model. I support efforts to keep the team in the state, and believe that would be in a positive event, both long and short term.
Wow, Sean, what an insightful comment! (Not!) "Look, there will be poverty, failing education and people dying for lack of health care with or without a stadium." In other words, we should throw up our hands in despair of solving any of those big, scary problems, and instead throw our money away on frivolous excess. Is that really what you mean?
Hi, Viking fans, why should we pay for your hobby and your entertainment? Enjoy the purple, but please pay for yourself.
Is it realistic to think that anyone who expects to have a political future after November would be shown in front of TV cameras supporting the idea of swiping money from children, elderly and the infirmed and handing it to a out-of-town Billionaire during a depression? And yes, if you do not have a job right now it is a depression.
I welcome the opportunity to express my opinion on this, but how many times is MPR going to ask this question?
I do not support the legislation for the vikings...we have so many things in this state that are of more importance than pro football. Funding for education, for our environment, for social services programs, for safety officers such as the police and fire and we are wanting to spend millions of dollars on a vikings stadium! No thank you! I don't care how the money is raised whether it's by hotels, rental cars, etc. I don't agree with it because then when I need to rent a car due to an accident with a deer on the north shore I'm stuck paying for the vikings stadium and I don't even go to a game or care. Put the money to better use than a bunch of million dollar pro athletes. Place it in the hands of our education system. The one that is making our kids better, place it in the hands of our police force or our state parks or anything else. But not pro athletes!
I'm all for the stadium, I am even willing to pay a small tax to pay for it too. All of those who say "we ought to spend all that money on the poor, mental health, education, etc." Look, there will be poverty, failing education and people dying for lack of health care with or without a stadium. Do you think by not building a stadium all these poor people will be taken care of? Seriously. Will college tuition or health care cost less of we don't build a stadium? Come on, who are you kidding. Perhaps all the stadium bashers who blame a stadium for poverty should direct their energies towards the poverty caused by un-married women having kids. Although that would be politically incorrect. Unelected tax? Apparently none of those who decry the Twins Stadium sales tax in Hennepin County smoke. So it's OK for the courts (not legislators) to impose a cigarette tax in the form of a "settlement", where's the outrage? Oh wait cigarettes are evil, I forgot. All of those opposed to a new Viking stadium when it will be built, don't even THINK about turning on your TV to watch football.
With such serious cuts to mental healthcare and other social services, I feel that considering spending tax dollars on a STADIUM to be repulsive and immoral.
The fundamental problem here is that the people who are going to be paying the tax need to be able to vote on it. The current Vikings bill has stripped away that right. The legislature took it away when we had the Twins stadium forced on us (Margaret Anderson-Kelliher and Hennepin County Commissioners McLaughlin, Opat, Stenglein and Johnson). I'm tired of pretending we have a democracy here.
Another core problem is that we shouldn't have to pay for a private business belonging to anyone, let alone a billionaire. But it won't be the hard core Vikings fans nor Zygi Wilf who will push this bill through. It will be those turncoats who inhabit the halls of power and who are owned by the rich.
Work out a deal that gets a stadium built now with some public support. At least there is an owner here with a huge interest in getting a stadium built. If a stadium does not get built, the Vikings will probably leave. Then there will be an even bigger push to build a stadium to bring an NFL team back to Minnesota. A stadium built without a team already in town will be an even bigger financial burden. Anybody recall the North Stars?
What part of **NO** do politicians not understand??
There has been state-wide votes that defeat putting tax dollars toward subsidizing sports teams stadiums, but in the blush of the new Twins stadium, the Vikings are trying for another go at feeding at the public trough ...
Many good reasons to turn this down, YET AGAIN, have been stated above...
Don't encourage the rich to get richer with our tax dollars --vote no tax dollars for another stadium.
Absolutely not! If we buy it WE!! own it
No taxation without representation.
I would like to see state ownership/revenue reception from the proposed stadium proportional to the percentage of the construction/maintenance costs we assume.
If we pay for 2/3 of the stadium, we should get 2/3 of the income the stadium generates.
