Professional sports teams in large cities are a fact of life. A lot of people want to watch them, either on TV or in person. Granted, on this list it may be a minority of members, but a lot of folks do want them here.
Referring to the stadium as "an overpriced playpen for millionaires and their billionaire owners" is certainly a catchy phrase. But it doesn't contribute anything to the conversation. Yes, sports team owners tend to be pretty rich, and the players make good money too. But the stadium isn't for them; it's for the fans. It's the same with the Walker, or the Guthrie, or the Ordway. Sure, the artists who exhibit or perform in them may or may not make as much as Randy Moss, but they are still publicly subsidized entertainment facilities. It's your perogative to look down on the guy who wears the blond wig with braids to the Vikings game, but he's no different from the nob who wears evening dress to the orchestra. Yes, Carl Pohlad will make more money with a new facility. Sure, he's richer than God. So what? I remember when he bought the team, saving it from being moved to another town. He was a hero then. He's probably not making a lot from the team nowadays, if he's making money at all. Yes, a new stadium would mean he could sell the team for more money. That's a fact of life. Target is also worth more since they built their new headquarters downtown. We ponied up for that, too--and though I complained and moaned about the subsidies, I have to say I really like shopping at the downtown Target. Minneapolis itself isn't going to be on the hook for a lot of money in any case. We have a law that says we can't put more than $10 million into such a project. It's going to be a county-wide, if not metro-wide funding issue. And, Pohlad won't own it--the Sports Commission will. Yeah, I think sports owners get a pretty good deal. But if we get a good deal out of it also, what's wrong with that? The Hennepin entertainment district seems to be taking off, and 80 home games right there during the time the Timberwolves are off seems like it would add a lot to the north end of downtown. As for the dome, if we have to, demolish it. We got our money's worth. I can imagine a lot of things that could be built there which would really enhance that area too. Leaving off the name calling, is this a good idea for the city? M. G. Stinnett Jordan REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
