Jim makes some excellent arguments which I will leave below. What he failed to do, IMHO, it to give a good argument why taxpayers should be compelled to put forward moneys for a billion dollar enterprise. He talks about parks and tennis courts and golf courses. Minneapolis, Hennepin county and Minnesota are not being asked to build a golf course for Jim Palmer. We are being asked to build a stadium for a billionaire to have a playing field for his team. While I like having the sports around, and do not WANT then to leave, I also do not want to be compelled to pay to keep them here. These are businesses and should be treated as such. If Carl can't make "enough" money with his team here let him move it or sell it to someone else. Target can't make "enough" money with Marshal Fields and Mervyns, so they are selling them off. That was a business decision. Maybe they should be in line at the public trough and ask for a handout so they can make "enough" money too.
I keep putting enough in quotes since it has been attributed to Carl Pohlad that he has said he can't make "enough" money with the Twins in the dome. I wonder what "enough" is to a billionaire? If unemployment, health care costs, and homelessness were not such large problems in lour area I would be willing to support poor Mr. Pohlad in his efforts to make "enough" money. But we have far too many people that are much more deserving of my tax dollars than he is. Jim mentions some of the arts venues locally. Unless I have been misinformed, the Walker is expanding with private dollars. Likewise the Institute of arts and children's theatre. Not sure about Orchestra Hall. The Guthrie is an issue I am not thrilled with, but they are largely privately funding their new theatre. I don't see Carl stepping up to the plate with his wallet open, he is balking at going a third of the way. Just recently there was a wonderful article that showed how the Twins can afford to build their own stadium, pay it off in about 12 years, and all with out public money. I would attach the link if I were more adept at that kind of thing. Jim also mentions the tax payer league, which has not said anything about tax funding a stadium, just lots of rhetoric about public subsidies to transit. Our roads are subsidized much more than anyone will admit in public. I fear our gas tax would be much more than it is if it truly paid for the road infrastructure we love to use with out much thought to the costs of it. Metro transit is at least owned by the public that is paying for it. The Twins are owned by a greedy old man that is unwilling to pay much of anything toward a stadium for his own benefit. No one has yet come forward with evidence that taxpayer funding for a new Twins stadium will ever benefit this area as much as it will cost this area. I have been listening to the arguments, for and against, and I am open to bang convinced that tax funding a stadium is a good idea for the greater good of the area. It just has not happened yet. Ron Leurquin Nokomis East Jim wrote: In the interest of full disclosure, I am a proponent of some public funding for public stadiums. I believe that professional sports are a major asset to this area. So is Orchestra Hall, the Guthrie, the Walker, a host of other arts venues, golf courses, tennis courts, great parks, the vitality of area businesses, and every museum you can think of! By themselves, professional sports do not make or break a community but they do create - for many - a sense of place and pride and a shared interest. We can and will continue to debate the wisdom of public funding for professional sports facilities and I trust that we will be respectful of each others opinions. But, the debate goes over the edge when the argument gets framed as this selfish notion that "I don't use it/doesn't make my life better - so why should I have to pay for it"! All of us pay taxes for some things that we may not support or may not use or may not affect our lives all that much! The notion that any one of us should be able to opt out of paying for something that we don't use or don't like is what has left us so many public services, public facilities, and public agencies struggling. There are a lot folks who do not use public transit, do not use public schools, do not use public libraries, do not use Sect. 8 housing assistance, do not use public health services like HCMC or community clinics, do not use general assistance, do not use crisis centers, do not use public golf courses, do not use community or park buildings (except maybe, to vote once in a while)and the list can go on, but you get the point! Some of those non-users argue that they should not have to pay for those "government programs" since they do not use or approve of them. There is a huge undertow of selfishness running through the citizenry right now; the idea being promoted by many in the conservative ranks that government should do nothing more than provide only the "base essentials" and that there is no common good or community interest beyond defense and public order. They argue that life is a footrace and if you stumble or if you are tripped then either you pick yourself up or fall into the gutter - or hope that a religious charity will provide for you. If one listens carefully to the Taxpayers League among others you will hear them boasting that "it is your money and government ought not to take it from you to pay for things you may not need or want". The "I don't use it or want it, why should I have to pay for it" argument offered by Eva White can - and has - been used as an argument against just about every function of government at every level. If applied evenly, we'll see no stadium to be sure, but we will soon see no busses, no libraries, no public schools, and no public purpose! Jim Bernstein Fulton 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