Finally an issue that my rabid right wing and I can totally agree upon, to wit, a no-go from the git-go!
Absolutely Not. If I just took a pay cut, and was having trouble paying my bills, I wouldn't be shopping for a new car. Massive budget deficits and new stadiums don't mix!
Mr. Potter has a point. Let's study the facts:
1) It is never the right time.
2) It costs too much.
3) The owners are too rich and too greedy.
4) They should should build their own stadium.
5) We should spend the money on teachers.
Those facts haven't changed in 30 years, therefore the opposition to public funding hasn't changed much. And it doesn't really need to - the burden of the argument rests with those who are pleading for a handout. And there is one new argument that has been brought to the table; state's massive budget deficit.
Unfortunately for Mr. Potter, the opposition is highly informed and not easily fooled.
Absolutely not! What a waste of resources to build a completely new building. Remodel the Metrodome if you need something different. Do private fundraising if you must have a new building, the public has already provided a building for the Vikings.
Having watched this battle for the last 30 years, nothing new has been brought to the table by those who opposed a new stadium. It is never the right time,it always costs too much and the owners are too rich and too greedy, they should should build their own stadium. We should spend the money on teachers.
Maybe the people who oppose the project should take the time to study the facts. Maybe then they could at least be informed in their opposition.
Yes. The Vikings are a big business that we as a state can not afford to loose. We need the jobs they offer. It's not all players and owners who get a paycheck from them.
Keep in mind that nearly every study done for every new stadium vastly overestimates the economic impact.
BTW, if the metro has the money for a stadium, why isn't there money to fix the roads to get to it?
Two critical questions need to be addressed prior to answering this question. #1. The Metrodome was funded by tax dollars. Why would we not use these same taxes/dollars for the new stadium? If not, what happens to the income from the taxes imposed for the old stadium? Last I checked the taxes are still in place. #2. If we are considering increasing taxes as the final option, this means that the new stadium is placed on a priority list with other items like school funding, improved police force funding, public road improvements, park improvements etc... By agreeing to taxes for a new stadium we are voting that this takes a priority over all these. If a company like Best Buy or Target asked the state to fund an new HQ via a public tax increase, people would be outraged. Yet this is the same deal with an added emotional hook tied to a football team that will only remain as long as it is financially profitable to do so. This is a bad deal any way you look at it. My guess is it will pass regardless. Ouch.
My knee jerk answer is NO WAY! But in the spirit of compromise...what if tax money was used, but in return profits were shared? Maybe a straight percentage formula could even work - ex. if 5% of the financing is tax dollars, then the state should be entitled to 5% of all profits for the duration of the stadium's use.
Just a thought!
No, I do not support it, for these reasons:
1. Public money should be used to fund public institutions and infrastructure.
2. Minnesota already spends too much taxpayer money on excessive layers of goverment - such as the school system - and rebuilding the structure of education should be a higher priority than an entertainment venue. (I went to public schools in Maryland and Virginia for the first half of my life, and got an excellent education - the schools had many more programs than I found in Minnesota, and were run more efficiently and consistently - every school was run by its county.)
3. Health care programs, education, transportation, and other public services have already been dramatically reduced or eliminated. If public money is to be spent, or taxes to be increased, I would support it for these essential services, but NOT for entertainment. If the energy and time spent discussing this matter were redirected into developing solutions for education, health care and public transit, Minnesota could probably attract more people to move to the state (as opposed to attempting to attract more Vikings fans, a niche group).
4. I think too much attention is being directed away from the big picture. The Vikings have a perfectly good venue in a central location in the Twin Cities. Their performance, not their stadium, will attract fans and bring money into the state. Why not remodel the existing stadium once the state economy is stable, and once their performance rises to and maintains a higher level for a set period of time? Also, they should be able to pull off a consistently high level of ticket sales before this matter is discussed further. They should earn the stadium!
YES THE PERMIDS WERE A PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT MONEY SPENT LOCALY CHURNS THE ECO. LOCALY.
