Archived Story

Facts vital in stadium issue [UPDATED]

Published 10:28am Monday, April 23, 2012 Updated 12:29pm Monday, April 23, 2012

In my quest not to get extremely angry at the individual members of the House legislative committee that killed the proposal to help finance a Vikings stadium, I’m attempting to, as I do when I miss a short putt or hit a ball out of bounds, take a deep breath, relax and gain perspective.

Everyone knows what the argument is for using public financing for building a stadium. If we don’t, the Vikings will eventually leave.

The NFL commissioner was in town Friday to reiterate that point, and rumor was that Vikings owner Zigi Wilf flew to Southern California this week to explore his options. If they leave, it will take a lot of time and great deal more money to bring an NFL — the most popular professional sports league in the country — team back to Minnesota, if another team ever comes. And as a Vikings fan, I clearly can see what I would lose if the team left.

What I’m trying to figure out is what exactly those who are so opposed to public financing for stadiums feel they have to gain. Here are the things, I gather.

Money for more important things: That continues to be the argument: Why should we use public funds on a stadium when we should be using it for, fill in the blank (education, health care, roads, etc.)? It’s absolutely true that there are more important things than football. However, history shows that, if Vikings stadium funding isn’t approved, the public funding mechanisms considered for it will not — and will never — be approved for the “more important things.” The only thing that may come out of it would be:

Lower taxes: Stadium funding proposals likely would come from an added sales tax from the city where the stadium would be located. If you spend a night or weekend in downtown Minneapolis, for example, you’ll notice the extra taxes when you get your bill. Of course, downtown hotels and restaurants are so expensive anyway that a sales tax is pretty much irrelevant. And if you don’t visit there, you won’t pay the taxes. There’s also a risk that the state funding mechanism might not cover the state’s portion of the tab, which means general funds would be used. However, the likelihood is that the Legislature would instead find another similar type of funding source, which brings me to my next benefit of not funding a stadium.

Saving gambling addicts: The primary proposal would be to fund the state’s portion of the stadium through gambling revenues. So I guess if you are under the belief that the expansion of gambling will lead to additional residents who have gambling problems, then I guess we save a few souls. Maybe there are studies that can back that up. But I’m under the opinion that if you have a gambling addiction, there are more than enough casinos, bingo halls, pulltab jars and c-store lottery ticket outlets to satisfy your craving.

Protection for the Native Americans: If we don’t expand gambling, then the Native Americans who have a stake in the 18 casinos will be better off. Anyone who has been on, for example, the White Earth Indian Reservation can attest that, considering the poverty, the Native American population certainly can use the money. Why would we take that away from them, the argument states.

However, my issue is that it certainly isn’t that black and white. Expansion of gambling in the Twin Cities area — let’s say placing slot machines at Canterbury Downs in Shakopee, for example – would create competition for Mystic Lake Casino in Shakopee. The tribe that owns Mystic Lake Casino has 200 members. One news report I found explained that each member makes a large six-figure income every year from Mystic Lake Casino profits. It’s not exactly the poverty stricken picture that is typically painted.

In fact, leaders of the White Earth Reservation — a tribe that does indeed deal with severe poverty issues — have proposed building a casino in the Twin Cities and sharing the profits for the purpose of financing a stadium. So far, the proposal has fallen on deaf ears.

The satisfaction that we won’t help a billionaire: It is patently unfair that Minnesotans living paycheck to paycheck are paying taxes of any kind – after all, gambling revenues could be used for other purposes – so a filthy rich NFL team owner can get a multi-million dollar public subsidy to build a stadium that he will make millions off of.

But the problem is, if we don’t give Vikings owner Zigi Wilf his stadium, he won’t shell out the money himself for a new stadium, and he won’t sit back and accept that the Metrodome is his team’s only option. He will either sell the team — likely for a nice profit — to someone who will move it somewhere else where public financing will be used to build a stadium, or he will move it there himself.

That’s not fair either. At least in the first unfair scenario, the Vikings stay here.

