New stadium’s getting closer!

The Hennepin County Board voted to approve the 0.15 sales tax increase for the new Twins stadium today by a 4-3 vote. Barring any setbacks from here, the new stadium construction should begin next year.

At the vote, the boys said yes (Commissioners Mike Opat, Mark Stenglein, Peter McLaughlin and Randy Johnson); the girls (Commissioners Gail Dorfman, Linda Koblick and Penny Steele) said no. Interesting. Dorfman’s been against a new stadium of any kind of quite some time now, so it’s no surprise her vote, along with everyone else’s, didn’t change from previous votes. If it were taxes to make a new shopping mall downtown, do you think the voting would have been reversed?

The PiPress gives an interesting fact: “According to county forecasts, a married couple with two children and a $75,000 annual income would pay an estimated $30 per year in sales taxes for the stadium.” If that’s the case, I’ll gladly give one of the many opponents of the tax increase $30/year to shut the hell up so I can have a decent stadium to watch some baseball.

19 Comments so far

  1. DF (unregistered) on August 29th, 2006 @ 7:23 pm

    I will take you up on that. Leave another comment here, and I’ll give you my email address.

    Dan


  2. Wendy (unregistered) on August 29th, 2006 @ 7:34 pm

    Yeah, and I know you live in Hennepin County how?


  3. Eva Young (unregistered) on August 29th, 2006 @ 10:41 pm

    This is a 1.1 billion dollar tax increase for 30 years on Hennepin County residents. You’d get me to shut up, if you’d write the legislators, and tell them to revisit this, and make the state pay for this state wide. Many of us who live in Minneapolis aren’t personally real interested in this stadium for our personal use.


  4. Joe (unregistered) on August 30th, 2006 @ 9:10 am

    I agree with Eva Young 100%.

    Speaking as someone who couldn’t care less about the Twins or professional sports in general… I’d rather be paying $30 a year to have someone punch a politician in the face.


  5. Greg (unregistered) on August 30th, 2006 @ 9:25 am

    While I’d love to see both teams in new stadiums, I think the funding should have been put to a statewide vote, rather than forced on the taxpayers of Hennepin County without our acceptance. They knew if they put it to a vote it wouldn’t pass. Will I get a free Vikings ticket out of the deal? Of course not…still will have to pay $100+/game. Taxation without adequate representation will hopefully keep more than a few policy makers from being reelected.


  6. Wendy (unregistered) on August 30th, 2006 @ 9:58 am

    You could always round up the Sons of Liberty and throw peanuts and cracker jacks into the Mississipi River. It worked in 1773 for Boston’s “taxation without adequate representation”, so I don’t see why it wouldn’t work now.


  7. Greg (unregistered) on August 30th, 2006 @ 10:20 am

    Actually, Boston’s was for “taxation without representation” period. Unfortunately, we voted these jerks in, and our representatives have their own agendas apart from listening to their constituents. Wonder if there will be a smoking ban at the stadiums? hehe.. It just keeps getting better!


  8. DF (unregistered) on August 30th, 2006 @ 11:34 am

    When you give me your email address, I will email you my full address and phone #, with the presumption that you will not share it publicly. I live in LynLake, definitely in Hennepin county.

    I am totally serious about taking you up on your offer. Remember, it’s a 20-year tax, so $30 for 20 years.

    Dan


  9. Wendy (unregistered) on August 30th, 2006 @ 12:27 pm

    I’ll be sure to pay you in ten and fifteen cent increments, too, since that’s how everyone will end up paying for it.


  10. Urgewyrm (unregistered) on August 31st, 2006 @ 8:42 am

    Wow How condescending with a little touch of cliche sexist ta boot. If you could have worked in a racial joke you probably could have hit a trifecta.

    I understand that you’d like a new spiffy ballpark to sit and drink your cheap beer in while eating some sort of gastrointestinal parasite in a bun. Good for you, people need hobbies, etc, etc.