LOTTERY TICKETS WITH 2% OF THE $ GOING TO THE SCHOOL DISTRIST IN WHICH IT WAS PURCHASED. STATE WIDE TAXES
NO! NO! NO! 900 million times no
ABSOLUTELY NOT! The team is a highly profitable business owned by a billionaire. Any public money towards such a project only serves to inflate the bank account of the owners and increase the resale value of the team. And the final insult is that a new stadium will be used as justification to charge fans more for tickets.
Previous posters have already listed dozens of ways that Minnesota's money could be spent on worthy projects, so I won't repeat them. I would like to add a few suggestions, however:
1) The team should be billed for the legislative hours it has consumed with its incessant begging over the past 15-20 years.
2) The legislature should pass a law requiring any organization (profitable or non-profit) asking for public money to open their accounting records for full public examination BEFORE any discussion of the issue takes place.The law should require this for any level of gov't from state level down to local.
No! No need to reiterate most of the reasons already provided.
LSE
Yes I support it and I will be pissed if the Vikings leave the state. Of course I believe in helping the less fortunate among us, but part of what makes this a great place to live is our Professional Sports teams!
Of course not.
To respond to Gary F again, cordially, I would say another positive effect of any MPR subsidy vs. the Vikings is the type of local jobs created. Journalism, broadcasting, publishing, the conducting of debates and public forums; these are high value activities requiring intellect and skill. Whereas Concessions, ticket taking, grounds keeping, security, etc.., are less appealing job opportunities to subsidize with public money.
There is a simple solution to this problem: raise taxes ONLY for those who support building the stadium with public money.
How many people would then support paying for the stadium?
No. I believe the Metrodome was specially designed for football. I would hope that it's useful life would be more than 30 years. I would not be opposed to refurbishing the Metrodome.
Health care for the needy should be a higher priority for state funds than a new stadium for the Vikings (who I enjoy watching every once in a while)
It is a sad commentary of our society that we would even contemplate catering to these completely worthless, over paid, brainless, knuckle-dragging, Neanderthals over more socially necessary issues such as education and healthcare assistance for the less fortunate among us. These creatures should not be encouraged, especially with public funds.
NO, NO, No. Stop the insanity, Single mothers with small children cannot bear the burden of funding facilities that benefit mainly men with above average income--owners, players, and even most of the fans.
This is totally unfair, and has been for years now.
Comments texted to MPR:
If the team put forth 50 percent of up front cost, it would show great good will (and it's just a write-off for them anyway!) -Randy Haukom, Minneapolis
No. If the state is going to spend that kind of $ it should be on teachers and lowering college tuition. -Kate, Mankato
I want the Vikings to stay and the Timberwolves to leave. At least the Vikings win! -John, Circle Pines
I support the stadium bill. -Julie, Lino lakes
Sell advanced season tickets and make the people who actually want it pay for a new stadium. -Michael, Minneapolis
I didn't support the Twins stadium so I don't support the Vikings either unless the owners pay for it and we know that's not going to happen. -anonymous
So we can raise money for millionaire thugs to lose games in a brand new stadium but we can't do the same for the poorest and sickest Minnesotans? Ridiculous. -anonymous
Yes. Tear down Brookdale mall and put the stadium there! I'll bring a hammer! -anonymous
If there were a proposal to subsidize MPR to the tune of $500M, and if Bill Kling were a billionaire, and if MPR were a for-profit enterprise, I'd oppose that, too. As it is, bringing MPR's government support into this discussion is a stinky red herring.
And, MPR is the "New York Yankees" of the public broadcasting industry. They are the 800lb gorrilla, unlike KMOJ or KFAI, who are scraping to make ends meet.
MPR doesn't need their subsidy either. They have lots of members and advertisers. They have put out a good product and people are buying it.
They always say, "oh, it's so little", then give it up. GMAC or MPR? Nursing homes or money to the fat cat MPR?
Professional athletes must file a tax return in every state they play in if that state has a state or local tax. So, we get their tax money. But they don't live in the state and spend that money. Joe Mauer said on the radio one day that he has to be careful not to spend too much time in Minnesota or they will think he lives here. Is Garrison Keillors official residence Minnesota.?
