Minnesota Vikings Stadium: Vikings Will Not File For Relocation Today
by Christopher Gates on Feb 15, 2012 10:00 AM CST
in Minnesota Vikings Stadium
Email
PrintToday is the 15th of February, which is the last day that the Vikings could file an intent to relocate with the National Football League for the 2012 NFL season. Late on Tuesday, Minnesota Vikings Vice President Lester Bagley said that the team would not take that route.
Even if the team had filed that notice, the move would have been subject to a vote from the other 31 NFL owners, and that would have been followed by the selection of a new city and the collection of a franchise fee.
Bagley said that there was progress being made towards getting a stadium bill completed during this legislative session, which has about six more weeks left before the legislature closes up shop for 2012.
Then again, now that the last bit of real leverage the Vikings have on this matter is officially gone. . .an aspect of this whole thing that is entirely the fault of the team for not exercising it. . .the legislature will have the ability to do exactly the same thing on the matter of a Vikings' stadium that they've done every year for the last decade, that being kick the can down the road for another year.
Never mind the fact that doing so will add anywhere between $30 and $50 million to the cost of a new stadium, making it that much harder to push through next year. The important thing is that there's an election coming up, and nobody is going to be forced to make any really tough decisions before we reach that point.
I think it's time to start researching who has pro-stadium and anti-stadium leanings in the Minnesota legislature. The only way this is going to get done is if the deck is completely stacked in our favor, it appears.
41 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Never underestimate the power of an election year.
Politicians would bass a bill declaring the moon made of Wisconsin Cheddar if it were considered a publicly favorable position in an election year. At least then we’d have rationale for a Newt Gingrich moon base.
by Jepp The Viking on Feb 15, 2012 10:10 AM CST reply actions
what you suggest might be good for a vikings stadium
but isn’t good for Minnesota as a whole. Before you say that “the will of the voters should be done”, perhaps you should think about the fact that none of the stadium people want a voter referendum on a tax increase to fund that stadium. Because they believe that the voters will overwhelmingly say “NO” to it. In other words, you are suggesting that only the will of the voters who think like you should be done. What the rest of the voters want, even though they are the majority, shouldn’t matter if they don’t agree with you.
That seems a little bit anathema to the notion of elections, don’t you think?
He's also speaking on a Pro-Vikings and Pro-Stadium in Minnesota website
He’s, for lack of a better phrase, “preaching to the choir” and if you live in Minnesota and are pro-stadium in vikings even if its w/ public taxes or whatever else, find out who is running that is pro-stadium and vote accordingly. Might be enough to sway the votes.
White Horn Gold Pants
No
It’s called representative democracy, and our elected representatives are supposed to make decisions that benefit their constituents even if they are unpopular.
Great point
Otherwise we would have like a weekly vote on EVERYthing government and it’d be 100% in the control of the people. That’s not the best thing. When you go to the ballot-box, you’re voting for a PERSON. You may believe you’re voting for ideals or personality or that WWJD thing where you think that Rep is going to vote the same way you would only to find out that politician was full of shit during their campaigning and were trying to get you as a vote. Ok, rant over.
White Horn Gold Pants
I wasn't trying to suggest that every little thing be brought up for a vote,
but rather, the referendums on raising county taxes that are already supposed to be voted on.
I was just supporting amiller's opinion.
Basically saying that requiring a referendum for the Reps of the state is a joke because they’re voted by the people and are supposed to represent the people. They are supposed to make the decisions. They’re not supposed to be voted in by the people just to ask the people what to do everytime a controversial item is brought up. I understand your point is just that the reality is that there would be a required referendum and there’s no way to work around that. I disagree with the rule, not you.
White Horn Gold Pants
And to add to that
The reason the people put in charge are supposed to make those decisions is because they(the informed political figures) can get all of the details and information on the bill and make their decision off of that whereas the majority of the people voting “NO” on the referendum simply look at “NO” for taxes, not knowing any of the details they are voting on. THAT is the issue with the referendum. And to support that argument, I would say that even a majority of the people voting “YES” on the referendum would simply be voting that because they are Vikings fans and don’t care to know about the details either.
White Horn Gold Pants
The downside...
… to this representative democracy in places like Minneapolis is that there really isn’t much of a choice. Do you know how long it has been since a Republican has been on the city council? There’s been a smattering of Green Party members, but every single other member has been DFL. That means that the vast majority are incumbents that win every election with little to no opposition. So when the City Charter clearly states that there should be a referendum for any public stadium funding, it’s critical that this be respected. Especially since the City Charter was amended not long ago to avoid situations where the voters get little to no say. It’s anti-democratic and anti-capitalism.
Except it's those incumbent Dems
Who advocated for the charter amendment.
"supposed to"
Means the legislature passed a law saying that local governments can’t raise sales tax locally without a referendum.
It doesn’t mean that the legislature can’t pass a law that raises sales tax locally.
agreed...but if almost every time the county wants to raise local taxes
the state does it for them without a referendum, while legal, kind of negates the usefulness of that law. If the legislature uses this end around often enough, there are bound to be some repercussions.
Not really
or I guess, maybe, but I don’t think that law is very useful anyway.
