A note on David Tilsen's otherwise astute post:
When the [county] buys bonds (borrows money) there are other costs. They
are borrowing 353 million dollars for 30 years. That means we will pay $28
million a year for 30 years. That totals about 840 million dollars. Since
the principle will be only
This stadium thing bite me royally.
Why do we need a new stadium commission for this stadium? What about our
current sport facility commission? Why can't the county own and operate it
themselves instead of this new commission? Seems like were just adding one
more layer of bureaucracy
I was once a Twins fan. Someday, maybe I will be again. I began my falling
out of fandom with the player's strike. Spoiled millionaire players whining
for more money, and shutting down the season was kind of unheroic, and a
turn off to baseball. This followed by threats to move the team, followed
Ed Kohler wrote:
I'd
expect 99%+ of the anti-stadium crowd to favor a new privately financed
ballpark. They're just not interested in spending public money to support a
private business.
I think it's more than that. As a working person who has never had
oodles of spare money and never will,
Steve Brandt wrote:
While we're at it, I noticed sometime last fall that a development
document for the Nicollet-Lake area included a one-block mini-stadium
among numerous ideas for development in the area. As I recall, it was
either on the same block, or one adjacent to it, as the old Miller
At 11:31 AM 4/12/2004, Sen.Linda Higgins wrote:
The Senate State and Local Government Operations
committee will hear the governor's stadia proposal on
Wednesday, April 14, at 12:30 PM or a half-hour after
session ends, in room 15 of the state capitol. Sen. Steve
Kelley will present the bill. It
Here's a talking point for you. http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/4716675.html
Massive public subsidies to pro sports teams for new facilities -- commonly as high as
75 or even 100 percent during the halcyon construction days of the 1990s -- could
become a thing of the past, say
James E Jacobsen wrote:
I think there is a lot of con work to get extra money
going on with this because I know they could just
work it all out and there wouldn't be significant problem.
Mr. Jacobsen's post seems to be saying: Trust us with $400-500 million
of your money and we'll have a
on 1/29/02 8:52 AM, Steve Brandt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This must be a first: A Star Tribune editorial on paying for the proposed
stadia draws no angry List response. Battle fatigue out there?
No, I don't think it's battle fatigue, Steve. Could be that the marvelous
semantics game the
James E Jacobsen wrote:
Is there an anti-professional sports mentality out there?
I rarely attend games, though I don't mind that the professional
sports brings nine figure money into the city every year,
providing huge tax revenues and providing employment to thousands
in hotels and
10 matches
Mail list logo
