House approves Vikings stadium bill; Hoppe votes yes, Leidiger votes no

The Minnesota House approved a proposal to build a new Minnesota Vikings stadium on a 73-58 vote last night.  Carver County’s House delgation split on the vote, with Rep. Joe Hoppe voting yes and Rep. Ernie Ledigier voting no.

40 of the 73 yes votes came from the DFL minority, while only 33 of the 72 Republicans in the House voted yes.

Dozens of amendments to the bill were debated yesterday, most of which were defeated, but there were some substantial changes to the bill that did get through.  These include:

  • Reducing the state contribution by $105 million and adding that to the team’s contribution, including a provision that would share naming rights proceeds.  This is a potential sticking point in the bill, as the Vikings have not agree to pay more (at this point) than the $427 million contribution agreed to in the original bill
  • Putting the Vikings on the hook for cost overruns during construction of the stadium; this is similar language to the Target Field bill, but it does imply giving the Vikings control over the construction process
  • Increasing the lease from 30 years to 40 years
  • Increasing the amount of revenue that has to be shared if the Wilfs sell the Vikings after the stadium is built

The bill moves to the State Senate today, which is in session beginning at 9 a.m.  State Senator Julianne Ortman of Chanhassen has indicated she will be voting no on the current proposal.

Advertisements

5 Responses to “House approves Vikings stadium bill; Hoppe votes yes, Leidiger votes no”

  1. The amendment sure makes this more palatable. The 105 million less from the taxpayer is a good start. Maybe the Senate can pare it down even more, and we can get this to a place where all legislators from both parties will like it.

    Too bad we can’t get all of the money spent lobbying this thing applied to the bill. We could probably build another.

    Do you suppose Dayton will veto this because the public isn’t paying as much? I know how he likes to spend money we don’t have. He also likes to use his veto pen as stupidly as possible. Maybe he can symbolically veto this like he did voter ID, due to the lack of taxpayer involvement, but then actually sign the bill just to get it off his desk.

  2. This is the problem right now, John. You write two great paragraphs that make great points and can spur rational, thoughtful discussion. But, then you add a third snarky paragraph that only serves to irritate people who see some things differently than you do and happen to support Governor Dayton. Not to dump totally on you – many others, including me at times – do the same thing. If we (meaning everyone who discusses and participates in poiltics) could get past partisan snark I think we could get a lot more accomplished!!

    • I’m sorry if I offended you, but I find our Governor to be an extremely partisan dolt, who just spews the old tax and spend mantra, and class warfare baloney that serves no one. Dividing us into classes over ridiculous claims of tax fairness is no way to lead.

      His notion that we need balanced approach to financial matters has been going on for decades, and it doesn’t work. It’s been said a thousand times, and it’s true. We don’t have a revenue problem. We ahve a spending problem. Big time. And these BS compromises that get done every year fail to stem the tide of unending government growth.

      I REALLY wish that someone from his family would explain fiscal matters to him. Because it’s clear that he doesn’t get it. He can’t even do simple math! When he claims 750 million bonding bill will create 21,000 jobs, ( I know it’s 1.5 million after other add ins), but that would either mean these folks don’t make mimimum wage, or the projects are built with donated materials. That’s a problem for me. It makes him look like an idiot when he says things like this. Furthermore, it makes me beleive that he either IS an idiot, or he thinks WE are idiots. If it’s the first, then I’m right to call him on it, and if it’s the second, then I SHOULD be offended, and I’m right to call him on it.

      So, yeah, I like to poke him in the eye. Because he deserves it. His rant against Senator Ortmann over Ellen Anderson was ridiculous and based on wrong information. He apologizes to the person he misquoted, but never to Senator Ortmann? C’mon. He’s a partisan hack and a mathmatetical dolt!

      • My bad. I was hoping to have an adult conversation. Thank you for proving my point though, I guess. Partisan snarkiness gets us nowhere and it seems to get in the way of actual facts. You do realize that your arguments are built on political rhetoric, personal opinion and insults?

        P.S. It’s Ortman with one “n”

  3. I, too, enjoyed John’s first 2 paragraphs. I’ve been saying the same thing…imagine what all that lobbying money could have taken off of the public side of financing this stadium!

    I also agree with Laura’s comments later that partisan snarkiness–if that’s a word 🙂 –gets us nowhere and the political rhetoric against Dayton supporters matches up to the political rhetoric of Pawlenty’s supporters. We all have a choice whether to share our differing opinions constructively and find common ground that unites us as Minnesotans/Americans…or we can use our differences to further divide and watch our state/country slip into further disarray.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: