Page 83 of 147
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Wed Nov 16, 2011 10:54 pm
by glg
Eli wrote:
How is it that the Vikings are where they are with their commitment to Arden Hills while the Ramsey County board is just _now_ approving it?
Maybe its a small hint at how many hoops they have to jump through and the massive amount of politics involved in getting this done.
I read that as the board approving the land purchase deal with the federal government. From just up in the thread, that piece came together just in the last week or so (and under expected cost)
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 3:00 pm
by dead_poet
Anoka County wants $2M from Ramsey Co. for Vikings stadium legwork
The Anoka County is asking that Ramsey County pay it about $2 million for a package that promoted bringing a new Vikings stadium to Blaine.
Anoka county spent the money from late 2002 to early 2007 to craft the stadium deal.
County Board Chairman Rhonda Sivarajah said Ramsey County has used that package in its pursuit of a stadium in Arden Hills.
"I know Ramsey County has requested information from us," Sivarajah said. "The $2 million is extremely conservative."
The Anoka County board also voted Tuesday to endorse a racino bill at the Legislature.
http://www.startribune.com/local/east/134335863.html
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 3:04 pm
by dead_poet
Senate sets agenda for Vikings stadium hearing
The Minnesota Senate has set the schedule for the first of two hearings on a possible public subsidy package for a new Minnesota Vikings stadium.
The first hearing, scheduled for Nov. 29, will begin at 9 a.m. in Room 15 of the State Capitol. Overflow rooms with televisions will be available for additional public seating.
Officials said that testimony would be taken from the Vikings and the Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission, the owners of the Metrodome in downtown Minneapolis, where the team has played for nearly three decades. Testimony will also be taken from Minneapolis officials, who want the Vikings to remain in Minneapolis, and officials from Ramsey County and Arden Hills, where the team wants to build a new stadium.
The hearing will be jointly conducted by the Senate Taxes Committee, chaired by Sen. Julianne Ortman, R-Chanhassen, and the Senate Local Government and Elections Committee, chaired by Sen. Ray Vandeveer, R-Forest Lake.
A second hearing is scheduled for Dec. 6.
The hearings come after months of renewed stadium drama at the State Capitol – but no consensus at the Legislature whether to help fund a proposed $1.1 billion Vikings stadium. The team, which has pledged to contribute at least $407 million to the project, wants to build the stadium in Ramsey County’s Arden Hills.
http://www.startribune.com/politics/blo ... 28113.html
Stadium thread
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2011 11:51 pm
by CalVike
http://www.twincities.com/ci_19422402?s ... ost_viewed
But instead of roughly $650 million coming from public sources, that money would come through "income taxes currently paid by Vikings players, visiting players and Vikings employees, as well as sales taxes on all the spending by fans inside the stadium."
I think this argument has been tried by nearly every team in recent memory, but maybe the Vikings can get some traction. It feels like desperation though.
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2011 11:55 pm
by thatguy
^Idc where it comes from...just get it done!
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 12:17 am
by NextQuestion
As long as I don't pay...whatever.
Stadium thread
Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 1:08 am
by CalVike
http://m.startribune.com/news/?id=134725848&c=y
The Minnesota Vikings reluctantly agreed Tuesday to meet with Minneapolis officials to explore staying in the state's largest city but also worked to persuade a packed Senate hearing room that the team is ready to build a new stadium in Ramsey County.
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 1:28 am
by Demi
So much for tailgating, loud music, fires....anything fun!!!
Minneapolis pricks are the ones holding this up now.
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 3:08 am
by kingkyle222
demi they have already said they dont wanna take the minneapolis site they just being nice and letting them suggest wut they thinking...
Stadium thread
Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 7:59 am
by CalVike
Ramsay Co. is in deep trouble. That's why Minneapolis comes up. The Vikings should be shouting from the rooftops that Ramsay County Board has agreed to 0.5% local sales tax to pay $350MM. That they are not says Ramsay Co. legislators won't support it without the referendum. But that should not matter. They need to drum it to rest of legislature that they have $350MM from a local source that does not affect them. If this happens, Ramsay Co. will go forward, if not, Minneapolis will carry the day.
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:57 pm
by glg
Demi wrote:Minneapolis pricks are the ones holding this up now.
Yep, and they'll happily vote for a no referendum local tax if hennepin does it, but not ramsey
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:38 pm
by PurpleMustReign
glg wrote:
Yep, and they'll happily vote for a no referendum local tax if hennepin does it, but not ramsey
What's wrong with that?
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:05 am
by Demi
PurpleMustReign wrote:
What's wrong with that?
What's NOT wrong with it? They're perfectly willing to not let voters vote one place but require a vote at another site? Specifically to keep it from happening one place? And forcing it to be built at the other?
Stadium thread
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:33 am
by CalVike
http://m.twincities.com/twincities/db_2 ... d=GlhfO1vw
The whole thing's ridiculous. They act like they have no role and local partner has to do all the leg work while at the same time rejecting Ramsay Co.'s legwork on the local sales tax, making them start over. If Minneapolis goes, legislature has to help them around a $10MM cap on stadium contributions by local ordinance.
Stadium thread
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:43 am
by CalVike
What's wrong, besides the excellent points that Demi and GLG make, is that the legislature is taking the "can't do" approach to stadium legislation. They offer only roadblocks and viable ideas they won't support without actually legislating and coming up with a workable plan. At this rate, they might as well just say. "We are doing nothing for you. Don't let the door hit you on the way out of town." To get it done requires compromise and willingness to support a plan they don't completely agree with for the greater good. There is no indication they will do anything at this point. Sad.