It’s supposed to be a check on local governments, and to the extent that getting around it requires state-level approval, it is.
while true...but perhaps
spending the hundreds of millions of dollars on a stadium to get maybe 10s of millions of dollars in return, isn’t exactly in the best interests of the state as a whole. So, to flip it around, maybe the decision to not fund a stadium would be best, even though, in certain quarters, would be unpopular.
Oh sure, I'm not an economist by any stretch
But even if its like $10M/year for however long the stadium lasts, wouldn’t that be a solid investment for the state? I mean, if you can keep a part of Minnesota “heritage” or whatever you want to call it, local pride, and could see to at least get your $$ back then what’s the problem? It’s not like investing in an NFL is a BAD thing so long as you make sure and have the right plan. The state’s making sure they get the best deal possible just like the Vikings and if drawing out this process allows them to get a better deal then so be it. That’s their responsibility, but us as fans would like to see the end game a little sooner rather than later because this is depressing.
White Horn Gold Pants
If that's the right decision
then it’s the one the elected representatives should make.
But it’s not spending hundreds of millions of dollars to get maybe 10s of million in return. It’s spending tens of millions of dollars per year over time to pay back bonds secured by the stadium to get tens of millions of dollars per year in direct returns on the taxes payed by team employees PLUS whatever additional marginal benefit comes from ancillary investment, multiplier effects and reputation effects.
There is lot of room to debate how that comes out. But I really don’t like politicians being shielded by referendum requirements that shield them from accountability for taking a position.
As the Vikings say
that’s $20 million/yr. I don’t know what the individual players pay in Minnesota State income taxes per year, no one has ever stated that. Combine that with what is spent on gameday, remember, state sales tax is lower than 10%…meaning the state gets less than $1 per every $100 spent. And there is no state sales tax on clothing…meaning that sales of jersey’s, sweat pants, coats, etc. does not generate any money for the state. I haven’t seen any definitive numbers on what is spent on game day….it is a difficult task, with a lot of assumptions that might be close to being correct for one game but not even close the next game. Also, there is the matter of interest to be paid on those bonds. Without knowing those items, it is difficult to tell if the stadium would be financially viable or not. And in the absence of such details, it would be foolish to trade in the fortune for what’s behind door #3.
Nope
The $20 mil is direct taxes (see pdf here) paid by the players and the club. About half of that income tax from the players.
But that’s only direct tax revenue. It doesn’t include taxes generated by business that run parking, for example, or bars and restaurants nearby or showing games. It doesn’t cover other events. It doesn’t account for how having a team benefit’s the city’s reputation. It doesn’t account for any multiplier effects that result from the team’s economic activity.
And again, it’s not “tradi[ing[ a fortune.” It’s taking out a loan that will need to be repaid annually in amounts that are very similar to the direct taxes paid for by the team (remember the “just pay for it out of our taxes” “plan”?)
But I reject your premise. We’re never going to be able to fully quantify the economic impact. It’s good enough for me that it’s close and the team is an important part of our community, history and culture.
I think Bagley's trying to save face
The Vikings dont have a leg to stand on. The fact that there is “progress” in the stadium talks is completely irrelevent. BTW, when was the last update? I think the last update was the Vikings turning down an Arden Hills offer. Before that it was the Dome site and other Minneapolis locations not being viable. I think what Bagley meant to say is that we(vikings) don’t have any leverage and these politicians want to make sure they have their seat occupied in November and don’t care about working FOR the people, only for themselves so we’re going to say that we have progress and that’s good enough for us to stick around another year, I guess because we can’t go anywhere else right now anyways.
White Horn Gold Pants
exactly. i knew the vikes had nothing as soon as goodell c**kblocked them during super bowl week with the LA announcement.
by Randytheviking17 on Feb 15, 2012 11:26 AM CST via Android app up reply actions
If you beleive in LA or not they were not ready in 2012. 2013 will be much different.
Mid summer the threat will become very real once the city passes of on the EIR for Farmers field. I don’t think the VIkes will move because their are California teams that need stadiums. But come near the mid summer towards the end of the year the threat of relocation could become much more real.
by raider.freak on Feb 15, 2012 1:37 PM CST up reply actions
Oh absolutely, and I think the legislative session actually means a lot
If the state takes this “deadline” that the Vikings had and sit on it until November or later, then Zygi will/should have a few things to say about that. I think he would be forced to give his ultimatum next winter and he won’t show the patience he’s shown this winter.
White Horn Gold Pants
I've said it before
But I’ll say it again.
The Vikings need to get the will of the people behind them on the stadium. The legislature simply will not move to fund if they don’t believe enough people are supporting it.
Right now, there is a LOT of negative and conflicted sentiment because of all the confusion, and the Vikings need to start running a better PR campaign.
Even if it doesn’t go to a referendum vote, more people need to feel good about this so they can say positive things to their representatives, who will then vote accordingly.
by liveforadrenaline on Feb 15, 2012 11:29 AM CST reply actions
Won't matter, this is 2012
Maybe the Legislature is holding out on a Vikings Stadium in case we need that money for the apocalypse?
