Why should Vikings owner Red McCombs pay for his own stadium?

Because he can.

McCombs -- shareholder of Clear Channel Communications, with more than 1,200 radio and 39 TV stations -- is estimated to be worth more than $1.2 billion.

He does not own the Vikings out of any special interest in Minnesota sports. He once said, "I've always looked at sports as a way to get a return."

In 1998 he bought the team for $246 million. Last year Forbes magazine valued the Vikings at $604 million. That's an increase in value of more than 145 percent.

McCombs is not interested in investing much in the team. Mike Tice, the lowest-paid head coach in the NFL, had to dip into his own expense budget last fall to pay for two new TVs and to reupholster some chairs for the players, according to a report in the Oct. 27 Sports Illustrated. Money that McCombs has promised to contribute to a new stadium would come from revenue streams created by the project and not from his pocket.

Economics professors at the University of Dayton examined the 13 stadiums built between 1989 and 2001 and concluded that teams would probably recover all or nearly all the cost of construction if ballparks were built with private instead of taxpayer money.

Recently, the New England Patriots and the St. Louis Cardinals built stadiums almost entirely from team-owner money. But many billionaire owners think they don't have to spend while there is free money from taxpayers. All levels of government seem to drift more and more toward privatized profits at public expense.

It is wrong to expect us to subsidize hugely profitable businesses. Taxpayers don't want to pay for new stadiums. A year ago a poll done for the Star Tribune found "62 percent and 65 percent, respectively, against taxes going to Twins and Vikings facilities." The same poll said, "A Twin Cities-area sales tax was supported by 25 percent of respondents and rejected by 72 percent."

The Anoka County Board confuses future Vikings stadium jobs with jobs created by a surrounding business complex to claim that 8,700 permanent jobs will be created in Blaine. This speculation is based on a study bought by the county and paid for by taxpayers who have already paid a million dollars to promote the scheme. How many of these jobs are part-time, low-income, nonstadium or transferred from other metro locations? Why not use the economic study of an existing stadium? Why does the Anoka County Board resist citizen input by arguing against a referendum on new taxes?

Now in 2005, even without a stadium tax, we have immense tax increases despite Gov. Tim Pawlenty's "no new tax" pledge. Last year the state permanently cut local government aid. This means that while the state continues to tax us just as much, local governments are taxing us at accelerated rates while cutting services.

In Lino Lakes my property taxes will go up about 17 percent this year alone. Our Centennial High School will have more students, fewer resources and class sizes reaching 40 students next year.

The University of Minnesota wants a new stadium for athletes whose graduation rate is the lowest in the Big Ten.

All this adds up to less government but more taxes. You never hear McCombs talk about these things, because unlike the team owners in St. Louis and New England, he shows no concern for our state, our schools or our future.

Minnesotans may want to ask: If the citizens don't want to pay taxes for stadiums, why do government officials keep pushing to do so?

Back to News/Articles page