Mark Anderson is so right. Every poll ever taken in this state shows a 2-1 majority opposed to public financing of professional sports facilities. As usual, proponents of publicly financed stadiums would like to cast public opinion in the distorted light of wishful thinking. They are the ones who constitute the minority of Minnesotans.
All of would just as soon have these teams here, but people in this state are NOT willing to do anything to keep their professional sports teams. The vast majority of Minnesotans have their priorities right: professional sports is just another form of entertainment and al other forms of entertainment have to function on their own resources, not ours. The fact that the teams have spent the better part of ten years blackmailing and lying and scamming the public and the Legislature about leaving, contracting and/or selling these teams off - but are still here and playing and making millions in profits without new stadia is the best answer to the Mark Snyders of the world. Ah yes, history. That old nagging recorded truth. Gets ya right here, doesn't it. Andy Driscoll Saint Paul -------- > From: "Anderson, Mark (GE Infrastructure)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:01:24 -0500 > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [Mpls] Stadium > > Mark Snyder wrote: > That's because there are a lot of people who DO actually want these > discussions to take place because they DO want to ensure that we keep the > Twins and Vikings in Minnesota. Part of this is due to the connection we have > with these teams and part of it is recognizing that keeping these teams costs > a heck of a lot less than trying to attract new ones. One only needs to look > at the saga of the North Stars and the Wild to recognize this. > > Now while there may be some folks who cannot fathom the civic value that > professional sports teams bring to our core cities and state, they are still a > small minority of our population, albeit a very vocal one. > > Mark Anderson replies: > Mark you absolutely wrong if you say that only a small minority don't want to > spend public money on stadiums. The only referendum we've had on the subject > was in Minneapolis. The MAJORITY voted against spending more than $10 million > on a stadium. As I recall, the referendum passed with a two to one margin. > Personally, I would have voted against spending $1 on a stadium, if I'd had > the option. Based on everything I've heard, I suspect a similar referendum > would go the same way in St. Paul, the suburbs, and outstate. And I think the > pro-stadium folks have blocked such a referendum because they know what the > result would be. Certainly the Mpls politicians have no excuse for supporting > public financing -- they KNOW what their constituents think. > > Mark V Anderson > Bancroft > 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 > 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
