As a Minneapolis resident, I would be happy to have St. Paul pick up the bill for the stadium. I recognize the benefit to the city to have the stadium downtown, but the expense is too great for my tastes.
That said, why would St. Paul not want to enter into the competition with the help of Ramsey County? Did they just lack the political support or is there some difference in the country boundaries (as opposed to the Hennepin/Mpls relationship) that makes this not a viable option?
I wouldn't want to be paying the tax that would be required just within St. Paul. I think R.T. Rybak's comments to that effect are not sour grapes as opined by one of the Strib columnists, but they are dead on - this is too big a project to put on a city alone...
On another note, today's Strib article about Red McCombs announcement that he would move or sell the Vikings had an unintentionally funny comment -the Vikings have spent about $2M on lobbying efforts over the past 2 years to get a stadium, but they were smiling at the $500K allocated to study the issue. Too bad they didn't spend their own money doing the same feasibility study - it would have saved the team and the state some money!
Mike Hess
King Field
>From: "David Brauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Mpls list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [Mpls] Grow on Mpls stadium bid
>Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 20:42:44 -0500
>
>Doug Grow takes some shots, fair and unfair, at Minneapolis leadership's
>conduct during the stadium debate.
>
>http://www.startribune.com/stories/465/2848617.html
>
>Grow examines a lot of canards and is usually pretty good at puncturing
>them. But he lets this quote from Tommy Osthoff go unchallenged:
>
>"I think Minneapolis and Hennepin County have more lobbyists over here
>than the rest of the state combined," Osthoff said. "They're always
>claiming that everything that's happening on their side of the river is
>regional. Everything else in the state is local and some of us just get
>tired of that."
>
>What a crock. The state didn't pay for the Convention Center -
>unarguably an asset of regional significance - the city did. The state
>didn't pay for the Metrodome - it was a local bar tax and a user fee.
>Target Center? Aside from a $750,000 state annual payment, all financed
>by Minneapolis.
>
>Meanwhile, St. Paul has the state-financed Science Museum, Children's
>Museum, and Xcel Arena, which has beaucoup state bucks. But
>Minneapolis's Planetarium? Sorry, pay for it yourself.
>
>At least when it comes to major education/entertainment thingies, the
>Capitol City has us whupped. So at least in this "regional" competition,
>it seems to me Minneapolis has reason to whine, at least compared to
>Osthoff's St. Paul. What I am missing?
>
>David Brauer
>King Field
>
>_______________________________________
>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
_______________________________________
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