The short answer is NO! Why should the taxpayers be building stadiums for millionaire players and billionaire owners? And it does nothing to help the local economy. Let's say you tax people 100 million dollars over a period of time to build a stadium. That 100 million would still be spent without a stadium, people would just get to spend it the way they want to. Like going out to eat, seeing a movie, investing, saving for retirement, etc. Its called opportunity cost, and who's better at deciding where your money should go, the government, or you?
During a time when funding is being slashed for schools and there is not enough money in the budget to maintain needed social service programs, I question the priorities of the legislature and their commitment to representing the needs of their constituents. I did not support public funding for a Twins Stadium and I do not support this proposal.
Absolutely not!! People talk about it being good for business and the economy, but maybe the businesses should help pay for it. I don't think we should support ANY stadiums with public money through a mandate or tax. If people want to pay additional taxes for it, let them "opt in" on an individual basis, not us as a whole. Would you help US Bank, Medtronic, or any other business build a new corporate office with public tax money? Why are we even talking about this considering the cuts and economic depression we're in??
HELL NO!!
To answer Gary F’s question (if he was asking in earnest): MPR salaries are probably spent here in the state, so the money stays in the Minnesota economy. Vikings salaries, except for a small tax slice, exit our economy and flow toward the states where the players choose to live.
Are you kidding me?! Our state's financial situation is the most dire in decades, real human beings are suffering serious hardship and worse due to the state's lack of resources, the mantra is "no new taxes" despite the economic realities, and some legislators are proposing using what few resources the state has to build a sparkling new stadium for wealthy sports figures and owners who already have a perfectly functional stadium?! Whatever legislators are introducing or supporting this proposal should absolutely be voted out of office for their clear lack of perspective. If the team wants a new stadium, they and their owners and sponsors can put up the total initial investment, and be repaid in part or full by user's fees added to tickets to the new stadium.
Not under current NFL ownership rules. The only way the public funds should be used is only if the taxpayers obtain a sizable ownership position. Otherwise it is just Socialism for a billionaires. If we lose the Vikings, I'm sorry, but they will come back to get back into this market. Additionally, legislation should be passed to the owners to be forced allow public ownership.
Yes, I do. I won't be able to afford to go to a game but I do think it enhances the state as a whole. people don't want to pay for anything. That is why there are homeless people; that is why there are uninsured; that is why our roads aren't fixed and bridges are falling. The Vikings need to step up and pay their fair share and we need to quit grousing about taxes. We have it pretty damned good.
Is this some kind of joke? We're coming out of the second worst economic crisis in history, while trying to resolve Minnesota's budget crisis, and certain legislators want to build a football stadium?! I cannot believe this is seriously being considered... by anyone.
No! No! No! Absolutely NOT!
Stop handing out Wilfare to billionaires and focus on the rest of us.
Close libraries, lay off teachers and make it difficult for hospitals to treat the poor....and then build a Vikings Stadium? PLEASE! It is outrageous for anyone to even think of it.
NO!
No! We need to focus on how to provide decent health care and school funding in our state and not another stadium.
In the old days, when the players and the team owner lived here, and spent their money (our ticket money) here, the cost of a stadium was more palatable.
But now, the players collect their Minnesota salaries and spend them where they live, usually California or Florida. The owner spends the profits where he lives, New Jersey. Only a fraction of the money that comes out of Minnesotans’ pockets remains in the state in the form of taxes, menial salaries, etc.., the rest goes away. Publicly funding a new stadium is like building a more efficient device to funnel this money out of the state.
Sure...If we get profits from the team. Until there is community ownership, I don't think the community should pay for their stadium.
Absolutely not. When there are more pressing issues the Legislature needs to contend with, passing legislation to benefit millionaires/billionaires is the last thing they need to be working on. Public monies should not be used for playthings for rich people and those who play for them. If they can pay players and others these outrageous salaries, they can build their own stadiums.
I think "Ziggy" should build as big and fancy a stadium as HE wants to pay for. It is, after all, HIS team; and football, as they keep reminding us, IS a business - NOT a civic investment. I don't have any stock in the Vikings...
