I think all of the politicians have gotten the message that citizens don't
want general tax revenues to be used for stadiums. But I think there is a
knee-jerk reaction seems some people where they see any public participation
whatsoever as bad. There are ways of doing a deal without putting a dime of
general tax revenues into it. The most obvious category is self-generated
revenues. To pay for the Metrodome, there was a 10% tax on tickets and a
tax on concessions. This money in fact paid the bonds off early. A sales
tax on downtown hotel and liquor sales in the downtown and were levied for
three years early in the facilities history but never levied again. The
self-generated revenues, in fact, paid off the building early. The Target
Center is paid for primarily with parking revenues generated from people
visiting the facility.
There are ways that government can participate in the stadium debate without
spending any of my or your tax money.
Carol Becker
Longfellow
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Hohmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Dooley, Bill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; David Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mpls
list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2001 11:38 AM
Subject: [Mpls] Vikes/Twins Stadium scenarios
> Regarding all the talk of new 'privately financed sports facilities':
>
> The phrase 'Public contributions that won't raise your taxes' is an
> oxymoron! Where do public funds come from? How are they raised?
Public
> funds are a result of taxation and payment of fees.
>
> There is no such thing as a interest-free loan! Someone is either paying
> the interest or foregoing the interest-- essentially the same thing!
There
> is no such thing as free money. If any public entity is providing a
> interest-free loan, it is the public that is paying the cost of the
forgiven
> interest. The same funds could just as easily be earning interest and/or
> paying down public debt and lessening the pressure for more income taxes
or
> property taxes or sales taxes or fees of all ilk at every level of
> government!
>
> Donated public land is not free either. As a real asset, it holds
intrinsic
> value for the owners- again the public. I haven't heard of any private
> landowners offering to donate land or install the infrastructure needed
> (sewer/water/roads/electricity/parking/access in general....). Publicly
> owned real estate tends to appreciate in value just like private property,
> and it has the capability to generate revenues for the public in lieu of
new
> income taxes, sales taxes and increased property taxes.
>
> Shifting other public revenue funds (parking revenues, bond payment
streams,
> etc) from one destination to another is just a shell game; robbing Peter
to
> pay Paul. If the funds are being diverted from a public to a private
> interest, it represents a direct public subsidy.
>
> Even the use of gambling funds from a publicly owned casino represents a
> public subsidy, albeit from a new source of significant public revenue.
> Lets just recognize that all these non-private sources of funds do
represent
> public subsidies. Once that is clear to all voters, taxpayers and
> lawmakers, let the negotiations begin!
>
> Michael Hohmann
> 13th Ward
> http://www2.visi.com/mahco
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> > Dooley, Bill
> > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2001 12:22 PM
> > To: David Brauer; Mpls list
> > Subject: Re: [Mpls] Vikings! Vikings! Vikings are coming!
> >
> >
> > No. I have yet to receive any stadium polling calls, but the
> > lateness of the
> > legislative hour has stadium proponents moving into fifth gear.
> > Here are my
> > stadium comments:
> >
> > "Public contributions that will not raise your taxes," forgiven
> > sales taxes,
> > no-interest loans, and infrastructure improvements surrounding a
stadium,
> > while not raising taxes per se, all deplete the state's or a
> > city's general
> > fund. I am firmly convinced that the only way there will be a new
stadium
> > for the Twins or Vikings/Gophers is through some sort of casino revenue.
> > Either a sharing arrangement with the tribes or I would not put
> > it past the
> > proponents to go for an outright placement of a privately-run casino
(with
> > the state taking a share of its revenue for sports projects) in downtown
> > Minneapolis, downtown St. Paul or the Mall of America.
> >
> > Bill Dooley
> > Ward 13
> > Kenny
>
> _______________________________________________
> Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
> Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
> http://e-democracy.org/mpls
>
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
