Moving out of the cheap seats? on Owatonna

OWATONNA — Push has come to shove for the Minnesota Vikings.

With just 20 games left at the Metrodome, the team is lobbying hard for a new stadium that would cost the state $29 million to $46 million annually for 30 years.

“We’ve made it clear we’re not going to sign a lease extension without a stadium deal,” said Lester Bagley, vice president of public affairs and stadium development for the Vikings. “We’ve been at the capitol a number of years, in good times and bad, with different ownership groups, in years of budget surplus and budget deficit. There’s no good time to have this conversation but now we’re down to the end of the lease.”

Bagley was in Owatonna this week as part of a swing through southern Minnesota to speak to newspaper editorial boards as part of the push for the new stadium.

The team has called the Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome home since it opened in 1982. According to the Vikings, the stadium is now well past its prime.

“It was almost obsolete when it was built,” Bagley said. “Now it can no longer compete. And the two issues are one, our revenues, and two, fan experience.”

According to Bagley, the team’s stadium stalemate hits them right where it hurts: Profits.

“We generally generate about $30 million less each year than the Packers, Bears and Lions because of the stadium,” Bagley said. That’s a huge number when you go over time. In terms of revenues we are at the bottom of the NFL.”

Exactly how much the Vikings are making — or not making — at the Metrodome is not clear. The company that owns the Vikings is privately held and therefore is not obligated to release quarterly earnings statements. However, the team would be willing to disclose financial information if that will help win the state government’s support, said Jeff Anderson, the assistant director of public affairs.

Part of the revenue problem relates to capacity, Bagley said. The building has the smallest square footage and is the second smallest in terms of seating. Most stadiums built today have a footprint of 1.5 to 1.6 million square feet — that’s 50 percent to 60 percent larger than the Metrodome. A larger stadium would have more room for high-end options like premium seating, suites, clubs, and “programmable space.”

The other issue, Bagely said, is the fan experience, which he called “very deficient” because of crowding in the bathrooms and narrow halls.

“The fan experience is tough, so even though we have a good team, we have a challenge selling tickets because a lot of our fans would like to stay home and watch it on high definition television,” Bagley said.

In spite of what Bagely said, the Metrodome’s drawbacks have not impacted attendance so far. Football games at the 64,000-seat stadium are generally sold out, said Leo Pidde, manager of building services at the Metrodome. In fact, that was an understatement. The team had sold out every game since 1998, Anderson said.

Nevertheless, the Vikings argue that a new stadium will help them and their loyal fan base.

The fix will not come cheap, however. According to the Viking’s latest estimates it would cost $670 million to build an open air stadium. If they tack on a retractable roof, the price is even higher: $870 million, $40 million more than a stadium with a fixed roof.

The Vikings ownership is willing to kick in $223 million, a third of the cost of an open air facility, but they do not want to be on the hook for a roof. Though a roof would make the stadium useful, and perhaps profitable, year-round, the team’s ownership would prefer an open plan to avoid the sensation of “playing in a closet.”

“The roof is important to the state but it doesn’t benefit the Vikings. We don’t need a roof for our games, but we understand the argument,” Bagley said. “Our owners said we’d like to have an open air stadium — the compromise was a retractable roof — but I think there may be a willingness by Vikings ownership to consider a fixed roof.”

Whatever option they choose, the remaining dollar amount will have to come from public sources, Vikings reps said. The team estimates that it would cost the state between $29 million and $42 million a year in public funds of some sort to pay off the debt left over from a new stadium project. The team has already approached Hennepin County and the City of Minneapolis, neither of which has any money to offer to the effort, though various suburban cities have come courting.

That leaves the state Legislature and the governor, to whom the team is now turning for aid. The Vikings are not wild about the idea of a loan from the state of Minnesota, unless someone else was willing to pay it off.

“The (Minnesota Wild hockey) deal was essentially an interest-free loan, which now they want relief from the debt,” Bagley said. “I think that could work maybe as a component of the deal, but in order to support the facility we need a revenue stream to support the bonds: The average deal in the NFL is one-third private, two-thirds public. That’s an element that could be considered, but I don’t think it gets us all the way there.”

