>And again, I would like to point out that my argument is for STATE
issuance of 
>bonds for financing a ballpark, NOT Minneapolis.  So comparisions to MRI
aren't 
>really accurate.  
It's still increased taxes whether it's the state or the city -- and
there's a big shortfall in the state budget right now.  

>A more appropriate comparison might be to the $20+ million in state money
that 
>is expected to be requested for the Planetarium next year.  Sure, it's 
>educational and I fully support funding this project even though I may
never go 
>see it if it's built, but will it draw 1.8 million visitors downtown for 81 
>dates?  Accounting for the smaller request and being open year-round, will
it 
>draw 400,000 visitors a year?  Are there lots of folks who will stay in
hotels 
>or visit restaurants or bars after they've visited the Planetarium?  Can
it pay 
>back a bond issuance through ticket surcharges or are us taxpayers on the
hook 
>right from the get-go?
How many people stay in hotels or visit restaurants after Twins games?  And
how many people stay in Minneapolis Hotels and eat in Minneapolis
Restaurants after Twins games?  

Studies on this issue have shown that when there isn't a pro sports team,
people spend their entertainment dollars in other ways.  

>How many are out there who support funding the Planetarium (or funding for
any 
>facility for the arts, for that matter) but not a stadium, even though
either 
>would theoretically put the taxpayer on the hook.  Does that make you a 
>hypocrite or a snob?  What argument do you offer for why you should get your 
>theater or museum but I can't have my ballpark?
Well I'm one who has gone to about 3 or 4 twins games since living in the
cities.  I also think that the quality theater in Minneapolis makes this
city unique.  There are lots of cities that have pro sports -- but not many
cities that have the quality of theater and arts that we do here in
Minneapolis.  

Neither the planetarium or any of the theaters that get public money pay
workers the type of out of control salaries that ball players make.  

>Also, I would venture to argue that the public does have some upside in the 
>deal.  We get to keep our baseball team.  I consider that a pretty big
upside as
>do 61 percent of those responding to the Minnesota Poll that the Strib
published
>on December 5th who agreed that losing the Twins would be a big loss for the 
>state.  I'd also like to respectfully point out that in the same poll, 72 
>percent of those polled favored (56 percent strongly!) a financing plan
using 
>surcharges on tickets, parking and/or concessions.  So much for there
being a 
>majority of the public adamantly opposed to any sort of public financing 
>proposals.
===============================================
As I understood it 67% opposed public financing.  

>How about this, though:  Since public financing would supposedly offer much 
>benefit to a team's owners and little to the taxpayer, shouldn't that be 
>spurring all the more interest in a community ownership plan like the one
Rep. 
>Kahn posted not that long ago?  Wouldn't that be a total win-win for the
public?

Not if it's not a sound business proposal.  What is stopping fans from
forming a non-profit now to buy the twins -- and getting a sugar daddy to
be the 25% investor?  Why does Kahn's proposal require the legislature to
act?  

What bothers me Mark, is this predictable act of extortion by Sielig and
Pohlad is getting the city, the state and the media to focus on this issue
-- in a way that keeps attention from other issues that are much more the
province of government.  This whole stadium task force costs taxpayer
money.  So does all the time city council members and the mayor elect are
putting into the issue.  Rybak certainly wasn't elected to subsidize the
stadium.  He ran against public funding of the stadium and attacked his
opponents for supporting public funding of the stadium.  Lisa McDonald was
attacked wrongly in this regard.  Her record on the subject was clearly
opposed to public funding of a stadium.  

Regarding publically funding sports -- I'd rather see these dollars go to
venues where citizens can participate in the sport -- rather than just
watch.  

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

Reply via email to