MPR: Forum on Stadia Provides Little Agreement

Forum on Stadia Provides Little Agreement
By Michael Khoo
October 12, 1999
Hear complete forum

With the Twins and the Vikings both seeking public support for new sports facilities, tracking the ongoing stadium debate becomes more complicated each day. Last night, key figures in the discussion gathered at a forum sponsored by Minnesota Public Radio and the St. Paul Pioneer Press. They came to five the issues a thorough hearing, and left with little to agree upon.

With a few exceptions, the St. Paul stadium fight has been waged at arm's length, with supporters and opponents lobbing argument and rebuttal from relatively safe distances. Last night, however, the two camps appeared side-by-side and face-to-face. The results were predictably intense, as in this exchange between Mayor Norm Coleman and City Council member Jay Benanav.

One of the more heated exchanges of the evening was between Saint Paul City Council member Jay Benanav (shown) and Mayor Norm Coleman.

Coleman: It is a distinction between pessimists and optimists. Really it is. If all you look at is the negative.
Benanav: Mayor, this is reality versus fantasyland.
Coleman: If that's all you look at ...
Benanav: Reality versus fantasyland.
Coleman: ...then that's the conclusion you come to.

Coleman is asking St. Paul voters to approve a sales-tax increase to fund one-third of a new $325 million downtown stadium. Under his proposal, the state would contribute an additional third, and the team would pay the rest from revenues generated by the facility. Coleman argued the plan would catalyze economic activity, leveraging private investments in jobs, housing, and entertainment. Panelist Betsy Bockstruck agreed. Bockstruck is the vice-president of the family-run Bockstruck Jewelers and a board member of the St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce.

Bockstruck: Anytime you can bring people downtown and attract employers, that's good for St. Paul and good for retail. Anytime you can bring a venue that will generate jobs and revenue and build a stronger tax base, that will eventually spill into the St. Paul community and the state as a whole.

But council member Benanav was unconvinced and questioned the credibility of studies predicting large economic returns from stadiums.

Benanav: I think the studies that have been done have been done by consultants who are paid for by the baseball teams. I think you can throw those out. I think there's some serious question as to the true economic development nature of this. I won't, again, bore you with studies: the Heartland Institute, University of Maryland, Stanford University, Princeton, Wall Street Journal have all indicated that there is no economic development benefit. In fact, there could be negative development.

Mayor Coleman acknowledged many academic studies show ballparks simply shift economic activity within a metropolitan region. But he said even re-directing existing wealth into the core downtown was an important goal.

Coleman: And if there is a difference, then, of philosophy here, it's about this big metro region. We are a big metro region. But a poor city needs the resources focused here. And I have choices. Either we get the money out of the pockets of St. Paul property tax payers, or we find ways to generate additional economic growth and vitality. We get money from the folks who come here to spend money.

An audience member, however, questioned the wisdom of building a new stadium unless there is significant reform of Major League Baseball. Opponents argue the current system is stacked against small market teams such as the Twins. They say without revenue-sharing or players' salary caps, the team will struggle -- new ballpark or not. Coleman agreed, but said there would be plenty of time to tackle the issue before the proposed stadium would open.

Coleman: Baseball has to get its house in order, there's no question about that. But the issue for us is whether we are on the sidelines watching that debate, waving from somewhere, or whether we're involved in that discussion because we have a franchise in our community.

Panelist Tom Montgomery is the founder of FANS for St. Paul, a group opposing the stadium sales tax.

Montgomery: I think the real question is what incentive does baseball have to get it's house in order if we build them a stadium? What incentive is there?

Panelist Tom Montgomery is the founder of FANS for St. Paul, a group opposing the stadium sales tax.

Montgomery: I think we need to be looking at the San Francisco model where San Francisco - the city of San Francisco said "no" to a publicly-funded stadium. And now San Francisco has a new baseball stadium that's being built that's 95 percent privately funded. Let's be more like that.

The Twins have called the San Francisco project an experiment doomed to failure. And Vikings owner Red McCombs likewise says the reality of professional sports requires public involvement. Last night's forum included a separate discussion concerning the search for a new football venue. McCombs said Minnesotans must ask themselves if they value their sports teams, and if so, how much are they willing to offer in support?

Vikings owner Red McCombs likewise says the reality of professional sports requires public involvement.

McCombs: The people of Minnesota will decide whether they feel that there're value in the Vikings or whether there isn't. That's what the issue is and I am just the messenger. Whoever would own the Vikings, you would have this same issue that you'd be looking at right today.

McCombs said he has no intention of moving the team out of state. But he also said the Vikings could not survive at the Metrodome through 2011, when their current lease expires. McCombs said a plan to retrofit the "Dome" as a football-only venue was inadequate. But the football discussion was not lacking for funding ideas. Republican state senator Roy Terwilliger of Eden Prairie said he thought a solution based on user fees remained viable.

Terwilliger: And so as I looked at it, kind of like Mr. McCombs is saying here about a public-private partnership, I believe there has to be a way to do this. There has to be some solution, some way that we can do this. Because it would be a shame; the Twins, the Vikings, everybody is here right now. Let's find a way to solve the problem.

During the 1997 Twins debate, Terwilliger offered legislation to support a baseball stadium with user fees. That effort was defeated. Senate Majority Leader Roger Moe was another backer of previous ballpark efforts. Last night, he noted the Legislature was sour on the idea of using state money for sports facilities. But he showed more hope for a Minneapolis-Hennepin County proposal to use a local sales tax - without a state contribution - to fund new stadiums as well as other infrastructure needs.

Moe: If you can get a sense from St. Paul, what they want, through a local referendum, maybe that's a way to engage the citizens of Hennepin County in that discussion to see. To be perfectly honest, I don't mind St. Paul and Minneapolis or Hennepin and Ramsey County bidding this thing and coming up with a process whereby the state isn't involved. I think that's probably very attractive.

Speaker of the House Steve Sviggum said he oppose tax increases to pay for sports facilities and questioned why a user-fee supported stadium would require state involvement. So he revived an alternative he first proposed in 1997.

Sviggum: Give 'em the Metrodome. It's paid off. Give it to 'em for a buck. And allow the opportunities of...the opportunities of signage, the opportunities of concessions. You've got to understand that there's other problems in this state, too. I'm a farmer. And if you give me my farm for a dollar, and I can't make it, then I better look at what I'm doing.

Sviggum says he currently has a bill to hand over the Metrodome. And he says by his own count, there are few lawmakers in the Minnesota House enthusiastic about introducing any of the alternatives.

	Sign up to receive e-mail newsletters

	Audio help

	Text: Sm : Md : Lg