Rybak faces testy crowd at a forum on Vikings stadium

  • Article by: ERIC ROPER , Star Tribune
  • Updated: April 11, 2012 - 5:22 AM

The 100 people sharing their views about the mayor's funding plan appeared to be split evenly.

  • 94
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
ndsulakesApr. 10, 1210:13 PM

quit your whining Anti stadium people. shut up and move out of the way, you probably cry about everything. Vikings and us in the state of minnesota deserve some state pride in a football team and stadium....let alone contstruction work!

46
128
mnfisher38Apr. 10, 1210:16 PM

ok, a stadium does cost money to build for the city, but it is an investment for the county and city for future tax revenue. Whether you like the deal of paying for a private companies business location/site, it makes sense for the city and state. FYI... I love the picture of the people present at the forum...shave and may look presentable and you will be taken seriously. Self respect goes a long way...Just saying.

39
108
rgreendaApr. 10, 1210:19 PM

Hats off to the Minneapolis city council for standing up and making a decision to get this stadium built. It is a must for minneapolis and the state of Minnesota!! To the seven council members thanks and keep it up!!!

41
103
Bob_NelsonApr. 10, 1210:21 PM

Pretty sad when the Mayor says taxes are being raised without any vote from city government or its citizens and that he will do nothing about it. Rybak thinks we are all slaves and have to accept whatever the totalitarian government tells you to accept.

95
41
RossbergApr. 10, 1210:37 PM

The charter amendment is a legal issue, not a political one. All the forums and hearings won't change that. What's needed is for a group of Minneapolis residents to go to the meetings and let it be known that should this proceed they will be willing to pursue an injunction to force the referendum and let the courts decide it. Doing so would be in everyone's interest since it would bring some finality to this.

98
24
tvzzApr. 10, 1211:06 PM

start a recall on Rybak. that would be the easiest approach.

79
37
apenderApr. 10, 1211:41 PM

just curious those of you that don't want this. What exactly are you willing to pay for? Do you ever ride light rail? The bus? your bike, on a bike trail? go to the Zoo - Como or MN? State Fair? a Library? do you drive a car on any city streets? Of course you don't do any of these things... So we should only pay for what we use? I think Jesse tried that, lowered a lot of taxes, etc...but gee did a few fees go up...oh I know you guys don't use any of that stuff.... get real... We sometimes have to pay for things not everyone uses, but in the long run it is good for Minneaplois and the State

34
95
ammunraApr. 10, 1211:45 PM

"take an action that will lower your property taxes, take the obligation for Target Center off us, come up with long-term funding for the Convention Center and make a billion- dollar investment in the city?" -- So you think; until the state can't come up with their share of money from gambling, then Minneapolis is going to be on the hook and there go the property taxes as well as everything else.

59
19
edkohlerApr. 10, 1211:46 PM

The current stadium bill is a bad bill. That's not Rybak's fault. Ted Mondale negotiated a plan that is bad for the public but very good for Wilf and the NFL. The public should punt this year, then renegotiate a deal that makes fiscal sense. Let's stop working to try to fund a plan that doesn't deserve funding.

79
17
rshacklefordApr. 10, 1211:48 PM

Skol to those citizens telling Rybak to stop acting like Wilf's paid lobbyist! Kill this thing off by showing-up and saying NO. I wonder why that city attorney didn't put her legal opinion in writing???

89
22

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

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

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT