It includes some insights into how the City of Minneapolis lobbied the state to get the state to override the city’s charter regarding stadium spending.

How the city worked to bypass the City Charter against the wishes of city residents:

Several of you indicated that you would never vote to override the city charter provision that prohibits spending of more than $10 million in public funds for a professional sports stadium without a voter referendum.

Earlier this week, you received a written opinion from the city attorney spelling out why the legislation does not violate the charter. I am not a lawyer, but as a senator observing the heavy lobbying of Mayor Rybak and other city officials on the issue, it certainly looks like a cynical move to get around the provision in the city charter that voters overwhelmingly asked for back in 1997.

Mayor Rybak and Council President Johnson pulled together a stadium funding package, then came to the capitol and lobbied aggressively to get the state to adopt it. They asked the state to take your city’s future sales tax revenue and spend it on the Vikings stadium. They succeeded. The state will take the future revenue from your local sales taxes and use it to pay for the Vikings stadium.

Then, they turn around and tell the public that the charter does not apply – because it isn’t the city spending city money on it; it was the state taking city tax money and spending it.

That is disingenuous – kind of like the story of the man who killed his parents and then begged the court for mercy because he was an orphan – the mayor and council president begged the state to do this, and then they tell the public that the city didn’t have a choice because the state forced it on them.

Even so, they were concerned that the strong language of the charter might apply, so they lobbied to ensure that the final stadium legislation explicitly overruled the city charter. Again, they succeeded.

The city charter provision that your residents adopted back in 1997 was clear in its intent – the public doesn’t want their tax money spent to subsidize a professional sports stadium, and if you want to spend more than $10 million, you need voter approval.

The city is agreeing to support, not just $10 million, but $150 million in stadium construction costs, plus over $200 million more for operating costs, and forgoing hundreds of millions more in property taxes, shifting the burden to other taxpayers in Minneapolis.

The charter provision won’t apply to the Vikings stadium, not because it wasn’t meant to cover this, but because city leaders were very successful at teaming up with state politicians to do an end-run around it.

But, Sen. Carla Nelson from Rochester (R) later proposed an amendment to Marty’s amendment to basically undo the language Marty proposed (and was voted into the bill).

That led to an interesting debate over whether the state should force Minneapolis to spend sales taxes raised in Minneapolis on a Vikings stadium.

Sen. Nienow argued against bypassing the city charter:

“You’re telling the people of Minneapolis that your voice doesn’t matter. We don’t care what you said with your referendum. That silly little voter that you took doesn’t mean anything. And, we’re going to vacate it. That’s what this amendment does, members. This is a horrible amendment. Please vote it down.”

Sen. Marty, in addition to pointing out that Sen. Nelson’s amendment strips out the language Marty had previously managed to get into the bill to protect Minneapolis taxpayers, explained the ridiculousness of Minneapolis City Council members asking the state to impose Vikings stadium financing upon the city so the city can spend money while being able to pass blame to the state:

The City Council says it’s not them that are imposing it. They’re coming to the Capital and asking us to impose it. And then they’re saying “we didn’t impose it so it’s not our spending.”

Senator Limmer points out that the state may impose local sales taxes, but it cannot do so without local approval.

We do not have the ability to impose a local options sales tax, for instance, without the public of that local subdivision approving it.

Senator Julie Rosen, the Vikings stadium bill author, took to the mic to mislead her colleagues about the terms of the Minneapolis charter:

We have to remember: a reason for a referendum is when there is an increase in taxes. There is no increase in taxes, members.

Rosen also calls the Minneapolis charter provision protecting taxpayers from spending more than $10 million on a pro sports stadium without a vote “antiquated”. That became law in 1997.

Rosen goes on to say that it’s smart that the state is forcing Minneapolis to spend the city’s money on a Vikings stadium rather than letting them spend it on “whatever they’d like to use it for”.

Senator Marty corrects Senator Rosen:

The Minneapolis charter provision that we’re talking about does not mention tax increases. It prohibits spending $10 million or more on pro sports facilities.

Marty goes on to clarify that Senator Nelson’s amendment to Marty’s amendment would strip out the language that respects the Minneapolis City Charter.