    Instead of paying 30 bucks to the people against getting railroaded by local politicians for shit they don’t necessarily want, why don’t you, as a baseball fan, pick up the difference from those of us that couldn’t give a rat’s ass about sports?

    I’m sure it’ll only be a couple a hundred bucks a year or so per sports fan. Maybe a buck a day? Since this new stadium is SO desperately needed, I’m sure there’s enough baseball fans to cover it with no problem.

    We can get a registration system going and you can get an ID card or something that states that you proudly support the Twins and are doing your part by paying extra for the stadium!!


  11. Wendy (unregistered) on August 31st, 2006 @ 9:32 am

    Good plan. And since the taxes I pay go to the school system, I don’t think I should have to pay those, since I currently don’t have any need to improve the school situation. Once I have kids, then I’ll pay those taxes.


  12. taylor (unregistered) on August 31st, 2006 @ 11:26 am

    At the time of the baseball stadium bill’s passage in the Legislature, I had an editorial in the Legal Ledger that made two points:

    1. The St. Louis Cardinals recently built a stadium with public assistance. Instead of 75% public assistance like the Twins required, the Cards got 25%. (Locally, the Guthrie, which also received public assistance, received 20% public funding.) I’m pro-baseball, but also pro-smart business and this was a terrible deal. Instead of taxpayers paying $30/ yr. for the stadium, it should be more like $10.

    2. The entire political process failed. There could’ve been a variety of ways to build a Twinks stadium that would’ve been fair to MN residents AND the Twins. Instead, this deal required a decade long PR campaign that included *contraction threats, bypassing existing legal procedure, and worst of all the exclusion of discussions on other viable stadium plans.

    People should be embarrassed by this.


  13. urgewyrm (unregistered) on August 31st, 2006 @ 12:43 pm

    Wendy’s equivilance fallacy regarding schools and ball stadiums goes here

    Your comparing a baseball park with the education system?

    Given that the school system was voted on by the people of the entire state, has a managed board that gets voted in periodically so the people have a say in how things get done and benefits not only the entire state but the entire country as well, your comment is farcical at best. Idiotic at worst.


  14. Urgewyrm (unregistered) on August 31st, 2006 @ 12:51 pm

    Wow, I butchered the spelling on that post.


  15. Wendy (unregistered) on August 31st, 2006 @ 1:53 pm

    I appreciate that by expressing my opinion, I can be called condescending, sexist, and an idiot. And all by one person!

    In a perfect world, Carl Pohlad would have ponied up for the entire stadium. Because he can. But he didn’t, so this is how things worked out.

    Besides, how do you think the Hennepin County Commissioners wound up in office? Elections, I believe.


  16. Urgewyrm (unregistered) on August 31st, 2006 @ 2:27 pm

    You ended your post with ‘durr objectors should shuddup durrr’ and then jumped on anyone that had a different viewpoint. Your comment about ‘the women would have voted for a mall’ was simply sexist and not necessary. Stop being condescending and sexist and I’ll stop pointing out that you’re being condescending and sexist. It’s quite simple, really.

    I said you had an idiotic arguement, not that you were an idiot. There’s a difference.

    In a perfect world? How about even a fair and just world? How about a maybekindaok world?

    The Commissioners are elected for a variety of things, not just the implementation of a new ball park. Since this will go into effect before any of the commissioners come up for reelection they will get their way, get their land, taxes and stadium long before they can be held accountable by their electorate.


  17. DF (unregistered) on September 2nd, 2006 @ 10:24 pm

    Wendy,

    Paying in 10 and 15 cent increments would be annoying just to be annoying, but I might accept it. The biggest problem is that you might forget to pay. What do you propose?

    DF


  18. DF (unregistered) on September 13th, 2006 @ 4:39 pm

    Since I have heard no response, I will assume maybe

    a. Wendy stopped reading this thread

    or

    b. Wendy doesn’t actually want to pay the $30/year for 20 years.

    Too bad.

    Dan


  19. Erica (unregistered) on September 13th, 2006 @ 9:22 pm

    Dude, are you that hard up for $30? Give it a rest.



Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.