Stadium Financing....Welfare? A Rediculous Assertion

Some stadium opponents have a singular focus in their opposition to public support of a new Vikings Stadium. They assert that it is corporate welfare. This is an outdated, narrow minded, short sighted and pathetic argument, yet they have nothing else.

First of all, what is welfare? It is a government entity GIVING money to an individual or family in need. For the purpose of this argument we'll STRETCH it to include corporations in order to look deeper into this argument.

The Vikings are contributing over 38.5% ($407 mil) of the total cost ($1.057 bil) of the project, the 3rd highest total of any NFL team. Additionally around 28.4% ($300 mil) of the total cost as currently constituted is NOT going to be paid by the public at large even though it is listed as a state contribution. This total is being paid by user fees, in other words by those supporting the stadium that will go to events held in the new venue, will buy sports memorabilia, or will participate in a sports themed lottery.

OK so lets recap, so far we have accounted for around 66.9% of the total cost of a new Vikings Stadium and opponents have yet to pay a single penny towards the cost and there is no burden placed on state coffers or any state program affected. The remaining 33.1% ($350 mil) of the cost is a result of a .5% sales tax imposed by a local willing partner in Ramsey County. This sales tax will not be paid solely by Ramsey County residents but by any person conducting business in Ramsey County. This will lead to economic growth on land with limited development potential. The increased growth will lead to new revenue streams and reduce the likelihood or the severity of any future levy increases. It will also lead to additional job opportunities which again leads to additional revenue and a reduction in state benefits paid.

Additionally this portion of the bill could be replaced by several other potential revenue streams to reduce any potential negative impact on the average citizen. Several options being considered are expanding the use of user fees, a rental car tax which is more likely to be paid by visitors to Minnesota than by residents. Another popular option is the passing of a Racino bill with portions of the revenue being dedicated to a new stadium and the remaining funds going into the state general fund, or using legacy funding which is set aside for the outdoors and arts/entertainment.

Several other important points include the fact that the venue would be owned by the state of Minnesota. It would be available for numerous state events including state high school tournaments, and increase the states competitiveness in attracting regional and national events which again leads to increased revenue. Due to the states involvement the cost of the project has increased several hundred million dollars to make it usable for state not Vikings events. Despite the fact the state would own the venue the Vikings would pay over 90% of the operating costs of the venue. They would also cover any project overruns, not the state of Minnesota.

The Vikings currently are responsible for around $20 million going into the state general fund annually which would increase to $25-30 million per year in the new venue. Using the low end of those revenue numbers means the Vikings will be responsible for $750 million of revenue at a minimum over a 30 year lease. This is in addition to any potential rent and/or annual maintenance payments the Vikings would be responsible for under terms of the lease.

This would be a state owned facility that the state would profit from, government entities do not profit from welfare. The payment of welfare strains a government budget, the welfare recipient does not improve the governments budget situation.

The last stadium built for the Vikings and several other tenants, who have since received their own venues which have proven to be worthwhile investments for the community, was built from a $55 million dollar bonding bill. There was not a single general fund dollar used or state program affected by the investment. The stadium was paid off in roughly half the mandated time and the state received revenue of $340 million, in addition to the funds used to pay off the bonds, of which over $186 million was as a result of the Vikings.

Show me a definition of welfare that includes a profit and increased revenue streams for a governmient entity, espescially in a stagnant and/or declining economy. Show me a definition of welfare that includes job stabilization and job growth. Show me a definition of welfare where the state is more competitive when competing with other communities in attracting events to our state, in attracting new businesses, and new citizens. Show me a definition of welfare where tourism to the state is increased and the state receives free national advertising.

Without the Vikings, Minnesota will lose revenue, jobs, attractiveness to new residents and new businesses, opportunity, identity and a great state asset. What do we gain by their loss? Are we willing to risk all our previous investment, 50 years of history along with their imprint on our culture just to appease a handful of people that exist solely to argue and make other peoples lives miserable?

Are we willing to pay exponentially higher amounts later when we see the error of our ways, much like we did when we lost the North Stars? Just a reminder we could have kept the North Stars for a $20 million investment to renovate Met Center, instead we listened to the few that can't or refuse to see the big picture and the team left for Dallas in 1993. Dallas won a Stanley Cup in 1999 with our team and we got to start from scratch with the Wild in 2000, after a 7 year absence and over $300 million invested.

That is deja vu I think we can do without.