Senator Nienow steps back to the mic to clarify that Senator Nelson’s amendment would override the city charter:

This tells voters “you don’t matter. Your voice doesn’t matter.” This antiquated provision is younger than the Metrodome. “You didn’t have enough smarts to index it for inflation. You know what? That may have been their intent.
…
Make no mistake. If you vote for this amendment, you’re telling the residents of Minneapolis that their voice is irrelevant. That’s terrible.

After a few more rounds, Senator Nienow came back to the mic to once again tell members that the charter will be overridden if Senator Nelson’s amendment passes.

Let me read to you what will be removed if we adopt this amendment. “Any relevant provision or provisions must be followed and must not be preempted, overridden or waved.” That language will be removed.

If you vote for this amendment. You are voting to vacate the Minneapolis charter. You are voting to ignore the voice of the people. You’re saying “we know better than you. You weren’t smart enough to write your charter the right way. We need to vacate it for you. We need to take away those rules that you asked for. It’s inconvenient that it exists for us (never mind that you wanted it).” And that is just wrong.

Things get interesting at 1:50 into that clip when Senator Carla Nelson objects to how Sen. Nienow describes her attempt to wipe out Senator Marty’s “honor the charter” amendment.

In the end, Senator Nelson’s amendment to Senator Marty’s amendment passed, thus modifying the bill to override rather than respect the city charter. Why a Republican from Rochester would do that is beyond me, but that’s what Sen. Nelson accomplished.

Clearly, a vote by Minneapolis City Council members to approve the Vikings stadium bill is a vote to override the city’s charter. City Council members, who’ve been elected by voters, should respect the actions voters took when they voted overwhelmingly in favor of amending the city charter to require a referendum on pro sports stadium spending of $10 million or more.

1. Kevin Reich created a campaign video in 2009 where he outlined his values and his planned approach to governance. He kicked it off by explaining that his campaign would be a “community building initiative” where he’d reach out and connect with people in local schools, churches, and community associations. Reich says that he’ll rely upon those groups in his political efforts:

2. Reich them makes it clear who he plans to represent. “If it’s about people, it should be with people and it should be on their terms.”

3. Reich reiterates that he’s going to “let the community’s voice direct this, and on their own terms.” He also touches on the importance of mutual trust:

4. Reich then gives a great example of how the community in Northeast has worked together to solve problems with vacant homes, drug homes, and to improve the local schools. He then closes by explaining that “what is good for Northeast is good for the City of Minneapolis”:

5. On Reich’s campaign page on Facebook, his platform is laid out one post at a time. He puts kids first:

Supporting youth opportunities and quality education in Minneapolis schools

Kevin’s primary goal in office is to help to bring people together to make Minneapolis a great City for everyone. His history is one of supporting youth opportunities and quality education in Minneapolis schools. Kevin has a demonstrated commitment to work with all stake holders to make Minneapolis’ public school system strong, safe and effective, not only to support our state’s economy long-term, but also to make a difference for Northeast families and in the lives of young people.

6. The Environment:

Protecting and enhancing our natural environment

Kevin’s primary goal in office is to help to bring people together to make Minneapolis a great City for everyone. He has a long history in Northeast of working with all stakeholders to leverage economic development projects to protect and enhance the environment.

7. Small Business:

Fostering a thriving small-business climate in Northeast Minneapolis

Kevin’s primary goal in office is to help to bring people together to make Minneapolis a great City for everyone. He has a long history in Northeast of working with all stakeholders to foster a thriving small-business climate in Northeast while maintaining Northeast’s unique community character.

8. The Arts Community:

Promoting the Arts community and the needs of increasingly diverse Northeast

Kevin’s primary goal in office is to help to bring people together to make Minneapolis a great City for everyone. He knows first-hand as the Project Director for the Holland Neighborhood Improvement Association how important it is to promote the Arts community and the needs of increasingly diverse Northeast.

9. Public Safety:

Developing a community centered approach to public safety

Kevin’s primary goal in office is to help to bring people together to make Minneapolis a great City for everyone. He knows first-hand as the Project Director for the Holland Neighborhood Improvement Association how important it is to develop a community centered approach to public safety.

