Accessibility menu
State Representative Tina Liebling
100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
651-296-0573
For more information contact:
OTHER
Vikings Stadium
Legislators have been told that the stadium bill will be on the House floor for a vote very soon. If the bill is not significantly changed I will be voting no.
The current proposal is for a $975 million fixed-roof stadium near the current site of the Metrodome. Under this proposal, the state would contribute $398 million, the city of Minneapolis would contribute $150 million, and the Vikings (likely with assistance from the NFL) would pay $427 million. The state would raise its contribution through an expansion of so-called charitable gambling via the authorization of electronic pull-tabs, E-bingo, and sport-themed tip boards. It is estimated that these would be available in about 3,500 locations. The state would sell bonds to pay for its share of the stadium. The increased gambling profits would go into the general fund. Every time the State writes a budget the legislature would then have to appropriate money to pay the debt service on these bonds, and these appropriations would come before all other budget items. If Minnesotans don't gamble enough to cover the debt service on the bonds, the extra money would come from the general fund.
In eight years at the legislature I don't remember an issue about which members of the public were so passionate. Clearly, many Minnesotans love the Vikings and can't bear the thought of losing the team. Who could deny that the Vikings are important to the state? And, of course, the team has economic impact on Minnesota and raises our state's national profile. However, at the end of the day, the Vikings organization is a private entertainment business--even if it is a business that is much loved and valued. The question for legislators is how far Minnesota can and should go to support this highly profitable business, particularly in a weak economy when the state has cut support for schools, health care, and other needs.
There has been a lot of talk about the Vikings possibly moving to LA if they don't get the public subsidy they want, and this has some fans almost in a panic. The recent visit of the NFL commissioner fanned these flames, and I believe that was no accident. The more fearful the fans, the more likely that the state will give away the store. By convincing the fans that the team may leave, the Vikings and the NFL have dramatically improved their chance of obtaining millions of dollars in public subsidy.
I would like to be able to support a new stadium and would do so if I thought the state's commitment was reasonable given the state's benefit. Unfortunately, that is not what I see. From what I have seen so far, this is a deal in which Minnesotans take most of the risk but the team takes most of the profits. The vast expansion of gambling in the bill also troubles me. Gambling does not produce "free money." Someone must pay for it, and gambling often diverts money that would otherwise be spent on necessities. I fear that this dramatic expansion of gambling would have a negative effect on our overall quality of life.
From all reports, Mr. Wilf could afford to pay for the stadium himself, find private investors to help him, or even ask fans to chip in. The NFL is a highly profitable industry which-according to some estimates--generates more than $9 billion of revenue every season. The argument that some other teams have publically funded stadiums does not persuade me. The public funding in this bill - $736 million in construction and operating costs - would be the highest public contribution in NFL history. In this "new normal" economy, we can't allow teams to play cities and states off against each other. Our newly restricted economy simply won't allow it. At the very least, if Minnesota is Mr. Wilf's business partner we should get a proportionate share of investment returns.
Supporters of a new taxpayer-financed stadium often cite the jobs that would be created and the amount of tax revenue generated as Minnesota's return on investment. I support a large capital investment bill to build good public projects all over the state, including Rochester. Such projects would put thousands of Minnesotans to work now and in the future, with the returns going to the public. At a time when health care for people with disabilities, public schools, colleges and universities, nursing homes, the courts, law enforcement, other crucial state and local functions, and even our state capitol are squeezed by budget cuts, a new football stadium cannot be our top priority.
I am also skeptical of the economic arguments for a new stadium, which are very controversial among economists. These arguments are usually posed as the economic difference between giving the Vikings what they want or "making them" leave. Those are not really the choices before us. The Wilfs would be foolish to take the Vikings to L.A., even if they have to pay for a stadium themselves.
Some constituents are concerned that lobbyists are getting in the way of a new stadium. The only professional (as opposed to constituent) lobbying on the stadium plan has come from the Vikings, who reportedly have spent millions. However, no one from that organization has contacted me to explain the proposal, answer questions, or try to secure my support. Many other legislators, both Democrats and Republicans, have noticed the same thing. This is very strange. Word has it that there are at least 10 lobbyists at the capitol working on this issue so I can only guess that the team is banking on tactics other than reason and persuasion.
My job as a legislator is to listen to my constituents, dig into the details as best I can, and vote the way I think is best for my district and the state. If I don't agree with you, that doesn't mean I'm "not listening." And it certainly doesn't mean, as one person suggested, that the lobbyists have gotten to me since-as I said-all of the paid lobbying is on the Vikings side.
Thank you again for contacting me.
Warmly,
Tina
News Items
- House Of Representatives Passes Omnibus Education Bill - (Posted: May 18 2013 12:00AM)
- House Passes Omnibus HHS Finance Bill - (Posted: Apr 16 2013 10:13AM)
- Rep. Liebling: Medicaid Expansion Good for Minnesotans and State Budget - (Posted: Feb 19 2013 12:00AM)
- Archived News Items
- Subscribe to RSS News Feeds
- Read more about RSS.