After years of dealing and debate, Vikings get their biggest win

  • Article by: BAIRD HELGESON and JENNIFER BROOKS , Star Tribune staff writers
  • Updated: May 11, 2012 - 1:07 PM

Senate's stadium bill OK ended string of long nights, closed-door dealing.

  • 329
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
dalemanMay. 10, 1212:06 PM

Now that we have increased gambling so that we can get a new stadium for rich guys. How much money are we going to pour into rehabbing addicted gamblers?

genericloginMay. 10, 1212:11 PM

If this passes, the biggest upside to it for me is that I won't have to hear about this issue any longer. How many years has this been going on?

vironweMay. 10, 1212:14 PM

Got to love the closed meeting, off the record conference committee shamwhich simply threw out every aspect from both bills that protected the citizens in any way. Remember the 300 Mil state maximum Dayton was set on, now 350. So don't say the Vikes added 50 Mil more, though GOT 50% of the increase they asked for. Some sacrifice.

gsthomsonMay. 10, 1212:17 PM

The owners of the Star Tribune are sitting pretty, just steps from this new sports palace. When can we expect a story on the windfall headed their way? A prediction, it is the "Peoples Stadium" right now, once it is signed in to law it will be "Zigi's ATM".

LuckyBobMay. 10, 1212:23 PM

All the questions and comments going on right now in the senate amount to nothing more than posturing, and getting their last digs in. The Nay voters know - especially if John Marty thinks so - that the bill is going to pass. It's a shame all this time has to be wasted. Also, I can't stand to listen to a senator who has the intelligence to know what he/she is saying is BS, but just wants to get his/her last licks in. I'm glad this bill is going to pass and that we can finally be done with the stadium issue. Time to move on.

fjbarrowsMay. 10, 1212:30 PM

Senator Langseth, maybe you should ask Senator Cohen (of your own caucus, btw) as to why there is no racino for funding of this project. Heck, ask him why racino was stonewalled from the beginning. From the April 25th Strib: "Sen. Richard Cohen, DFL-St. Paul, said including racino would also be problematic in gaining DFL votes, and might also face legal challenges. “You’ll have almost no votes from the [DFL] caucus” in the Senate, Cohen predicted."

vnbushmanMay. 10, 1212:34 PM

This has been going on for about ten years. So I say it's about time the Vikings get a new stadium built. This stadium is a profitable issue all around. The stadium can and should be rented out with the Vikings approvel. Minneapolis and Minnesota should do very nicely on rent these next 25 years. Which will easily make up for the small amount of taxes on Minnesota citizens. Thank you Minnesota legislators for approvel of this bill. We wont regret it.

sgtsmashMay. 10, 1212:36 PM

"The rich get richer," Harrington said, referring to the concentration of major state projects in downtown Minneapolis, as opposed to St. Paul." Mr. Harrington, where was St. Paul during all of the stadium haranguing? Was a plan ever offered up by the city of St. Paul to build a stadium there, opposed to Minneapolis? Perhaps if there were a bidding war between the two cities, the fans/taxpayers/state may have come out ahead on the deal. But of course the only impact St. Paul had on the matter was the location of the capital.

marathongirlMay. 10, 1212:40 PM

"Following this vote, the Senate will hear speeches from retiring members, including Sen. Keith Langseth, DFL-Glyndon, who has voted on virtually every stadium project in his nearly four decades in the Legislature. He is inclined to support the Vikings project, even though he wishes a racino was funding the project rather than charitable gambling." -- I'm in full agreement with him. Why coudldn't it be done that way? Bring revenue to Canterbury to help it survive and bring revenue to the state that the Tribes currently don't contribute to. It's time for healthy competition. Even without the stadium under it (oh yeah and the tracks would've given the state $120M toward the stadium 3 years ago to get the Racino) this should still be passed.

bigtmnMay. 10, 1212:43 PM

A legislator on public radio the other morning said that polls show that Minnesotans do NOT support a stadium bill. So why aren't legislators listening to their constituents? It's no wonder that people want referendums when the elected elite won't vote for the people they represent.


Comment on this story   |  


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






question of the day

Poll: Can the Wild rally to win its playoff series against Colorado?

Weekly Question