In response to Mark J. Moller: Let's assume all of your points are accurate: What doesn't get funded in order to pump $500 million into a ballpark? Or do taxes get raised to pay for it? Or do we raise the restaurant and bar taxes even further? Or put a tax on tickets? I agree with the comment by Dean Lindberg that what is needed is a rational proposal that the public can buy into. If such a proposal is not forthcoming then let it go.
I vaguely remember a proposal from several years ago by a group led by Steve Stone (formerly a Cubs broadcaster) that would privately fund a stadium and the purchase of the Twins. (I think the price they were willing to pay for the Twins was the sticking point.) What they would get was the rights to develop the area around the stadium. I don't remember how much public funding they were asking for, but that sounded more like what a reasonable proposal would be. The investors would have both risk and reward. The return to the city would be proportional to its investment: land, services, etc. Flowery rhetoric on the value of that championship feeling is great. I loved being here for '87 and '91. I sure never got that buzz growing up in Chicago, where I learned to love baseball. But what am I willing to pay for the possibility of recreating that feeling at some indeterminate point in the future? One last thing... Portland, Oregon has recently hit the top of several "Best Places to Live"-type ratings. I don't know how well-deserved that is but assuming it is, how many pro sports franchises do they have? Answer: 1 - The NBA Trailblazers. Minneapolis can still be a great city even without the Twins. Walt Cygan 12-5 Keewaydin _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
