>MAS: I'm not sure where you're getting this argument from. Now if the team were >locked into a long-term lease, it's possible they could attempt to break it and >public money would be spent fighting that. If there's a loan, it's a loan, >plain and simple. It gets enforced. Not even bankruptcy would allow a teams >owners to skip on what's owed. If this is such a good risk why isn't the private sector doing it? What bothers me is the Twins were so adamant about not working with the Private group New Ballpark that was looking at private solutions to the problem.
There is a lot on the city's plate right now. >As far as a public corporation, I would be all for that too. Ask anybody from >Green Bay and they'll tell you how great it's worked out for them with the >Packers. If our political leaders could put together a plan and get Major >League Baseball to approve a sale to a public corporation, then I'd be honored >to buy shares in the Twins. This reinforces my point that it's political will, >not money, that is the major stumbling block here. It's clearly greed by the baseball owners that's the stumbling block -- and this city -- like many others are tired of the extortionistic tactics used by the owners. >Gary Bowman wrote: > >"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." > >MAS: I agree that many corporations are hypocrites. But that's not the point >here. I'm trying to advocate the voice of the fan. If there were a way to >build the ballpark fully from private funds in this market, I have to believe it would have been done by now. My hope is to find some kind of puublic-private partnership that allows the team to stay without being a total loser for the taxpayers. I think my proposal at least moves in that direction and shows that the problem is less about dollars and more about the lack of political will. ============================== That's not the case. There are ways of doing with with private money -- but the Twins management refused to work with groups that have worked for that option -- such as New Ballpark. >If there are 100,000 fans who would be so devastated to lose the Twins, >each should take out a $3,000 loan for three or four years and combine >the funds to build a park. That would run about $75 a month." > >MAS: Maybe Bruce missed it, but part of my proposal suggested a progressive >surcharge, specifically to keep the cheap seats cheap. Also, those who have >attended games in the past season or more can attest that upper deck general >admission seats (which were actually $5) were still not very popular due to the >lousy view. Lower level general admission tickets were $10 each, a better value >on an hourly basis for your entertainment dollar than going to a movie. > >I'd also like to see Bruce back up his claim about teams with new ballparks >being money-losers. Which teams and how much were their losses? Were there any >other circumstances involved that may have contributed to losses, such as a >lousy product on the field or social backlash because the team has players or >owners that are jerks? ========================================= If a stadium were a good investment, the private sector would be chomping at the bit to make that investment. I would rather see city tax dollars go to basic city services than corporate welfare. Eva Eva Young Central _______________________________________ 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
