ANY public funding of a professional sports stadium is unacceptable both economically
and morally.  By definition, pro sports is entertainment.  That puts it below
almost anything on the funding list because we must pay for basic services,
services for the health and welfare of our citizens (such as schools, housing,
and health care), and infrastructure before we even consider paying for toys.
 Minneapolis, and in fact all of Minnesota, is not meeting these needs.  Therefore,
we have no business discussing exotic ways to take money from these needs, or
raising money for stadiums instead of for these needs.

Even if we had a few dollars to spare, pro sports should not be their recipient.
 A very small number of people attend baseball games - at most 1% of Minnesotans.
 Other sports have a bit bigger following, but still around 1% who actually
go to a game at least once every year or two.  This means that the rest of Minnesota,
rich and heartbreakingly poor alike (the latter of which WILL NOT be going to
any games!), is being asked to subsidize the fun & games of a very few sports
fans.  Others may argue that many more Minnesotans enjoy watching pro sports
on TV, so there is greater state-wide benefit, but this is false logic.  The
ONLY appreciable economic benefit to Minnesota from a stadium would come from
fans who happen to come TO the stadium and spend entertainment dollars in the
area.  By and large, they're well-off suburbanites who come in for the game
and leave again without shopping or eating around the stadium, so where's the
great pay-off?  

And who can we ask in good faith to bear the cost?  Nobody but the fans.  It
is wrong to ask all Minneapolitans to pay for these folks' entertainment, especially
since we also have to bear the additional crime, noise, traffic, and garbage.
 It is wrong to ask the whole state to provide funding, since most residents
of the state will never travel a hundred or more miles for a game. A successful
entertainment enterprise pays for itself from ticket, souvenir, and concession
revenues.  I'm not saying that a single sports team should pay for an entire
multi-use stadium.  However, let's look at the Metrodome, which is shared by
the Vikings, Twins, Gophers, and a few specialty events (concerts being off
its menu since it's proven not to be suitable).  Let's say that those three
teams account for 80% of the dome's use.  Great - they should have paid for
80% of the cost of the stadium UP-FRONT, in proportion to each team's percentage
of sports use.  Simple.  Only then would it have been reasonable for Minneapolis
to pony up the remaining 20% of the cost to essentially provide a public venue
for special events brought to Minneapolis.  Further, those sports teams must
pay for their share out of commercially available funds, at the going interest
rate.  How much economic benefit is stolen from the area by teams getting special
deals which don't put interest dollars back into the economy?  Plenty!  The
state loses a huge value in the use of money every time it provides these interest-free
or other special financing deals.

But let's get back to the real issue:  if we're willing to get creative to give
free money to greedy corporate owners to employ 50 players plus staff, let's
instead get creative to educate our youngsters, house our families, clean up
our green spaces, and otherwise tend to the proper mission of government.  How
about interest-free financing for $100 million in low-cost quality housing?
 Another $100 million to not only bring inner city schools up to par, but to
shepherd our kids of all races into higher education so they can make a good
income and in turn create businesses and jobs to grow our economy?  Why have
we, as a society, allowed the Carl Pohlads of the world to dream of half-billion-dollar
stadiums on the public dollar, while not letting our kids dream of a full stomach
and a secure, enjoyable career?  Is Carl Pohlad more important than an entire
generation?  Nay, and for shame that we act as if he is!

Let's get back to the mission!

Roxana Orrell
8th Ward




>Message: 4
>Date: 11 Nov 2001 22:03:58 -0800
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: [Mpls] Twins ballpark funding proposal
>
>On Sun, 11 November 2001, "Walt Cygan" wrote:
>
>"Mark Snyder wrote: 'Assuming an annual attendance of 2 million fans...'
>From http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/MIN/attend.shtml:
>
>The average annual attendance for the Twins over the last 10 years was just
a shade under 1.5 million,..." 
>
>I too will commend Mark Snyder for his efforts but agree with Walt's sentiments
that given the attitudes seen thus far, I doubt baseball's or the business communities
willingness to put out the funds supposedly needed. 
>
>I've said it before and will again.  It's immensely ironic that the business
community is so quick to chant "less government, less taxes, free market" when
there's talk of public investment in social programs but have no problem going
to the trough when they're the recipients (and I'd argue far less needy ones).

>
>I also will strenuously argue to my dying breath that businesspeople smart
enough, talented enough, and having enough resources to make the immense wealth
they have DO HAVE the ability to build a stadium themselves.  The reality is
they're smart enough, talented enough, and have enough resources to know that
it's not a wise investment.  Hence, let someone else pay for it.
>
>Gary Bowman
>1-1
>
>Sincerely,
>Gary Bowman, Jr.
>2600 Taylor Street Northeast
>Minneapolis, MN 55418
_______________________________________
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

Reply via email to