Nearly since the Metrodome first began housing the Minnesota Vikings, Lester Bagley has served as point man on the team's efforts to construct a new, billion dollar stadium. Bagley's utter fleecing of his employers over that span of time aside, the purpose of Bagley's endeavor has been to ensure that, for whichever Vikings' ownership group he has served as public-good-implications-aside mercenary, he obtained an expensive, publicly funded, retractable-roofed, luxury-box-ensconced, revenue-stream rich stadium, replete with public funding, in perpetuity--a stadium that would draw not only unrelenting revenue but also equity for the team and league.
Bagley and his minions--many of them found throughout the local media and most evidently displayed in local newscasts wondering such things as "where should the next Vikings' stadium be located?"--routinely and consistently have pointed to the end of the 2011 season as the bewitching point. That is when, we are cautioned, the Vikings will prove that they mean business, packing up their Minnesota shop and heading for the new stadium in the sky.
If not before, certainly now is the time for the good people of Minnesota to provide a counter-proposal to Bagley and his carpet-bagging cohorts. That message should read as follows:
"At the end of the scheduled 2011 NFL season, the State of Minnesota invites the Minnesota Vikings to renew their Metrodome lease. That lease will not include any of the perks that the Vikings currently enjoy to the tune of tens of millions of dollars every year, perks such as advertising, naming rights, and tax concessions. Rather, those rights will return to the operators of the Metrodome and the residents of Hennepin County and the State of Minnesota. Rent also will increase, placing the Vikings on the same footing as other tenants in the Minneapolis area. We recognize, of course, that the Vikings' ownership group might balk at this proposal and prepare for the team's departure. Should they opt to take this course, searching for a market that does not yet exist, we certainly wish them well."
The result for Minnesota will be either a far better return on a product that currently receives an unwarranted sweetheart deal or the loss of a mounting tax burden that occupies a valuable chunk of the downtown real estate. Instead of the choice falling to the people of Minnesota, the people of MInnesota ought to let the choice fall to the ownership group of the Vikings with notice clearly given that the State and local governments, not Bagley or his minions, hold the winning cards. If the Vikings wish to depart, so be it. Cheering for jerseys no longer has the broad appeal it once did.
Up Next: Fungible NFL.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Of the $68 million it took to build the Metrodome only $33.4 million was from public funds. If I remember correctly, the Vikings invested like $25 mil and the Twins the next largest share among the major tenants. Finding numbers through 2006, tenants and events have paid $430.7 mil (93%) and the state and Minneapolis have gained $245.6 mil in revenue. I wish that I could get that return on an investment. Source = http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBUQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.msfc.com%2Fimages%2FdynImages%2Fhouselocalgovernment022309.pdf&ei=kueXTa_uHoPqgQfq9sWyCA&usg=AFQjCNFOfU1EKqjQKQIfyWv7e0gr0VKKBg&sig2=8r_D6tyk9sVzl1Xaem3ABg
The Vikes want the improvements in residency to stay competitive. Without it, they will probably move to where they can make money. Bye-bye sweet deal for the state and all its residents.
Luft,
I do too. And so do Minneapolis, Hennepin County, and the State of Minnesota. Unfortunately, your initial figure takes into account only the initial price, not the additional costs and not the interest paid on the public debt. The actual cost was over $100 million.
The return on the Metrodome, nearly thirty years later and not factoring in the cost to maintain the facility and the cost of not using the site for another purpose, has been reasonable and probably a good example of how taxpayer dollars can create a profitable public-private venture.
What's problematic about the Vikings' current stadium endeavor is the price tag, what the Vikings want out of the deal, and what the Vikings want to contribute. As I've written numerous times, a new stadium can be a good situation for both the public and the Vikings--but only if the terms are right. That means that the public needs to get more out of the deal than retaining the jersey wearers and accruing debt. The Vikings don't seem to see it that way. And, as long as that mindset persists at Winter Park, there is no reason for any sane public entity to engage in discussions with the team.
VG
Post a Comment