One source would be taxes on Minneapolis hotels and restaurants. The idea is akin to the original Metrodome deal, when the stadium was funded by a seven-county, 2 percent liquor tax. They could also institute surcharges or taxes on “users,” for instance a sales tax on things like memorabilia.

Another possible avenue is the gaming industry — perhaps a dedicated lottery or the racino proposal now before the Legislature, which would allow slot machines and video gaming at existing horse tracks.

“Add those together and you can get to $42 million and build a retractable roof stadium. It’s supported by the public. The problem is in the Legislature,” Bagely said.

So far, state politicians have been unenthusiastic about a new stadium. There are trying times ahead: The state must fix a $1 billion budget gap this year and a projected $5.8 billion deficit in the next biennium.

Sen. Mike Parry said he would be in favor of using racino revenues for the stadium, but said he was adamantly against taxing anyone for the Vikings’ benefit.

“Remember racino is voluntary. A tax is a tax, a surcharge is a surcharge, and they all have one thing in common: They tax citizens,” Parry said. “I am not for taxes and neither are the majority of the voters in District 26.”

If they can strike a deal, a design is ready and they could have shovels in the ground by August, Bagley said. But what happens if the Legislature doesn’t come through? Bagley answered via Gov. Tim Pawlenty.

“The governor said that he didn’t believe owner (Zygi Wilf) would move the team, but he didn’t believe he would hold it,” Bagely said. “What the governor is saying is that the concern is not so much that the Wilfs will move the team, but they’ll sell it to someone else who might.”

Reps. Kory Kath and Patti Fritz did not return calls seeking comment on Thursday.

Clare Kennedy can be reached at 444-2376.

Share:

