This is an archived version of a Field of Schemes article.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 05, 2010
One-day-old Vikings stadium funding plan is axed
That was even faster than I expected: A Minnesota state house committee late last night removed the provisions for memorabilia, hotel, and rental car taxes from a Vikings stadium bill, after those same provisions were just introduced with much fanfare the day before. That leaves the bill with only Plan B: Using Minneapolis city taxes currently designated to paying off debt on the city's convention center, once those bills are paid off in 2020, to build a new stadium on the site of the Metrodome.
The Minneapolis Star Tribune called this an "initial victory," but it's hard to see how: Minneapolis city officials aren't even in support of this plan, and since the money wouldn't begin to flow for another decade, a workaround would need to be devised to figure out how to bridge the financing gap until then. And then there's that little matter of the Minneapolis law that requires a public referendum on any use of more than $10 million in public money on a stadium. From the sound of things, the only reason the convention-center money came to a vote was because the committee had to wrap up its business by midnight — and as they've shown in the past, the Minnesota legislature likes bills that only require other people's money.
Meanwhile, St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman chimed in on the Vikings issue yesterday, saying if Minneapolis gets a football stadium, he wants a new hockey practice rink and St. Paul Saints stadium for his city. This increasingly doesn't sound like something that's going to get resolved in the two weeks remaining before the legislature goes on break.
Oh it was even worse than described in the story above. First of all, the MN House meeting for this proposal didn't start until 11:00PM. Lest Bagley, the Vikings representative talked for at least 1/2 hour answering what, in my opinion, were softball questions.
The Minneapolis representative, a City Council member, basically introduced herself and started to say that in her opinion making Minneapolis pay for this was unfair. After 30 seconds, she was cut off by the committee chair who claimed there wasn't enough time.
It was bad.
Posted by tani12 on May 5, 2010 10:06 AM
just say "NO" to all of them!
Posted by paul w. on May 5, 2010 12:28 PM
The atmosphere in the committee room was extremely hostile. Bagley was basically dressed down by the chairman, saying he didn't have time for this meeting but was ordered to do so by leadership. He rushed through his presentation and was extremely discombobulated. His partner at the capitol (Rep Solberg) was equally grilled by his peers.
The Minneapolis council woman basically told the council that they had zero interest in doing this. The convention center is far more important to the city of Minneapolis than the Vikings. It brings in 4 times as much business than the Vikes do.
Posted by Geoff on May 5, 2010 12:48 PM
Err...wait, I'm referring to the meeting held this morning, on the 5th. The one on the 4th was a softball meeting with no real debate presented. The one today... well, this bill is officially and quite brutally dead.
Now, the Vikings should focus on HF2911, the bill to sell the Dome to the Vikes for $1. Why should they accept it?
1) It saves them their portion of the new stadium bill; roughly $250M.
2) It saves them having to pay rent for the next 40 years; roughly $450M.
3) They collect all the revenue from PSLs, naming rights, advertising, concessions, etc.
4) They collect all the revenue from events held at the Dome in the 300+ non-Vikings related events held there each year.
5) They generate a bottomless well of goodwill from the people of Minnesota for solving the stadium issue without having to raise taxes.
Posted by Geoff on May 5, 2010 12:51 PM
Does that really generate that much revenue for them, though? In the big picture, what you're doing is just transferring all the net revenues of the the dome's current public owners (i.e., revenues from all events less operating costs) to the Vikings. Is the MSFC making that big a profit that the Vikes are going to be happy with it added to their bottom line?
Not that I don't think it makes sense on some level, but you can see why Bagley & Co. would be holding out for a $500 million taxpayer windfall, even if it doesn't happen this year.
Posted by Neil on May 5, 2010 01:03 PM
It's basically no revenue. The Dome can't survive without the Vikings, because 80% of the time it's full of rollerdome days and high school baseball. However, the financial benefit comes from not having to outlay $250M for a new stadium, not have to pay rent ($~450M according to the Vikes in their Purple Plan), and the *potential* to make money from other events if they can market it well enough.
In fact, at last nights meeting Bagley said the new stadium should be run by a for-profit company to maximize the revenue they can generate. Granted he said it because they get a big chunk of that revenue, but the Vikings are a for-profit company, and would get *all* the revenue, so why not just make them do it?
It's cheaper than moving to a city that doesn't exist (as the Vikings admitted to day). And more profitable than continuing to live in the Dome run by the city. But you're right...odds are they will just punt for another year. Of course, next year the legislature is facing a several billion dollar shortfall (budget year), and if there is a strike... nothing will happen then either.
Posted by Geoff on May 5, 2010 01:12 PM
An update from the Senate committee meeting on this topic: They just passed an amendment to have the new stadium funded 1/3rd through the owners (Wilf) and 2/3rds through PSLs ($3,000-$20,000 per seat). No public money used at all. It passed 9-3. 2 major victories against publicly funded stadiums in one day!
Posted by Geoff on May 5, 2010 02:01 PM
Viva Los Angeles!!!!
Go Vikings and Lakers!!!
Posted by L.A. Vikings on May 6, 2010 07:13 PM
*sigh* Guess we're looking at the LA Vikings soon. And Minny's loss is LA's loss. Ho ho.
Posted by Marty on May 10, 2010 08:30 PM