 

Joel Myhre is The Journal’s Publisher. E-mail him at joel.myhre@fergusfallsjournal.com

  • BWD

    What was that you would lose J. you never did say what that was?

    Why do we always need Gambling? Why is Gambling always the answer to economic woes? It was supposed to end all of our School money problems, wasn’t it? Now, we need more gambling to keep the over paid Deva’s in town.

    In town? What about rural Minnesota? What jobs do the Vikings bring in rural Minnesota?

    The NFL is so rich…why can’t they front him a load? And you have the nerve to say to us, “a sales tax is pretty much irrelevant”. Says you! Just proves how out of touch you are with this area.

    Why is it the NFL always manages to hold US Taxpayer hostage? All the while we read about their so called ‘heros’ full of dope, broads, and assault arrests for beating on each other and their girlfriends?

    And YOU cry a river for maybe losing your Vikings because the Public does not want to spend one penny of our money to build them a new playground. Let Zigi own the LA Donkey’s for all I care.

  • camobabe

    If all else fails in your frenzied attempts to justify taking more money away from the taxpayers so you can once or so a season go to watch the rich sociopaths who attack each other on the Vikings playground, you could try appealling to tho our sense of PRIDE in OUR VIKINGS. But, what’s to be proud of, having the record for spectacular failures in four Super Bowls, too-many-to-count championship games, drug busts, “love” boats full of hookers, wife and girfriend beaters, dope fiends running over meter maids, unbridled hubris, near illiterate All-Pros?

    We’re supposed to fork over our earnings in new taxes to keep that kind of crowd here? Let em go to L.A., that cesspool is more their kind of neighborhood.

  • Walt Henry

    Every time a visiting pro football team comes and plays in Minnesota the player’s income for that game is taxed at Minnesota income tax rates. It is projected that over the first 30 years of a new stadium, with player salaries being what they are, those income taxes will pay for the state taxpayer’s contribution to the stadium. Without the initial taxpayer investment there will be no professional players with income to tax.

    Salvino D’Armate is often credited with inventing the first pair of wearable glasses, though various sources suggest an earlier origin. A recorded sermon, made in 1305, referenced the invention of eyeglasses 20 years earlier, predating the notion of D’Armate being their inventor.

    I bet some thought Ben Franklin invented eyeglasses.

    • camobabe

      Larry/Walt, your myopic head in the cloud liberal democrat logic is showing. Like any lib you assume that players’ salaries will rise at the rate of increase usually seen only for college professors. There will come a point when the towners will say “Enough!!” to the boundless demands of players, and the rise in salaries, ergo the raise in taxes, will be blunted and head downward. And then what happens to your fairy tale predictions of untold wealth derived from athletes’ tax payments? The average family will get stuck with making up the revenue shortfalls through tax increases.

      Pray tell, what does it matter who invented spectacles when the matter under discussion is the publisher of this newspaper having a tantrum because he might not get a free press pass to go see his favorite team?

      • Walt Henry

        A thinly veiled reference to some commentators here suffering from the short-sightedness spoken of by the CEO’s of some of Minnesotas biggest companies.

  • Walt Henry

    And what do the job creaters have to say? http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentaries/148750535.html

  • Pingback: Outstate News (4-29-12) | MiddleMinnesota (Views of a Moderate Pol)

Editor's Picks

Locals say AP should be suspended: Owners reverse course, pull Vikings running back again

As more allegations come in that Minnesota Vikings star running back Adrian Peterson served improper punishment to his children, local fans are weighing in on ... Read more

Architects looking for input on library project

Fergus Falls community members got to hear BTR principal architect Ann Voda speak about library trends and the needs of the current Fergus Falls library. ... Read more

Musical savant Tony DeBlois returns to FF

37-year-old pianist is blind, autistic Musical savant Tony DeBlois, who amazed audiences at the opening performance in A Center for the Arts’ first “Center Series,” ... Read more

20-year-old gets 3.5 years in prison for role in burglary

A Fergus Falls man was sentenced Monday in Otter Tail County District Court to 41 months in prison with credit for 259 days served after ... Read more