Digg

Guidelines: Welcome to the Owatonna People's Press community. Please keep your comments civil. Don't attack other readers personally and keep your language decent. If you would like to report abuse click here to notify us.
Member Opinions: By: JonathanM on 3/12/10 Eight-hundred seventy million dollars, wow. I heard you can fix a wholllllllle lotta potholes for 800 million. By: LovingLife on 3/12/10 I find it hard to believe that the Vikings bring in less revenue than the Lions. I would like to see them prove that. By: jtull on 3/12/10 This is a pure guess on my part, but maybe they don't consider revenue tickets sales, only consessions and parking, which they get no piece of. IF that's they case it's believeable. By: idstauffer on 3/12/10 jtull is right...the Vikings get a much smaller portion of concessions and merchandise sold at games because they don't own the Dome. As far as tickets, the Lions sell out almost every game, too, and they sell more tickets because they have a bigger stadium. By: B-STING on 3/12/10 "We generally generate about $30 million less each year than the Packers, Bears and Lions because of the stadium,” - So you make less money than your neighbor (so do I)but you're still making money. Another thought...Did anyone at the meeting suggest to the Vikings that they consider building the stadium somewhere in outstate MN instead of the Twin Cities? After all they are the MINNESOTA Vikings. By: gattaca on 3/12/10 I'm a season ticket holder but I'd rather see them leave than support their corporate welfare. I love how it "would cost the state $29 million to $46 million annually" and the Vikings have no problem with that....BUT then they say: "We generally generate about $30 million less each year than the Packers, Bears and Lions because of the stadium," Bagley said. That’s a huge number when you go over time." ...So $30/46M to the state is fine but $30M less in revenue is HUGE! But the thing that really, REALLY makes me want to tell the Vikings to go [defile] themselves is this, "The roof is important to the state but it doesn’t benefit the Vikings." Wow. ...Just...wow. What I hear is: "We want you to pay for our stuff so we can keep the profits. Oh and by the way, I don't give a $#& about what would benefit you at all." I would be very sad to see the Vikings go since I do enjoy watching them play. ...But, I would be even sadder to see us tax payers burdened with helping those [expletives]. By: fairandbalanced* on 3/12/10 I do not want to pay for a new stadium either through my paycheck or straight from my pocket. The Vikings are a private entity that share their talents and skills with the public, I think it's absolutely ridiculous to expect the "state" (meaning us taxpayers) to pay for a new stadium. I want a new swimming pool in my back yard, will the "state" pay for that for ME? Nope...I'd rather see that money spent on the needs of the "state", for those of us who do not have health insurance for instance, or for the families struggling to make ends meet. What makes a strong state is strong people! By: MNBear on 3/12/10 This sentence says it all: "And the two issues are one, OUR REVENUES, and two, fan experience." The Vikings are a private enterprise. Why is it the taxpayer's responsibility to buy them a stadium to play in? If Mr. Wilf wants a stadium for HIS team to play in (a total of about 8 days a year, assuming no playoffs), then let him pay for it. It's funny, isn't it, that the price of the stadium is just about the purchase price for the entire team? How about this Mr. Wilf - we'll build a stadium if you turn over the team to the state. Fair? Every academic study ever produced has reached the same conclusion - the public never gets a return on its investment when it builds palaces for sports teams. Never. So, Mr. Wilf, go build it yourself with your own money. Don't like that answer? Then, leave. By: fairandbalanced on 3/12/10 I totally agree with MNBear...there will be no love lost and money saved! By: NoteTaker on 3/12/10 "The Vikings are not wild about the idea of a loan from the state of Minnesota, unless someone else was willing to pay it off." Well, I'd be happy too if I took out a loan and was able to get someone else to pay for it...LOL! "Another possible avenue is the gaming industry — perhaps a dedicated lottery or the racino proposal now before the Legislature, which would allow slot machines and video gaming at existing horse tracks." In the words of Gomer Pyle, "Shazaaaaaammm!!!" "So far, state politicians have been unenthusiastic about a new stadium. There are trying times ahead: The state must fix a $1 billion budget gap this year and a projected $5.8 billion deficit in the next biennium." I truly cannot understand why any legislator is even considering such an endeavor, especially given the current fiscal situation. Vikings leave Minnesota to become...what?...the Colorado Vikings? Oh yeah...that'll work...LOL. But, just in case it does, I'm offering myself to help them pack! By: Sarge on 3/12/10 How much money do the players make per year? Maybe if they were to put up some of their money as a loan, then they would have more than just team pride to play for. By: jtull on 3/12/10 This is such an old worn out subject, and I know I'm not going to change anyone's opinion, but. I like have a professional sports team. The Vikings asking and expecting a new stadium paid for by the state isn't different then any other state or city. And it is true to some degree a new stadium doesn't benefit the city/state ohter then to continue have a sports team. Having this private business does provide jobs as well as the contruction. Those people as well as the players and coaches all pay taxes which benefits that state. Building a stadium with a roof provides some income other then football. Concerts, high school football, truck pulls, NCAA tournament have all paid to use the dome, as will the Vikings. I'm not sure how to pay for this, but I hope they do. What I'd like to see is