This week, I saw an article in the Minnesota Star Tribune that discussed how all the local sports teams are simultaneously pushing officials to give them taxpayer money for upgrades to their sports venues.
The Minnesota Wild won’t publicly disclose how much they want from taxpayers or even what they want to upgrade. We just know that the owner could “perhaps contribute up to $250 million in financing”, if local and state officials gave him a large yet unknown amount of taxpayer money.
The Minnesota Twins are asking for an extra $10 million dollars every year from a sales tax. Unfortunately for the Twins, legislators are still not exactly sure “why the Twins should receive” that money, considering that the current plan is to use this money to “subsidize the county’s two safety-net hospitals”.
We don’t know what the Minnesota Timberwolves want, since the question of ownership of the team is still being played out in court.
Now, we turn to the Vikings. The Vikings want local and state officials to create an additional funding source of revenue for them that will pay for future upgrades to the stadium.
A little over 10 years ago, the Vikings agreed with city/state officials on a plan that would see the team get a new stadium. While the total cost would be $975 million dollars, the Vikings were solely responsible for paying $477 million and the other costs would be “split between the state of Minnesota and the city of Minneapolis”. Local officials wanted everyone to focus on the team owners paying for almost half of the stadium costs out of their own pockets. Or, as one article put it, the Vikings cost of the stadium was really an “investment from a private businessman into our state”. Others noted the Vikings would pay their part of the deal with private money.
— USATodayExcept, the owners of the Vikings were literally putting in nothing for the new stadium. If we factor in the revenue that the team got from their absurdly priced personal seat licenses, a $200 million loan from the NFL, and revenue from a naming-rights deal, the Vikings owners were paying off their amount “with other people’s money”. One estimate showed that the Vikings owners likely would only need to pay just $3 million dollars out of their bank account to cover their $477 million dollar amount. I loved how the Vikings responded to a Minnesota Public Radio question about whether the team was happy about paying their part of the stadium with money not coming from the owner’s actual pockets…“Vikings officials didn’t quibble with the math”. Neither would I argue with the Vikings owners, given that several are convicted felons, and recently a state judge described how he’d never seen one truthful and accurate financial statement from them.
It was pure coincidence that many government officials and their family/friends got “free access to luxury boxes for all events in the stadium”. Everyone else needs to pay $200,000 to $300,000 for these tickets per season. The Vikings tried to argue that these tickets were just for “marketing purposes”…just without any marketing nor any purpose other than wanting to bribe thank these people. As Reason.com wondered aloud, wouldn’t this make everyone question if the government really negotiated for taxpayers on this deal? I almost fell out of my chair when I read two Minnesota Sports Facilities Authority (MSFA) members trying to justify their suite tickets because they had “work long hours on game days” and “spent long nights negotiating on behalf of taxpayers”…therefore “having friends and family there is reasonable”.
— ForbesConsidering how much taxpayer money is involved in this stadium, when can the public attend the next MSFA meeting? Never. The MSFA doesn’t allow the public. How on earth can this be allowed or even legal? One MSFA chairman claimed he could only protect public money in closed-door discussions. If these were open to the public, then “this may negatively impact the ability of the MSFA to resolve the issues in a satisfactory manner.”
It is challenging to counteract something that is utterly dishonest and stupid. How would being transparent hurt MSFA from doing its job? The only way that MSFA operates is by refusing to disclose information. When the first report came out about the potential MSFA abuse of suites at Vikings games, MSFA responded by refusing to show any information about any guests. After the Star Tribune began asking questions about the suite tickets, almost all the suite guests (mayor and family, state commissioners, city attorney, and city council members) thought it would be a good idea to write a check so that they could reimburse the board for the tickets they had used. Pure coincidence!
But the Vikings vice president said that the public was missing a vital piece of information. Much like a taxpayer owning a house, the Vikings VP claimed the owners paid for the “ongoing costs for maintenance, taxes and the like”. Yet, over the last few years, we have seen the Vikings push and push for new taxpayer money for upgrades. Three years ago, the Vikings forced the state to pay over $60+ million for security upgrades around the new stadium. Two years ago, the Vikings claimed that the stadium “will require some $280 million in maintenance…including nearly $48 million next year”. The MSFA was clear that they did not have this amount of money and that taxpayers would foot the bill.
— MinnPostAll the economic activity promises made by the Vikings, when they were negotiating for a new stadium, have been completely inaccurate. The mayor of Minneapolis made a public spectacle of how the new Vikings stadium had “encouraged Wells Fargo to relocate 5,000 jobs” near the venue. That does sound impressive. Except, the relocation of these employees preceded the announcement of the stadium deal. No new jobs were being created from this new stadium.
The Governor of Minnesota at this time, Mark Dayton, was very public in his support for getting something done with the Vikings. He touted the new stadium as the People’s Stadium. After the stadium agreements were signed and construction began, the Governor only then realized how little the Vikings owners were privately contributing to the stadium. So, he asked them to increase their personal stake, and they refused. He asked the owners to please not price out normal fans who can’t afford insane PSL prices. They again refused. The owners also do not want you or anyone to bring up this topic to them.
— Unknown
Have any sports economic promise ever work out in the taxpayers’ favor? In New York, the Independent Budget Office was asked if a new soccer stadium would create new revenues and development. The IBO report found that “there is little evidence that these types of subsidies generate sufficient economic activity to lead to a net fiscal benefit to the local area”.
The Vikings have committed to paying $13 million a year in operating and ongoing capital costs, which is about two-thirds of the annual expenses.
About $8 million of that is straight rent, and the Vikings say that’ll be the highest rent payment in the league.
The state owns U.S. Bank Stadium.
At U.S. Bank Stadium, there are two separate requests from the state.
The Minnesota Sports Facilities Authority (MSFA), which oversees the building, is renewing an $85 million request to fund the second phase of a secure perimeter to meet evolving Department of Homeland Security standards.
The other U.S. Bank Stadium request comes directly from the Vikings in that they are seeking a dedicated revenue source for ongoing upgrades and renovations.
Both the Vikings and Vekich note that the 2012 legislation to build the stadium included a requirement that the state maintain the facility in a first-class manner.
Revenue from the tabs was so abundant that the state paid off the debt two decades early, in June 2023.
Revenue from the electronic pulltabs now goes to the state’s general fund, but it is often mentioned by supporters as a potential funding source for future stadium maintenance.
“U.S. Bank Stadium’s coming up on its 10th NFL season, and it’s considered one of the best venues in all of sports,” Bagley said. “It’s time to consider the long-term capital needs and identify a reliable funding source so we can maintain the building in a first-class manner.”