We give money to big well funded public radio stations like MPR, so why not the Vikings? Everybody like THEIR subsidy and thinks it's worth it.
Absolutely not. It's rather telling that on the Senate Media Services page, the videos listed are:
*Vikings Stadium Funding Plans Announced
*Cuts to Health and Human Services Budget Forthcoming
*Health and Human Services Budget Released
*Senate Rolls Out Cuts to Education
*Awaiting Federal Medicaid Match Dollars
*Enforcing Tinted Car Window Regulations
What's wrong with this picture? They want us to pony up our hard-earned dollars to line the pockets of a billionaire while everything else is getting cut. And while they claim that the taxpayers won't be on the hook for the stadium, we certainly will as the state plans on issuing at least $500 million in bonds. If revenue expectations aren't met, the state will have to tap into the general fund to make up the difference. (Unless of course, they want to risk having the credit rating of MN get downgraded which they certainly don't.) So, where does the money for the general fund come from? Us taxpayers of course.
If the Vikes want a stadium, they can pay for it themselves. The billionaires have fed at the public trough long enough. Time to cut them off.
with the way they acted a few yrs ago on Lake Minnetonka!?! At least the Twins play 80 games at home and baseball requires a different mentality rather than, "physically hurt the other team." NFL has been steadily going down hill for the last few yrs.
Major league sports is an unhealthy addiction. No matter how profitable the industry is, the money is never enough. Every decision is made to generate yet more money.
In football, for example, how does one explain overtime, the bye week, the extra week of hype before the Super Bowl, and TV timeouts, where the game is stopped to show commercials?
To forcibly take money from a person and hand it to an immensely profitable industry, such as a major league sports organization, is criminal. And it just happened a few years ago with the local major league baseball team. It's almost beyond belief that even a single member of the legislature is contemplating repeating this crime.
No, No ,,, and let me check again... ah-NO.
"Professional" sports must get the money from the people that support THEM.
NOT TAX PAYERS!
The drug using, wife betting, overpaid, criminals can go do whatever they what --without my money.
no,
No,
NO.
Why the willingness to provide corporate welfare while cutting basic services for the rest of us?
Who are these politicians representing?
I am a huge Viking Fan who goes to most games every year.
I AM OPPOSED TO PUBLIC FUNDS FOR THE VIKINGS !
I STILL OPPOSE THE TWIN STADIUM TAX !
LET THE BILLIONAIRE OWNERS AND MILLIONAIRE PLAYER PAY FOR THEIR STADIUM.
PUT CONSTRUCTION WORKERS TO WORK BUILDING MEANINGFUL INFRASTRUCTURE NOT FOOTBALL STADIUMS.
FAREWELL NFL ...HELLO UFL AND CANADIAN FOOTBALL
Hey, maybe we can use this strategy for everything...
A scratch lotto game for health care showing a grandmother who only takes half her medicine since she cannot afford it...
How about a game where you guess how much your school budget will get cut...
Perhaps you can try for a prize that equals the yearly salary of just one 40 year old football player...
I could live for 50 years on that.
No public funding for Footbaal!
No.
We currently don't have enough revenue to adequately fund schools and human services.
The Vikings are a for profit organization. If they were public, non-profit or charitable, then it would be different.
They play 10 games in the regular season. All that money for 10 games?! Unbelievable.
Well said Steve! I second it.
No.
Instead I propose we lend them all the money to build the stadium, but charge 300% interest.
Yes! It's our patriotic duty to support this noble American institution. Football is our heritage. It's a celebration of American values of strength, power, crushing the weak, knocking down adversaries and walking over them on the way to the goal.
And while we're at it, the media should quit criticizing the patriotic heroes who play the game. Those bogus allegations about steroids and embarrassing revelations about off-the-field misbehavior only serve to distract them from their vitally important work of inspiring our young people. And I have nothing but praise for those magnanimous billionaires whose generous backing of local Football teams is key to the success of this wonderful civic activity. We should feel blessed to have the privilege of helping them make a profit in return for their selfless efforts.
As for the poor, if they have time to complain that society isn't supporting them, they must not be working hard enough. Let them eat footballs!
