Dayton wants Vikings special session by Thanksgiving

  • Article by: MIKE KASZUBA , Star Tribune
  • Updated: October 18, 2011 - 8:58 AM

The governor hopes to get the deal done by Thanksgiving. The GOP isn't as gung-ho.

  • 357
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
EleanoreOct. 17, 11 9:25 PM

Limit the agenda to the stadium issue? NO WAY! You call a session and my representatives have a right and duty to bring up cutting LGA for jurisdictions that feel they can double dip by claiming poverty for basic service budgets but still find a way to tax for unethical corporate welfare for the NFL. Call a special session and you will get a special session which deals with all aspects of this special and unsustainable industry, and the unsustainable politicians who aid and abet it against the intentions of the people of this state.

EleanoreOct. 17, 11 9:36 PM

It's also strange to see a govenor who has shown no problem with a legislature failing to even address its' constitutionally mandated responsibility to establish and maintain a uniform system of schools, call an expensive special session simply to maintain an unsustainable business model for private profit through mandated public subsidies. What strange priorities some people demonstrate.

armorstudOct. 17, 11 9:36 PM

This riddiculous! A special session? Really? How about a Special session for new jobs; NOT new taxes! My Mother does even like football so why should her Ramsey taxes increase? How does this benefit her? Plus the traffic is already bad on Hwy 96 and I-35W which means more constuction. Did you read that the other Hwy projects would be put on hold until the Vikings have priority over their roadway? Which means your potholes wont' get fixed or your lanes in your south metro. Who cares if the Vikings leave? 100 Mil to Peterson? Come on...

justthetruthOct. 17, 11 9:37 PM

On a day when the Ford Plant closing is estimated, on a day when the U has to fork over a million dollars for a sports-related lawsuit, the governor, a rich man by birth, decides to move forward a playground for a multimillionaire at largely taxpayer expense. It just goes to show you where our priorities are in life. Money for entertainment, less for education, training and social services. Oh well, maybe the unemployed Ford workers can help build the Wilf Palace.

mcleanmOct. 17, 11 9:38 PM

Dayton wants special Vikings session by Thanksgiving - And I want a new Suburban. We both have the same issue. Who will pay for it????? And once the special session is called by Dayton, only the state congress can end it......

hodgie999Oct. 17, 11 9:41 PM are like most dem's and talking gibberish. I never thought I would grow to like Dayton even as I am an independent but I am slowly coming around. For a half cent sales tax the benefits of keeping the Vikings around far outway the cost of letting them leave. Nobody is even going to notice a half cent.

sharkysharkOct. 17, 11 9:42 PM

Don't forget your constituents Mark, it's likely that they would overwhelmingly prefer not to make any "deal" at all. Don't waste our hard-earned money on something we really don't need and can't afford.

owatonnabillOct. 17, 11 9:44 PM

Business is business. Zygi & crew will go to where the grass is greenist. Unfortunately that may not be Minneosota. Our priorities at this time in our history should not be in favor of enriching billionaires.

justthetruthOct. 17, 11 9:47 PM

Let's see. Ten dates @ 80,000 people per date with an average ticket value of $100.00 yields $80 million in revenue. Assuming a sales tax and state tax of about 20% total yields $16 million in state revenue. If it costs the State $800 million to do this Palace no matter where it is, that means tax revenue will equal state investment in about 50 years. I don't count retail or anything else because that is disposable income that would be spent on something else if not for a Viking game. So could somebody please tell me from the pro-stadium crowd how this is a good investment of taxpayer money?

openthymindOct. 17, 11 9:49 PM

I always thought it was interesting, and said something about the common sense of us as a people when the referendum was on the table. We had lawmakers from both sides saying "if it came to a voter referendum it would never pass, the people don't want to pay for a real estate mogul's football stadium." Then you have the people that are for the stadium that do not want it to go to a vote, knowing it would fail. They insist that there is no reason to bring it to a vote because we have representational government, so our lawmakers that we elected should do the will of the people without bringing every little thing to a vote. If that is truly the case, and both sides said voters would kill any chance of public finance for the stadium, why the heck would our representation pass public funding for a stadium right now? What am I missing? Just something to think about I guess.


Comment on this story   |  


Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters