Just a clarification, Tim:
> For example, the current Metrodome was funded in part by an
extra
> percent or two of sales tax applied to meals sold near the stadium.
But
> that was interpreted to mean any meals sold in the downtown area, and
at
> any time, not just when there was an event at the stadium. So for
years,
> all of the people who worked Monday-Friday in the downtown area paid
extra
> foe each days lunch to finance the stadium. Every plan I've seen
continues
> this fraud.
The memory banks are starting to corrode, but I think Tim is referencing
the liquor tax, which I believe was three percent, and was only levied
for three years ('82-'84). I don't think there was ever a meal tax. So
unless our Downtowners were having a liquid lunch (I know I had a few
working for the Twin Cities Reader then!!), they were spared the Dome's
financing.
The Dome, whatever you think of it, is a model of user financing. I
think it's a classic case of getting what you pay for, but that's a
different thread.
David Brauer
King Field - Ward 10
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________
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