Absolutely not: The Vikings management and ownership is merely bluffing on any threats to leave Minneapolis. The team faces the same issues that any other team in the NFL has. They can't even fill the current stadium and there is nothing wrong with the Metro Dome.
Stated simply, YES.
No way. I thought we were against socialism, yet here is another glaring example of how there's plenty of money for corporate welfare at a time when ordinary suffering citizens are expected to tighten their belts.
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just think of what we could buy with $500,000,000
for classrooms!!
Maybe the kids would grow up intelligent enough not to rely on sports to make a living..
If there's not a dime of tax money involved, except to fund infrastructure for the facility, I'd support it. Since this bill has taxpayer-funding in it, NO.
Do the legislators really think this is the right prioritization of their time and our money? Do the legislators not think that taxes on hotels and rental cars mostly tax business travelers and the local businesses they are visiting? Do the legislators not realize that local people rent cars when theirs are in the shop for extended periods, and that they rent hotels locally for weekend "get-aways?" Perhaps I'll "reprioritize" my vote to some other options for elected officials next time(s) around...
Who is John Galt?
No! The arrogant Vikings management is already making demands regarding "its" stadium. Why should the public pay for a stadium to be owned by billionaires? Even if I help pay for the stadium, I still will be shut out of Vikings games by high ticket prices. I want my tax dollars to be spent on things that truly benefit the public, like clean water, better roads, police and fire services, and high-quality schools. Do the Vikings really benefit the state more than these services? I think not.
Are you kidding? I can not believe with all of the real $$$ problems we are having with schools and infrastructure and people loosing thier homes and going bankrupt to go to the Dr. that people even have the nerve to bring up paying for stadiums. Or worry about serving alchohol at Gophers games. Come on people!
Absolutely! Bring on the scratch off lottery games, allow slots machines at Canterbury. People volunteer to gamble with their money every day. Why not have the money go towards some sporting entertainment.
I personally gamble one to two hundred dollars per year between local casinos and the state lottery. For a chance to win season tickets, or a suite at a Viking/Packer game... Good Bye Casino!
GO VIKINGS!!!!
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Let the billionaire owner pay the cost. I am not a fan and do not want to be penalized with higher taxes.
This is crazy to place another burden on citizens to subsidize a football stadium. There is no material benefit to me as a taxpayer.
No
Absolutely not! The team and the NFL are private business that will keep private profits, if there are any, from a new stadium. If the Vikings want a new stadium let them pay for it. It's not the fault of taxpayers that the owners choose to pay the players obscene salaries.
I can't believe this is even being discussed when we apparently don't have enough money to support the poorest of the poor or adequately fund our education system. If legislators can come up with tax gimmicks to build a stadium they can do the same to ensure that the poorest and most vulnerable Minnesotans are provided for.
| May 2010 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | ||||||
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
| 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
| 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | |||||
Master Archive
Recent Entries
- Have changes to the airline passenger experience affected your willingness to fly?
- Should marijuana be available for medical use in Minnesota?
- Do the struggles of Minnesota's business icons signal trouble for the state's economy?
- Do you know whether insurance would cover your losses in a major storm?
- What kind of recycling program would you be likely to use the most?
- Would you support paying people for organ or tissue donations?
- Have personal relationships in the workplace ever presented a problem for you?
- Do you think Facebook is a passing fad?
- Will you be less likely to visit the Minnesota Zoo without its dolphins?
- Should authorities in the Twin Cities change the way they warn people about tornadoes?
Public Insight Network
The Public Insight Network draws upon your experiences to help shape our coverage.More
Categories
Services
In The Spotlight
-
Sound Learning
Looking for ways to ensure your students are doing quality research from credible sources? Sound Learning is a launching point to Minnesota Public Radio's content on the Web. -
The Current Music Blog
Your daily note for good music, news and pop culture. With attempted jokes.
- Become a Member
- Member Connect Accounts
- Leadership Circle
- Sustaining Members
- Member Discounts
- Become a Sponsor
- Tax Information
- Planned Giving
- Vehicle Donation
- Donate Stock