Remember, remember the seventh of November.
I think the Vikings shooting down the Arden Hills re-proposal...
…was a turning point that didn’t favor the Vikings. They looked selfish and, in my mind, unreasonable in their demands. How can the Vikings expect to get stadium naming rights without actually going out there and building and owning their own stadium? I can understand their opposition to the surtax on tickets. I’m less sympathetic to their desire to get all of the parking revenues. I think that stadium naming rights issue is going to give the politicians all the cover they need to keep a deal from happening. The Vikings need to give on that and give in quickly..or pony up and build and own their own stadium. Having their cake and eating it too won’t work in this environment.
"Men are creatures with two legs and eight hands. - Jayne Mansfield
I don't know what the Vikings actually declined
I don’t know if they listed out items in the proposal that won’t work or if they just lumped all of those items(parking/seat tax/naming rights) together and declined all of it collectively. If they stated specifically and listed out that none of those are up for negotiation then that does hurt their side because they could use some of those for negotiation. Why not take a $10M hit on some parking naming rights if you can get the rest financed another way? But I can see where that’s expected income for them to start paying themselves back for the amount they are putting in. If I recall, I think Ramsey County was only asking for those incomes for non-football game related events which I find fair, but between parking/stadium naming rights for almost 97% fo the year is a BIG chunk of it since we’re only talking like 10 days the team will be using the facility for.
White Horn Gold Pants
yep, they didn't decline anything. they are just still favoring the original ah plan.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
Except that
The legislature, the governor and the county don’t have that plan on the table anymore.
And actually
They did reject the new funding mechanism. My take is they are agnostic on how the County gets it’s contribution, as long as it doesn’t come out of their pockets.
As for whether it’s bad move, it is what it is. This legislature is not interested in any tax increase, even if it’s for a stadium (or maybe especially if it’s for a stadium).
I haven't seen naming rights be a big issue for anyone yet
And the latest Arden Hills plan left the naming revenues to the team, no? They said they would sell naming rights for parking lots but not for the stadium, didn’t they? Regardless, I’m not sure how much the stadium naming rights are worth anyway. I guess I assume not enough to make any material difference.
But I guess I think the Vikes saying no to the latest from Commissioner Ortega suggests that they think what Minneapolis is offering is more attractive than what is effectively an increase in their contribution in Arden Hills (by charging user fees that are money that would otherwise have been available for to them). Either that or they think they can still get Arden Hills done with an alternative funding mechanism.
$7.30 cents is the ONE TIME actual cost per minnesotan per year for 30 years
To finance $1.1 billion.
If only $333 million is needed, then this figure drops by 70% or $2.21 or the price of an expensive cup of coffee or soda.
It’s ridiculously cheap….for a straight up cost.
It’s all about proper perspective. In my opinion, behind the scenes – the political process would like to extract more from gullible taxpayers if they can out of their sheer stupidity and get away from not even calling it a ‘tax’.
For example, electronic pull tab revenue would assume to grow over 30 years, where the net effect to the state is not a fixed amount but grows profitably as well. Instead of loaning $333 million straight up, they have a chance to make as much or double that amount over 30 years.
You can now see why it may be easy for the state to become ‘hooked’ on this revenue as it can fund many of other initiatives. Met Sports Commission is hooked with the dome as is, a risky consequence with the long term assumption the Vikings continue play within their jurisdiction. When was the last time the MSC actually helped sports initiatives outside of their jurisdiction?
Do a simple one time tax and for once, be honest to the taxpayers on what’s really going on. The 30 year price per minnesotan is only $2.21*30 or $66 bucks if financing $333million. A great deal in my perspective for 30 years of vikings entertainment.
Vikings in 2012 will be a Wonder-ful year. Seriously!!
I also love the game of golf. My favorite golf GPS app is OptimalClub.
It is hands down the BEST golf aid you'll ever have for club distances
under current elevation and weather conditions. Stop guessing & score low!
by VikesFanSince1967 on Feb 15, 2012 3:43 PM CST reply actions
start a fund today, if it is as easy as you say
you could end up paying for 30 people’s worth of debt each month for the year. Have each of your family contribute the same amount, then others won’t need to.
Well he did say...
out of their(taxpayers) sheer stupidity
And God knows, there is no shortage of stupidity emanating from the “No Wilfare” crowd. There is plenty of shortsightedness and contemptible selfishness. I get sick to my stomach reading their selectively filtered tripe from the Strib that I’ve stopped reading. Say, if losing a professional team was no big deal because it is so bad for the citizenry, why did Minnesota entice two that they lost to come back paying through the nose for them?
I HAVE THE FARKING SOLUTION DAMMIT (said with feigned angst).
the best possible site for a stadium is actually in st. paul…
tear down the capitol and build the stadium on that site, then
move the capitol building functions into the empty metrodome.
done !!!
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
Two bird with one stone!
The capitol is crumbling and needs major repairs anyway.
Think bigger.
How about a legislature with a retractable roof?
"Men are creatures with two legs and eight hands. - Jayne Mansfield
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Daily Norseman
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
- Alex Smith gets blown up by Jon Beason over Cam Newton comments