after it's paid for, the tax payers get something back to show the benifit. I'm not sure what that would be, a long term lease for sure. Maybe we all get a toaster. By: Common-Joe on 3/12/10 I'm a huge Vikings fan and want to see a stadium deal get done-- While I'd prefer no tax dollars get used, the fact is that the vast majority of Cities/Communities are forced to assist their funding. The thing that just beats me over the head is how the funding could be directed from Gambling Proceeds (that already profitize Native Tribes) and our elected officials allow it to occur. I WILL NOT go to a current Minnesota Casino bceause of this fact. I would definitely go should our lawmakers allow the State draw some benefit from such gaming. I fully support the Racino possibility and also believe a form of "user fee" be applied toward tickets for events within the venue. By: jtull on 3/12/10 User fees and the Racino are very good options. Then you have a choice if you want to contribute. How about slot machines at the stadium? I wonder why the tribes never offer to contribute to these projects. I'm not sure what they contribute to other then lobbiest. I know that they do spred some money to MN, I'm not sure how much though. I'd like to think more then we know. By: jtull on 3/12/10 My comments and question regarding the Indian tribes isn't intended to be any kind of a slam towards them. By: commoncitizen on 3/12/10 As much as I like the Vikings, I would rather see them go then to spend the money for a new stadium. Humphrey Stadium was good 30 years ago. In 30 years will we tear down the new stadium because someone wants more money in their personal pocket. The vote to support the Twins stadium should have been the kiss of death for those county commissioners that supported that fiscal fiasco. If the Viking want state money, put up ownership for the team on the table. By: RealityCheck on 3/12/10 Does the NFL have a salary cap? How about for the owners? The Vikings are doing just fine. The just want more, because they can get it somewhere. If not in MN maybe they just skip the racino and move straight to Nevada. Might want to change the name though. Cactus maybe? There's a joke in there if you think about it. Rhymes with bricks. Interesting how business leaders criticize public institutions claiming they could run it better as a private institution, yet sports teams everywhere seem to need taxpayer money anyway. I hope the general public keeps this in mind the next time they want to slam public schools, the department of transportation, the police, etc. and say that privatization is the answer. By: jtull on 3/12/10 The Dome was never good. It was built cheap, remember it wasn't air conditioned the first summer. It's always been a bad football stadium and a horrible baseball staduim. Granted there are good memoriese, but the facility is and always has been awful. By: quinn on 3/12/10 Easy gattaca, not used to this side of you. Not saying that I don't agree with your post, though. The tone, not to mention comments, of Bagley alone are enough to put me over the edge. Seems pretty apparent that he doesn't care one iota about the "fan experience" and he must not be much of a follower of the team either. They don't have a problem selling out games when they have a decent season. Last year they had problems selling out games, and lets face it, the restroom wait had nothing to do with it. They invested $12,500,000 last year hoping to suck the public in for $607,000,000 and it didn't pan out. Or perhaps it did, Pawlenty is a fan of corporate welfare. By: FEIDO on 3/12/10 I think the Vikings are an exceptional good way to advertise for the state of Minnesota.As an outsider on the west coast,It was wonderful to see your state shine this last season.I think Minnesota was the most rooted for team out here.It really made people take a good look at your state and wish we had a team like that.The team brings in a lot of money that the average citizen does not realize.I live in a city that is the most largest market with out a professional team of any sort.We are currently looking to build a new stadium for our triple A baseball team.Perhaps if Mr.Wilf does not feel wanted at home,he should take a good look west.We would really like a professional team out here.It would make our state look good to be advertised and exposed.Remember what happened to the North Stars,Didn't know what you had until it was gone. By: gattaca on 3/12/10 quinn, What can I say?...I hadn't had my morning coffee yet. :) By: cialunatic on 3/13/10 MNBear, I have read articles about those studies and I couldn't find one that had 100% facts to back up your argument. Most of them have such a long introduction that it appears there is more convincing going on than presenting the truth. Everyone I have read seems to be either a guesstimate or has me wondering that those doing the studies are trying to sway the public. The dome was built for approx. 55m in 1982 and has brought in just in sales tax alone over 450m in the time it's been in service. For some odd reason there is always a city that is willing to put 100% into a stadium to lure a team there and some of those cities are ones that lost teams ( St Louis, Baltimore, Houston ). I believe the cities that have lost and returned over skewed studies. By: Snowbird on 3/13/10 Let me get this straight. The owner of the Vikings has megabucks, I have little. He wants a new stadium, partially paid for by me, so he can make more money and the value of his asset, the franchise, will increase and I get nothing but the "satisfaction" of knowing that I contibuted to his good fortune. What a deal! Got'ta love it. By: donghua on 3/13/10 I can watch any pro team on TV, regardless of where their stadium is. It requires no driving, and the bathroom line is shorter. Put that money into education and infrastructure. By: sentry on 3/15/10 This is whats wrong with society the wants are more important than the needs.
Login and voice your opinion!