Campaign Promises vs. Corporate Welfare

1. Charging local teachers 0.5% sales tax on purchases for decades to subsidize an NFL team is a strange way to build a community. That city-wide tax is a regressive tax that redistributes money out of communities like Northeast through downtown to New Jersey. Unless Zygi Wilf decides to spend money in Northeast Minneapolis, that money does not come back around.

2. If it’s really “about people, it should be with people and it should be on their terms.” it’s clear that honoring the people’s wishes by allowing a referendum on stadium spending is the right move. If the people agree with the terms, they will vote for it. If not, they won’t. This is exactly why Minneapolis residents amended the city charter.

3. Mutual trust comes from upholding the letter AND the spirit of the law. Honoring the charter is how it’s can be done.

4. Redistributing money from Northeast Minneapolis to downtown and from downtown to New Jersey does not make Northeast a stronger community. Removing the regressive city-wide sales tax from the set of taxes paying the Convention Center debt once that’s paid off would make Northeast stronger.

5. Northeast families, teachers, and kids will all be chipping in for 30 years to subsidize Zygi Wilf’s private business if the current Vikings stadium bill is approved. Why are we using regressive city-wide sales taxes to subsidize an NFL franchise?

6. How is it environmentally friendly to tear down and rebuild a new NFL stadium every 30 years? The 49ers signed a 40 year lease for their new stadium, yet MN only negotiated a 30 year deal with the Vikings, virtually guaranteeing that we’ll build yet another stadium the day this one is paid off.

7. Small businesses in Northeast will have to collect a 0.5% sales tax on every purchase for decades in order to redistribute money out of Northeast, into downtown, and from there, to New Jersey. For every $200 spent in Northeast, one will be lost.

8. Local artists create local jobs, spend money locally, and help turn around neighborhoods that are on the margins. They do not benefit from paying regressive sales taxes to subsidize an NFL franchise.

9. While I understand that the revenue generated from the Convention Center taxes may not be transferrable directly to neighborhood public safety initiatives, I understand that money is fungible. Minneapolis does not need to continue taxing downtown visitors and residents the highest tax rates in the country, and imposing a city-wide regressive sales tax on all city residents. Instead, residents may prefer to be taxed in different ways to satisfy different priorities than what the convention center taxes allow.

Which brings us back to: “If it’s about people, it should be with people and it should be on their terms.”

The people of Minneapolis – including the people who voted for Kevin Reich – truly do value schools, the environment, the arts, and public safety. If your goal is to legislate based on principles of community involvement and mutual trust, the approach one should take regarding spending $675 million of the people’s money is extraordinarily clear.

Take the decision to the community by honoring the charter.

I realize that this won’t be an easy vote, but wouldn’t it be much better to be known for doing the right thing than forgotten to doing wrong? As Aaron Rupar framed it at CityPages:

What if a majority of your city’s residents stood behind you when you voted “no”?

That’s the political reality of this issue. The community wants to decide what’s best for the community and will support city council members who honor that request.

Honor the charter.

1. Will the stadium be as multi-use as the Metrodome? I didn’t see any mentions of running or rollerblading in the stadium bills. I mentioned that it would be worth getting this into writing to a few legislators, but it didn’t seem to happen. Is there any guarantee that the stadium will be built with running and rollerblading friendly concourses? If not, we were sold on a building based on its multi-use potential that would support dozens and dozens fewer events than the existing, paid for, Metrodome.

2. How will non-Vikings events be accommodated during construction? The Vikings are planning to use the U of MN’s stadium. What are the plans for college baseball, high school football, runners, rollerbladers, etc.?

3. Who profits from e-pulltab device manufacturing and leasing? The stadium bill says that the devices will be leased to bars. I asked Rep. John Kriesel, the gambling bill’s author, who would benefit from this government created business. He never addressed this. Someone’s going to make millions off this, but the public has no idea who. I bet Rep. John Kriesel and others know. Why haven’t they told us?

What would you add?

MPR looked at the redevelopment potential (the day after the bill was signed) with an urban vitality consultant, Charles Landry, who had the following take on stadiums:

In general, stadia neutralize the space around them and kill the city- as an urban construct.

Patrick Reusse, writing for 1500ESPN less than 24 hour after the bill passed, has an impressive piece looking at how much the public was fleeced by the Wilfs. Bob Collins calls Reusse’s after the fact reporting “journalistic malpractice”:

From Reusse’s column:

We in the Twin Cities sports media were so amped up over getting a new stadium for the Vikings and thus maintaining them as a subject to write and talk about that not much time was spent looking at the financial realities.

Nick Coleman points out the problem with Reusse’s piece (Reusse also writes for the StarTribune):

Reusse closes his piece on 1500ESPN by pointing out that the Vikings are probably only putting $27 million of their own money toward the construction of the $975 million stadium:

Add it up – naming rights, license fees, NFL grant _ and you have $450 million of Zygi’s $477 million. That doesn’t seem to be much suffering for a fellow now being depicted as the patient martyr of stadium negotiations.

That’s something we never saw in the StarTribune. And, something people chanting “BUILD IT! BUILD IT!” clearly didn’t understand.

Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer’s letter to colleagues explains how much the public got hosed over in the conference committee. The House and Senate both passed versions of the Vikings stadium which then went to conference committee to reconcile the differences.

But, that’s not what happened.

Both bills heading in to conference committee were better bills for the public than the bill that came out. Instead of a regression toward the mean, we saw the public’s regression toward a private business owned by a New Jersey businessman:

Usually bills get better when they come back from a conference committee.
This time, it got worse. Additional pork for St. Paul and Minneapolis was added, a shocking data privacy for the Vikings was included, the funding mechanism of the pull tabs continued, the percentage to charity got smaller, no user fees included and the general fund continues to be at risk of bailing out this project in the future. In addition, the “new” $50 million the team is “adding” to their portion is offset by the team getting the naming rights instead of the state. The Wilf family also got back in their exclusive rights to a Soccer team for the next five years or so. Quite an amazing package for the owners.

I realized that this was a set deal between the Vikings, the Governor and the bill authors and that no matter the amendments or arguments, it would get done. They had enough votes to force it through.

This is becoming a classic NFL scam. Get the media to focus on the up-front construction costs, while ignoring the real money in a stadium deal. The public will receive nothing from naming rights, concessions, parking, user fees tied to tickets, suites or merchandise. But, the public will have the opportunity to pay for the stadium, to maintain the stadium, and to continually upgrade the stadium to NFL standards. Minneapolis takes a huge hit on this, with $675 to $890 million in stadium obligations over 30 years.

Esme Murphy blogged about the change in public sentiment regarding public financing for a stadium:

Somewhere in the haze of the past few months of the Vikings stadium debate, I heard someone say if legislators really thought people wanted a Vikings Stadium that they would vote for it.

I honestly can’t remember where I heard it, or who said it. But I kept thinking about it. It was so simple, so basic, so true. And in the end, it was why I was convinced that there was not a chance of a stadium bill getting through the legislature.

A couple of months ago, if you mentioned the topic on the radio, the phone calls and the texts were overwhelming in anger and opposition. But in a remarkable and fundamental turn around, public opinion began to shift and ultimately lawmakers began to soften.

Albert Breer with The NFL Network explained (on May 11th, of course) how gullible MN legislators and Governor Dayton were regarding the Los Angeles relocation threats:

The league is no closer to returning to the nation’s second-largest market. And the truth is, there’s a good chance the NFL is still a long way from returning to a city it vacated — twice over — 17 years ago.

…

The league actually has found L.A. to be a profitable market from a TV standpoint if it’s simply fed the best games week to week, which happens because there isn’t a local club to stop that from happening.

Supporting the public financing / corporate welfare package was surely easier for people who didn’t understand the terms of the deal. In fact, it seems like Vikings fans who paid close attention to the debate still don’t understand what the public has given Zygi:

To me, that’s the real failure of the media on this issue. When people disagreeing on an issue can’t at least agree upon the facts surrounding that issue, the media has failed the public.